Liu Wanyou was one of the 11 defendants in the Tang Lanlan case and was released on 2016. Before this case happened, he had been elected for two consecutive terms for 8 years as the village director, in the courts judgment, Liu Wanyou was found to have violated Tang Lanlan with many people, and in Liu Wanyous mouth, before the 2008 case, he had little contact with the soup family, only some understanding of the situation of the soup family. In October 27, 2008, Tang Lanlan reported to the police, and then 16 people, including Tang Lanlans father, grandfather, uncle, aunt, aunt, cousin, cousin, and neighbours were investigated by the police. Among these people are Tang Lanlans mother and grandmother. According to Tang Lanlans report, her mother and grandmother had witnessed the process of being violated, but did not stop and even help, and Tang Lanlans father and mother forced her to prostitute and charge for it. In June 2017, Tang Lanlans mother, Wan Xiuling, was sentenced to 8 years and 8 months in prison. Her husband, Tang Jihai, the father of Tom, was sentenced to life imprisonment by the court and still in prison. In addition to being upset, Wan Xiuling said she had never thought of why her daughter would go to prison. Tang Lanlans aunt, Tang Yumei, and her husband Liu Changhai were also involved in the problem. In August 2009, after Tang Lanlan reported to Wudalianchi police for nearly 10 months, the Heihe peoples Procuratorate prosecuted 11 defendants such as rape and forced prostitution against 11 defendants, such as Tang Jihai and Wan Xiuling. Of the 16 suspects investigated before the police, three people, such as Ding Fu, Tang Jibin and Xu Guocheng, were unable to examine and prosecute within the legal period and change compulsory measures for surveillance. Tang Lanlans grandfather Tang Ruijing died during detention and was terminated, and the grandmother of Lantan was bailed out. In September 2009, the Heihe intermediate peoples court held the first public hearing of the case. According to Liu Changhai, the defendant of the case, the trial lasted for a day. During the trial, 11 defendants denied the facts of the prosecution of the procuratorial organs, and called the guilty confession made under torture. Only the accused Xu Junsheng, the Tang Lanlans aunt, admitted to having been indecent to Tang Lanlan, but did not commit the infringement. At that time, several defendants brought up another fact that they had been extorting confessions by torture, namely, the accidental death of Tang Lanlans grandfather, Tang Shui Jing. In December 13, 2008, Tang Shui Jing died accidentally during detention in Wudalianchi detention center. According to the autopsy report issued by the criminal technical detachment of the Heihe Municipal Public Security Bureau, there were blood stains in the prison room where Tang Ruijing was on the scene. On the right occipital part of Tang Ruijing, there is a scar on his right arm, but it is not fatal. The cause of Tang Ruijings death was poorly differentiated squamous cell carcinoma of the lung with necrosis, hemorrhage and death. Crime time and so on become the focus of the dispute In addition to putting forward the extortion of confession by torture, in this trial, whether the time of the crime, the place of the crime, the circumstances in which the crime is carried out, is the focus of the dispute between the two sides. A number of defendants put forward that the procuratorate has accused the execution of crime by early 2003, a day of autumn 2003, a day of summer in 2004, one day of the spring of 2006 and so on. Direct evidence is questioned Because the time span of the case has not been preserved, the police can extract the key evidence that can be identified by the DNA. In this trial, the most important direct evidence is a DVD machine and an obscene disc of the defendants Tang Jihais family. According to the prosecutors charge, in 2003, more than two defendants had infringed on the victims. According to a DVD sales voucher provided by the defense, the Tang Jihais DVD machine was purchased in 2004, that is, the prosecutor accused several defendants of the use of the tools at the time, and it did not exist at all. During the trial, the lawyer submitted a call to the court by the villagers, Liu Guiying and Tang Lanlan, because of the relationship between some distant relatives, and Tang Lanlan called Liu Guiying as the old aunt. The recording time was in October 2008, when the police filed for reconnaissance. At that time, more than a dozen people in the village had been taken away by the public security organs. In the recording, Tang Lanlan said that if Liu Guiying helped her pay three years tuition, she could not accuse Liu Guiying of her husband. Liu Guiying: to pay you 3000 a year? Tang Lanlan: 3000 a year, three years. Liu: why can I pay you 3000 dollars for you? Tang: if you want to say so, I will have nothing to tell you. Liu: Well, I asked your old uncle. Your old uncle said nothing at all. Tang: he gave me the scourge. I told you it was no use. If you dont admit it, he will go in tomorrow. Reporter: who was the voice of your record at that time? Liu Guiying: Ji Guang Fu. Reporter: where was it recorded? Liu Guiying: the store reporter: how is the record? How did you record it? Liu Guiying: I have to ask, just record it here. Reporter: did you record your cell phone or someone elses mobile phone? After talking to Tang Lanlan, Liu Guiying called the police and gave the call to Wudalianchi police. So what does this evidence want to corroborate? Liu Changhai first defense lawyer Liu Xianheng: want to express is that there is a lie here, is there something else in it? If she did not call the phone, if the other side did not record, maybe he would be caught in, then we have to wonder, then this person, in the end, does he have sex? According to Liu Xianhengs counsel, after the courts defense submitted the evidence, the prosecutor issued a view that there was no connection between the extortion phone and the criminal facts. According to Liu Xianhengs counsel, after the courts defense submitted the evidence, the prosecutor issued a view that there was no connection between the extortion phone and the criminal facts. Liu Changhai first instance defense lawyer Liu Xianheng: of course, the public prosecution office will think that the so-called fraud phone and other evidence in this case are not related, there is no relation, that of course, the public prosecutor thinks there is not this fraud phone or whether there is such a blackmail call, that does not affect the other people to commit a crime. According to the lawyer, when the first hearing was held, the prosecution and defense sides were very controversial. Liu Changhai, the defense attorney of the original defendant, Liu Xianheng: the dispute lies in whether the evidence of conviction can be condemned. So for this case, that is whether the facts of the case can be certified, so this controversy is great. After this session, prosecutors found some evidence of some changes. After the trial, the procuratorate applied for the withdrawal of the prosecution After the trial, in December 2009, the peoples Procuratorate of Heihe changed the facts to apply for withdrawal. The peoples Court of Heihe decided to allow the withdrawal of the prosecution. According to the guiding opinions of the Supreme Peoples Procuratorate on the withdrawal of prosecution in cases of public prosecution, the peoples Procuratorate shall not prosecute any new facts or new evidence for the case of withdrawing the prosecution. The new fact refers to the fact that the original indictment has not been charged. The new evidence refers to the evidence collected and retrieved after the withdrawal of the prosecution to prove that the original allegation is guilty. In June 28, 2010, after six months of withdrawing the action, the Heihe peoples Procuratorate filed a public prosecution with the Heihe intermediate peoples court. After three days of trial, the court announced the adjournment of the court. In October 2010, after two prolonged trial periods, the peoples courts in Heihe, Heilongjiang Province, sentenced eleven defendants to the crime of rape, the crime of prostitution, and the crime of forced prostitution. Defendant Tang Jihai was sentenced to life imprisonment, and the remaining ten defendants were sentenced to five to ten years imprisonment. After the first trial, 11 defendants appealed. In October 2012, the Heilongjiang Provincial Higher Peoples court rejected the appeal request of 11 defendants and decided to maintain the original judgment. In February 1, 2018, after the media reports on the orange case, the Wudalianchi municipal government and Law Commission issued a announcement to respond to the case of Tang Lanlans case and the cases of the persons involved in the case. In February 7, 2018, the high peoples Court of Heilongjiang issued a message that it is currently being dealt with by Tang Jihai, Liu Wanyou, Chen Chun Fu, and the eastern army. As early as four years ago, Liu Changhai had made similar complaints to the higher peoples Court of Heilongjiang province and was dismissed. In this Notice of rejection, it is clearly stated that the original trial judge is correct in determining the facts and applying the law. On the basis of the evidence, the referee, based on the evidence of the victims statement and the confession of the same case, found that the fact that Liu Changhai was raping the victim with the same case criminal constitutes the fact that the crime of rape was clear, and the evidence was true and sufficient. From the October 2008 Tang Lanlan report to the high peoples Court of Heilongjiang in February 2018 to review the complaints of many defendants, we can see that the case has been advancing in accordance with the relevant procedures of the law. What is the fact of the case? We believe that the law will eventually give a clear conclusion. Aside from the case, our reporter found in the survey that there was an important time node in the development of the whole event, that was October 3rd 2008, the day when Tang Lanlans mother Wan Xiuling saw her last time, and on that day, Tom wrote a letter of report. So what happened then, that Tang Lanlan finally reported to the police? In October 2008, Tang Lanlan, who was just 14, began to go to the first grade of junior high school. The school was located in the long town of more than 60 kilometers away from his home. Because the school had no accommodation, he lived in a residential family near the school, only to go home on holidays. According to Wan Xiuling, daughter Tang Lanlan lived in a happy family from childhood. And Tang Lanlan later said in the report to the police, it is precisely because of this transfer to live in the long town of this family home, so that she can stay away from the injury, feel the warmth of a normal family. According to a small morning stay with the family, the couple at the time were very concerned about Tang Lanlan. Reporter: How did you feel about your family at that time? How are you doing? Xiao Chen: Yes, its OK for us. Reporter: How did you live in the law at the time? Xiao Chen: at their home. The woman lived in the house, and the man lived in another house in his house. Reporter: is he different from Tang Lanlan to other boarders? Little morning: better than us. At that time, we recognized Godfather and godmother. Im very concerned about her study. Reporter: how do you know that? Morning: a whole discussion of her learning at the table. Wan Xiuling recalled: in October 1, 2008, she and her husband Tang Jihai worked in the fields when they received a call from Tang Lanlan. Wan Xiuling: suddenly I made a phone call to say that she was pregnant. I was surprised and surprised. I said you were an object, she said no, I said no object, how can you get pregnant? She told me, mom, I was my father. Then I was quite surprised. What do I say? My sweetheart said what, the baby, the husband said that the pregnancy is yours, my wife said so, he said is not good school, learning bad, do not let her read. I said Ill say it again tomorrow. Thats all. I finished the girl and the phone hung up. Two days later, in October 3, 2008, Wan Xiuling called Tang Yuying, the cousin Tang Yuying of the Shang Tang and the sea, and Ding Fu, the son of Tang Yuying, were going to long town to take Tang Lanlan home. Tang Yuyings son, Ding Fu, was also reported by Tang Lanlan to have infringed upon her. Wan Xiuling recalls that in October 3, 2008, three of them went to the town of long town to take her daughter home. After Tang Lanlans home, Tang Lanlans mother gave her a B - book. According to Liu Xianhengs lawyer, the two copies of B ultrasound show the same time, the same hospital, the same doctor, and the result is quite the contrary. The date of the single ultrasonic display was March 31, 2008, and one of the results showed fetal symptoms in the womb while the other showed no abnormalities in the uterus. In February 2018, the Heilongjiang Provincial Higher Peoples court announced that it was reviewing and handling Tang Jihais complaints in accordance with the law. Then what is the relationship between the courts examination of the complaint materials and whether the case can be filed for retrial? Chen Weidong, a professor of Law School of Renmin University of China, believes that in accordance with the criminal procedure law and the judicial interpretation of the Supreme Peoples court, it is the case of the complaint. The peoples court should accept the examination and accept the examination, which does not mean the case has been filed and the case is the result of the examination. If the complaint is justified, the case, whether it is a fact, the evidence or the applicable legal error, is in conformity with the conditions of the legal retrial, and the case should be set up. If the retrial does not conform to the condition of the case, the peoples court will notify him to withdraw, and if she does not withdraw, he will dismiss the complaint. Experts are reviewing the complaint materials and analyzing whether the case can be filed for retrial. Professor Zhang Jianwei believes that in the case of the many questions that exist in this case, a detailed investigation of the relevant departments is not only significant to both parties, but also has a far-reaching impact on the establishment of judicial credibility. The more bizarre cases, the more we should return to the judicial process and stand the test of judicial procedures. We will continue to pay attention to the progress of this case. Source: CCTV news network editor: Qiao Jing _NN6607 The more bizarre cases, the more we should return to the judicial process and stand the test of judicial procedures. We will continue to pay attention to the progress of this case.