Can "zero confession" be convicted? The only driver present refused to admit that a 40000 yuan gold pendant from a Porsche was stolen by Zhang | Criminal facts | Driver's representative
The golden pendant worth 40000 yuan inside the Porsche car was stolen, and the only representative who appeared inside the car insisted that it was not stolen by himself. How will the court make a judgment when facing a suspect with a "zero confession"?
On a noon day in July 2022, driver Zhang received an order from the platform to drive a Porsche SUV sedan from the repair site to the owner's residential area. That night, when the car owner got into the car to check, he found that the 999 pure gold pendant of Chow Tai Fook, which was originally hanging at the rearview mirror for more than 40000 yuan, was missing, so he called the police.
The next day, Zhang arrived at the scene after being notified by the police. Upon arrival, he denied stealing the gold pendant inside the car. After investigation by the public security organs and examination by the procuratorate, the Xuhui procuratorate prosecuted Zhang to the Xuhui court for theft. Recently, the Xuhui Court held a public hearing to hear this case.
In court, facing the prosecution's accusations, Zhang denied all criminal acts as if during the investigation and review stage. Zhang's defense lawyer pointed out that there are still three unresolved doubts in this case: first, whether the pendant fell while driving; Secondly, if the pendant falls onto the car, is it possible for others to take it away; Thirdly, if the pendant was taken by Zhang, where is it now? During the period from the incident to his arrest, Zhang did not make any significant contributions.
During the court investigation, Zhang stated that he did not notice anything underneath the vehicle's rearview mirror. But for the lost gold pendant, his explanation was that he had felt something fall into the passenger seat, but did not notice what it was, as if it was the vehicle remote control on the center console. This confession is the first since the incident. When the prosecutor raised such an important clue as why it was not provided as early as possible and the remote control still appeared intact on the center console after getting off the car, Zhang was unable to respond.
During the evidence stage, the prosecutor provided surveillance videos showing that when Zhang drove away from the maintenance center, there were objects hanging under the front and rear mirrors of the vehicle window; After driving for a few minutes, the monitoring display shows that the hanging items under the rearview mirror can no longer be observed. Zhang has no objection to this and acknowledges that there were no other people getting on or off the vehicle throughout the journey, and there was no sudden turning or braking of the vehicle.
"Where is Porsche's camera located?" "Will we still inquire after sending out all the evidence?" "Does the police station really have a lie detector?" "What is the size of the case where a lie detector is used?" "What are the conditions under which a lie detector can be used to handle theft cases?" After the incident, Zhang's browser search records frequently showed relevant content. ". Regarding this, Zhang explained in court that before the public security organs contacted him, the car owner called him and searched for these contents in order to prove his innocence. The prosecutor immediately pointed out that during the review stage, when Zhang made his initial confession on this issue, he claimed to be "searching for fun" and also expressed willingness to compensate the victim accordingly.
During the court debate stage, the prosecution believed that, based on the positive and indirect evidence and common sense inference in this case, it is sufficient to determine the fact that Zhang secretly stole more than 40000 yuan worth of property from others for the purpose of illegal possession, and should be held criminally responsible for theft. After arriving at the case, Zhang did not truthfully confess the facts of the crime and did not compensate the victim for the losses. It is suggested that the defendant Zhang be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment and fined. The defense counsel suggests that if the court finds Zhang guilty, they earnestly request the court to consider him as a first-time offender and impose a lenient punishment in sentencing.
Based on the analysis and determination of the evidence in the case, the court confirmed that the items on the victim's car rearview mirror were lost while Zhang was driving the vehicle, which was directly proven by surveillance evidence; After surveying the vehicle, based on the interior of the vehicle and relevant evidence, the court ruled out the possibility of the hanging parts naturally falling onto the vehicle during driving as a substitute driver; After the vehicle was handed over to the victim's family, if the vehicle did not leave the community, the court ruled out other reasonable suspicions such as other personnel coming into contact with the vehicle and obtaining the involved items; The defendant has searched for relevant content directly related to how to avoid judicial processing on their mobile phone, and cannot provide a reasonable explanation.
In summary, the court believes that the evidence in the case is sufficient to exclude other reasonable suspicions that non Zhang committed theft. The prosecution has established the accusation that the defendant Zhang secretly stole more than RMB 40000 worth of property from others for the purpose of illegal possession, and his behavior constitutes theft. Based on the defendant's criminal facts, nature, circumstances, and degree of harm to society, the Xuhui Court ultimately sentenced Zhang to 2 years and 8 months in prison and a fine of 10000 yuan for the crime of theft.
After the verdict was pronounced, the defendant Zhang did not appeal, and the case has now taken effect.
