On May 13, 2019, the Yuzhou City Court of Henan Province, which re-examined the case, ruled that Cao Hongbin had been acquitted of the crime of intentional injury because of unclear facts and insufficient evidence.
On the afternoon of May 13, after Cao Hongbin was acquitted, he held his verdict and took a picture with his defense lawyer. The pictures in this article are provided by the respondents.
Finally innocent, finally innocent! After leaving the court on the afternoon of May 13, Cao Hongbin told Peng Mei News. He and several relatives scrambled to raise the verdict, waving and shouting.
Seventeen years ago, Cao Hongbin was accused of involvement in extramarital affairs and wanted to divorce. In the early morning, he raised more than ten kilograms of stones to smash his sleeping wife, causing serious physical and mental injury. Cao Hongbin was sentenced to death at the first trial, and later to 15 yearsimprisonment. After Cao Hongbin was released from prison in 2017, he still complained that he had not harmed his wife.
After more than a decade of retrial and retrial by the three-tier courts, the case is now finally hammered. Cao Hongbin, who won innocence, said he would apply for state compensation next. As for the identity of the real murderer who hurt his wife, it is still a mystery.
Why did Cao Hongbins case go through so many twists and turns from the death penalty to 15 yearschange of sentence to acquittal?
Trial of Triple Court in 17 Years
Cao Hongbin, a native of Yanling, Henan Province, used to work in a local cotton chemical factory. Before the case, he had suspended his salary for several years, and his wife, Li Ling (pseudonym), ran a sugar, tobacco and alcohol wholesale department in Pengdian Township.
In the early morning of April 20, 2002, Li Ling was hit on the head in front of her shop and fell naked on the bed. Cao Hongbin called out to his neighbors and called the police. He took his wife to the hospital for treatment. After identification, Li Lings physical injury constituted a serious injury, and her mental disability reached the second grade.
Cao Hongbin was soon locked up as a criminal suspect by Yanling County Public Security Bureau. On the fifth day of the case, he was detained on suspicion of intentional homicide. In October 2002, Xuchang City Procuratorate charged Cao Hongbin with intentional injury and prosecuted him. In December, the Xuchang Intermediate Court rendered its first instance judgment.
Judgment Record: At about 2 am on April 20, 2002, Cao Hongbin drove a van from Yanling County to Pengdian Township in order to divorce his wife, Li Ling. He picked up a stone outside the door and went to his wholesale department. When Li Ling was asleep in the small bed in front of the door, he lifted the stone and hit her head twice, causing her to coma. Then he took off Li Lings autumn trousers and trousers, and took out two money boxes from the house. He threw them in the wheat fields near the door and outside the village respectively. After forging the scene of rape and robbery, Cao Hongbin called out others. Call the police and take Li Ling to the hospital.
The court of first instance held that Cao Hongbins act constituted a crime of intentional injury. In order to severely crack down on serious criminal offences, he was sentenced to death and deprived of political rights for life.
Cao Hongbin, in addition to making a guilty confession in the public security investigation, said he was not guilty in the trial and appeal links. He said that in the early morning of the day, he returned from the county to his own wholesale department, found his wife injured and fell to the ground, and hurried to shout, alarm and send to the hospital.
After the judgment of the first instance, the case between the court, the high court and the grass-roots court falls into a circle of revocation, retrial, and retrial.
In October 2003, after Cao Hongbins appeal, the Henan Provincial High Court ruled that the facts of the original judgment were unclear and the original judgment was revoked and sent back for retrial.
In August 2004, the Xuchang Intermediate Court retried Cao Hongbin and sentenced him to 15 yearsimprisonment for intentional injury, depriving him of political rights for three years. Four months later, the Henan High Court again ruled that the retrial decision of Xuchang Intermediate Court should be revoked and sent back for retrial.
Since then, the case has been tried in grass-roots courts. In December 2005, the Yanling County Court sentenced Cao Hongbin to 15 yearsimprisonment for intentional injury and deprived him of political rights for five years. Cao Hongbin appealed again and was rejected by Xuchang Intermediate Court. In August 2006, Cao Hongbin transferred to the Third Prison of Henan Province to serve his sentence.
On April 20, 2017, Cao Hongbin was released from prison after 15 years of imprisonment. He continued to appeal to the judiciary.
In fact, as early as May 2012, after reviewing the case, Xuchang City Procuratorate believed that there were major doubts in the case and suggested that the court retrial. In 2016, the Xuchang Intermediate Court decided to retrial the case. Two years later, the court ruled that the fact that Cao Hongbin was convicted of the crime of intentional injury in the first and second trial judgments was unclear and the evidence was insufficient. The case was sent back to the Yanling County Court for retrial. The case returned to its starting point.
In February 2019, the jurisdiction of the case was changed and Yuzhou City Court was appointed by Xuchang Intermediate Court to hear the case. After the trial in April, Yuzhou City Court ruled on May 13 that the fact that Cao Hongbin hurt his wife Li Ling was not unique and exclusive, and that the criminal facts charged by the original public prosecution organ could not be established, so Cao Hongbin was acquitted.
Yuzhou City Court, which retried the case, acquitted Cao Hongbin.
Does extramarital affairs become the motive of hurting a wife?
Retrospecting the trial of this case for more than ten years, Cao Hongbins motive for the case has aroused controversy. This involves an extramarital affair which makes Cao Hongbin regretful.
Cao Hongbin and his wife Li Ling were introduced to each other and had two sons after marriage. Cao Hongbin and his wife started a wholesale business of sugar, tobacco and wine after they stopped working in a cotton chemical factory. At this time, a woman once again entered Cao Hongbins life - his ex-girlfriend Ding Hui (pseudonym).
Cao Hongbin wrote this love history in his appeal. He fell in love with Ding Hui when he worked in a cotton factory, but for various reasons he did not get together. Later, they formed their own families. About half a year before Li Lings injury, Cao Hongbin and Ding Huis old friendship revived. Later, the two men were found by the court to have long-term improper relations.
The court of first instance once held that Cao Hongbin wanted to divorce his wife Li Ling because of his extramarital affair. In the early morning of the day of the case, he called Ding Hui in the county town after drinking, then drove back to the wholesale department and injured his wife with stones.
Cao Hongbin said in a guilty confession at the investigation stage that after the telephone conversation with Ding Hui at that time, he had no taste all the way. He was ready to go home and try to find something to divorce my wife on this pretext. Later, Seeing my wife lying on the ground with blood all over her head, I regretted it, so I hurried to call the neighbors and hit 110 and 120.
However, during the court hearing and appeal, Cao Hongbin claimed that he was tortured at the stage of investigation and was handcuffed in an iron chair for three days and two nights and could not stand torture before violating confession.
Cao Hongbin wrote in his appeal that Ding Hui had mentioned living together with him, but he did not want to divorce his wife, Li Ling. We cant let both families break up, which would hurt our children. Cao Hongbin also said that even if he wanted to divorce, he would not brutally hurt his wife who had lived together for more than ten years. If it was me, it would cost a thousand dollars.
Xuchang City Procuratorate also pointed out in the Procuratorial Proposal in 2012 that although Cao Hongbin had an unfair relationship with Ding Hui, their confessions showed that Cao Hongbin was unwilling to divorce. At that time, Cao Hongbin and his wife had a better family condition. Cao Hongbins sudden idea of killing his wife was not in line with reason.
Investigation experiment on the time of committing a crime
At the trial stage, the defense lawyer questioned Cao Hongbins time.
According to Xuchang Telecom Business Voice Sheet, on the day of the incident, Cao Hongbin and Ding Hui finished calling at 2:09 a.m. After that, Cao Hongbin drove to his wholesale department. According to the registration form of Yanling Emergency Center, the time when the hospital received 120 rescue calls (Li Ling was injured) was 2:55 in the morning.
Based on this calculation, if Cao Hongbin is identified as the real murderer, the time of his crime should not exceed 46 minutes.
Within 46 minutes, can Cao Hongbin rush back to the wholesale department in the countryside from the county town and stone his wife, then take off his trousers and lose his money box to complete the forgery of rape and robbery scene?
In order to verify this problem, the case handling organ has done two investigation experiments. The first experiment was carried out by Yanling County Public Security Bureau on the third day after the incident. The police arrived at the scene of the crime at a speed of 30 kilometers per hour in 16 minutes driving a van from the county cross street.
Two years after the first experiment, Yanling County Public Security Bureau, Xuchang City Procuratorate and Xuchang City Court jointly completed the second experiment. The time is more than 9 a.m., the staff simulated the whole process: driving time 20 minutes, crime, rescue time 19 minutes 10 seconds, a total of 39 minutes 10 seconds.
39 minutes and 10 seconds are within 46 minutes of the crime. According to the case handling organ, Cao Hongbin had time to complete the crime.
During the April trial, Mao Lixin, one of the defense lawyers, questioned the two investigative experiments.
The first experiment did not simulate the whole process, but only simulated driving time, which is not scientific enough. Mao Lixin believes that the second experiment is more than two years away from the time of the crime, when the road condition is better, and the experiment time is daytime, driving vision is good, and driving at night is completely different, scientific is still insufficient.
To put it a step further, even if we agree with the experimental results of 39 minutes and 10 seconds, Cao Hongbin will have to exercise almost continuously in only 46 minutes to complete all the operations. Mao Lixin said, If it is a premeditated crime, who will reserve such a tense time for himself?
When Yuzhou City Court retried the judgment, it also pointed out in the judgment that the simulation experiment can not prove that Cao Hongbin had the time to commit a crime.
Splash Bloodstains on Jackets
There is also a controversial focus in this case - the bloodstains on Cao Hongbins clothes after the incident.
The inspection report of Yanling County Public Security Bureau shows that a jacket worn by Cao Hongbin at that time was sent for inspection. Spotted blood was found under his right cuff and button, which was a splash blood stain. The blood stain on clothes and the blood stain on stones extracted from the scene were identical with the blood of victim Li Ling type A.
This seems to confirm Cao Hongbins view of murder. But defense attorneys Mao Lixin and Zhang Xuhua pointed out that Cao Hongbin used a tricycle to take Li Ling to the hospital, running while holding her injured head, while Li Ling vomited blood, so the splashing blood on Cao Hongbins clothes could be splashed and thrown in the process of saving people.
Later, Cao Hongbins jacket was sent to the Ministry of Public Security for inspection. According to the opinions of the Ministry of Public Security on the physical evidence inspection, dark red stains formed by splashing and splashing were found on the jackets sent for inspection, which is different from the splashing blood stains identified by the Yanling County Public Security Bureau.
Discussions on the validation of bloodstains in jackets are continuing. In October 2005, the transcript of the seminar of senior engineer of trace in Henan Public Security Department showed that the experts participating in the seminar believed that the formation mechanism of splashing, splashing and splashing bloodstains was the same. The bloodstains formed were directional and could not be strictly distinguished. There was no obvious boundary between the three.
The record of the discussion and the appraisal conclusion of the Ministry of Public Security have in essence overturned the scientificity ofsplashingbloodstains as the basis for the final decision. Defense lawyer Mao Lixin said.
When the case was retried in April 2019, the Yuzhou Procuratorate also believed that the source of dotted blood on Cao Hongbins jacket could not be ruled out without reasonable doubt. The above opinions of the prosecution and defense lawyers were adopted by Yuzhou City Court.
Yuzhou City Court not only made a judgment on blood trace identification and the time of the crime, but also pointed out that Cao Hongbins guilty confession at the stage of investigation was inconsistent with that at the scene, such as the shape of the stone used as the tool of the crime and the injured part of Li Ling.
It is noteworthy that the testimony of Meng Mou, a witness adopted in the first and second trial stages before, was not recognized as evidence in this retrial. Meng Mou was a prisoner who was imprisoned with Cao Hongbin in 2002. He testified that Cao Hongbin told him about his wifes injury. Later, when the Xuchang Intermediate Court reviewed the case, Meng admitted to the judge that the record of the public security organ was not what he said. He only suspected that Cao Hongbin had hurt his wife.
Therefore, for Meng Mous relevant testimony in that year, both the prosecution and the defense believe that it can not be used as the basis for the final verdict.
The defenders opinions on the inaccuracy and insufficiency of the evidence in the case, and the Yuzhou Procuratorates opinions on the unclear facts and insufficient evidence in the case, shall be adopted. Yuzhou City Court decided that Cao Hongbin, the defendant in the trial, was not guilty.
When the trial reopened in April this year, Cao Hongbins elderly mother also came to Yuzhou to listen.
Who is the real culprit?
On May 13, Cao Hongbin was acquitted. This raises another question: Who was the real culprit who hurt Li Ling in those days?
Cao Hongbin recalled that at more than 2 a.m. on the day of the incident, he returned to the yard of the wholesale department from the county town. Suddenly, he found a dark man pushing a motorcycle not far away. Who am I shouting? The man said,I am, and he did not turn his head back. He rode away on his bicycle. Cao Hongbin said that he later went into the yard and found his wife lying outside the store. Afterwards, he suspected that the murderer was a shadow man riding a motorcycle that day. He had reported it to the public security organs, but was regarded as fabrication.
Yuzhou City Court also pointed out in its judgment that the suspect figure Cao Hongbin had been confessing - the man who fled in a hurry by motorcycle near the scene of the case, did not attract the attention of the public security organs and did not verify the truth or falsity.
Cao Hongbin hopes that the judicial department can find the real murderer and let the wronged and injured wife have a understanding. He had been deeply guilty of his wife, who had not returned late at night on the day of the crime and had been tragically assaulted by his wife at home.
After the incident, Cao Hongbins wife, Li Ling, gradually recovered from head injuries after treatment. However, she was mentally abnormal and was identified as a severe mental disability. She had been treated in a psychiatric hospital for many times, and was cared for by her mother and her son one after another. Today, she still spends five or six hundred yuan a month on mental medicine.
After Cao Hongbin was released from prison in April 2017, he lived with his wife and began to collate complaint materials. In February this year, Li Ling was received by her son to work in Baigou, Hebei Province. Cao Hongbin found a job as a handyman in a local enterprise, 60 yuan a day.
Cao Hongbin was relieved to see his grandson and granddaughter when he was in prison when his two sons were only over ten years old.
With the help of his son and daughter-in-law, Cao Hongbin learned to use Weixin. His micro-message head is like the smiling face of his grandchildren. He takes a micro-letter name - Spring has arrived. He said that he hoped to rebel as soon as possible, just as he looked forward to spring. He believed that this day would come. On May 13, he was finally acquitted. Seventeen years, finally innocent. Although its late, we still see justice. Cao Hongbin revealed that he would consider applying for state compensation next. In the afternoon and evening of the day of sentencing, Cao Hongbin, who was innocent, lost his cell phone by his relatives and friends. Before the shutdown, he sent a micro-letter to the Pengchao journalist expressing his gratitude to the media for their attention. The short message begins with four words: Spring is coming! Source of this article: Peng Mei News Responsible Editor: Ji Guojie_NBJ11143
With the help of his son and daughter-in-law, Cao Hongbin learned to use Weixin. His micro-message head is like the smiling face of his grandchildren. He takes a micro-letter name - Spring has arrived.
He said that he hoped to rebel as soon as possible, just as he looked forward to spring. He believed that this day would come.
On May 13, he was finally acquitted. Seventeen years, finally innocent. Although its late, we still see justice. Cao Hongbin revealed that he would consider applying for state compensation next.
In the afternoon and evening of the day of sentencing, Cao Hongbin, who was innocent, lost his cell phone by his relatives and friends. Before the shutdown, he sent a micro-letter to the Pengchao journalist expressing his gratitude to the media for their attention. The message begins with four words: Spring is coming!