In reality, torture to extract a confession, who will provide evidence and how to be responsible?

　　On the morning of September 2, Zhang Yuhuan, who had been acquitted for nearly 27 years and was acquitted for nearly 27 years, submitted an application for state compensation, with a total amount of more than 22.34 million yuan.

Among them, Zhang Yuhuan said that he was tortured to extract a confession in the criminal police team. He still has scars on his hands and thighs from being hanged and bitten by a wolf dog.

Due to prolonged detention and wearing a restraint, his right foot has been severely deformed, and he still needs corrective treatment.

Therefore, he applied to Jiangxi Higher People's Court for compensation for the infringement of the right to health and 1 million yuan for follow-up treatment.

　　In his previous comment on the Zhang Yuhuan case, Professor Luo Xiang pointed out that in some similar cases, even if the existence of torture is found, the judicial organs will stop prosecuting because the statute of limitations has expired.

　　How to determine the case of extorting a confession by torture?

What are the common characteristics of publicly heard cases?

How is "torture to extract a confession" defined?

What is the result?

The Paper (www.thepaper.cn) tried to find an answer by sorting out cases related to torture and extracting confessions online.

　　Cases of Extorting a Confession by Torture in the Judgment

　　Different from the major grievances in common newspapers, in the cases sentenced by "torture to extract a confession" on the Judgment Document Network, the victim is often arrested for relatively minor crimes such as "theft", "fighting" and "fraud". Thefts accounted for the vast majority.

　　In many cases, the victim is often imperfect, which seems to be a "justice" footnote for "torture to extract a confession."

However, torture is still expressly prohibited by law.

　　The basic penalty for the crime of extorting a confession by torture as stipulated in Article 247 of the Criminal Law is fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years or criminal detention.

If there are special circumstances that cause disability or death, it will be converted into the crime of intentional injury or intentional homicide, which will be severely punished.

Judging from the case of Judgment.com, the sentence for minor injuries is flexible. If a settlement is reached and the compensation is in place, there is a high probability that criminal punishment will be exempted.

　　The Vague Area in the Determination of Extorting a Confession by Torture

　　However, in more cases, the determination of torture to extract a confession is in an ambiguous state.

　　The study pointed out that in the cases concluded in 2015-2016, the defendant in 2858 cases claimed to have been subjected to torture to extract a confession, but only in 174 cases the court determined that the defendant’s confession was invalid due to torture, and it was not considered as evidence for the final decision , Which only accounts for 6.1% of all cases.

　　Among the cases in which the defendant submitted a torture to extract a confession, the defense provided evidence in only 20%.

　　However, lack of evidence has become one of the main reasons why the court does not recognize torture to extract a confession.

The reason for the judgment in one case was that the bruise on the defendant was formed during the arrest, and the investigators conducted the interrogation in accordance with the law.

Due to insufficient existing evidence, it was determined that there was no torture during the interrogation.

　　The study points out that in reality, when investigators intend to torture the defendant to extract a confession, they will not disclose their identity information, and the defendant will lose the concept of when and where he is when he is detained in a closed space.

In addition, there are methods to extract confessions by torture that can make the victim suffer without leaving scars.

This is one of the reasons why the defense rarely provides evidence.

　　Even so, studies have sorted out cases that mentioned "illegal evidence" from 2013 to 2017 and found that torture has become the primary reason for the court to exclude the defendant's confession (the defendant’s trial confession is invalid) in recent years.

　　Torture in the law

　　In recent years, unjust, false and wrong cases have been corrected.

In these cases, torture to extract confessions quickly put an end to the pending case, but let go of the real criminals, and also took away the lives of the wronged.

Therefore, laws and related regulations are paying more and more attention to procedural justice and human rights protection.