The retrial verdict of Li Yuqian's "killing his wife and children" case reveals three key points: confession, evidence collection, and evidence chain opinions | Evidence | Li Yuqian

22 years after the incident, Li Yuqian from Guizhou was sentenced for retrial in the case of "killing his wife and children".

On September 6th, the Liupanshui Intermediate People's Court of Guizhou Province publicly announced the verdict on the defendant Li Yuqian, who was remanded for retrial by the Guizhou Provincial High Court, for intentional homicide, Meng Ruihong for sheltering, and criminal incidental civil litigation. Li Yuqian was sentenced to death for intentional homicide with a two-year reprieve and deprived of political rights for life; Meng Ruihong was sentenced to eight years in prison for the crime of shielding. At the same time, a judgment shall be made in accordance with the law on the incidental civil part.

Li Yuqian told Pengpai News that he filed an appeal in court.

According to the retrial verdict obtained by Pengpai News, the Intermediate People's Court of Liupanshui believes that the existing evidence cannot determine that the public security organs used illegal methods such as torture, coercion, and deception to extract confessions from Li Yuqian and Meng Ruihong; The forensic physical evidence inspection and appraisal report, as well as the on-site investigation record, have legitimate and objective sources, and can be mutually verified with other evidence, which can be used as evidence. The defense reasons and opinions of Li Yuqian and his defense counsel are not valid and will not be adopted.

Is there any torture to extract confessions?

Pengpai News previously reported that on September 10, 2001, the Liupanshui Intermediate People's Court convicted Li Yuqian of intentional homicide and sentenced him to death, depriving him of political rights for life. After the second trial was remanded for retrial, the court changed the sentence of death to Li Yuqian with a reprieve. Afterwards, Li Yuqian's appeal was rejected again and he continued to appeal while in prison.

On May 27, 2016, the Guizhou Provincial High Court decided to initiate a retrial of the case. On September 28, 2020, the Guizhou Provincial High Court publicly announced the verdict on Li Yuqian's intentional homicide case. The Guizhou Provincial High Court held that the original first instance procedure violated the relevant procedural provisions of witnesses appearing in court to testify, presenting appraisal conclusions, and re appraisal. The original judgment found that there were doubts and contradictions in the criminal facts of Li Yuqian's intentional homicide, which may affect a fair trial. Therefore, it was decided to revoke the original first and second instance judgments and remand them to the Intermediate People's Court of Liupanshui City for retrial.

In November 2022, the case was retried for trial. Li Yuqian claimed in court that he had been tortured and forced to confess, and that he had a good relationship with his wife and had no motive for murder. He was framed by Meng Ruihong. In addition, Xu Xin, the former defense counsel of Li Yuqian, stated that the evidence in this case only includes contradictory and inconsistent testimonies from Li and Meng, and Li Yuqian's testimony was obtained during illegal detention, which raises doubts about its legality. "Excluding the testimony, there is no evidence pointing to Li Yuqian in this case."

The verdict of this retrial shows that the Liupanshui Intermediate People's Court believes that, after investigation, in order to verify the legality of the public security organs collecting the testimonies of Li Yuqian and Meng Ruihong, the public prosecution organs have submitted Li Yuqian's entry medical examination form, the testimonies of Li Yuqian's fellow inmates, and the statements of the investigators to the court. They believe that the case was natural, and that the public security organs have lawfully collected evidence and interrogated Li Yuqian during the handling of the case. They have not illegally detained, tortured, or induced confessions of Li Yuqian, and that Li Yuqian's physical appearance was normal when he entered the detention center; There are no scars on the body. The existing evidence cannot determine that the public security organs used illegal methods such as torture, coercion, and deception to collect the confessions of Li Yuqian and Meng Ruihong. Therefore, the above reasons and defense opinions are not valid and will not be accepted by the court.

Is the evidence collection process legal?

Regarding the defense opinion of Li Yuqian, stating that the evidence collection process in this case is seriously illegal, appraisal opinions, on-site investigation records, etc. cannot be used as evidence, and the relevant physical evidence is not fully extracted and the source is unclear. The Liupanshui Intermediate People's Court stated that after investigation, the forensic material evidence inspection and appraisal certificate and on-site investigation records, numbered as "2001 Public Criminal Technical Law Jian Zi No. 032", are legal, objective and true. The technician who visited the site confirmed that the blood stains, hair and other items used for inspection and appraisal in the appraisal certificate were from the identification of Li Yuqian and Meng Ruihong on April 2, 2001. The public security organs extracted them based on their identification, and they can be used as evidence to verify each other with on-site photos, identification photos, and defendant's confession. Therefore, the defense opinion is not valid and the court will not accept it.

Is the evidence chain complete?

Regarding Li Yuqian's statement that "there is no time, motive, or behavior to commit the crime; existing evidence cannot prove that the perpetrator committed the murder and invited Meng Ruihong to dismember or dispose of the body, and should be declared innocent" and his defense's statement that "the confessions of Li Yuqian and Meng Ruihong are contradictory, and the confessions themselves are contradictory, which cannot prove that Li Yuqian committed the intentional homicide crime; existing evidence can prove that Li Yuqian did not commit the crime at the time or motive; objective evidence in the case cannot prove the cause of death of the victim, and it is unclear whether the blood stains on the scene formed before death or after dismemberment; the dismemberment tools and the dismemberment process used in this case are unclear, and the time of dismemberment is contradictory. Existing evidence cannot form evidence to lock the evidence. The chain cannot draw the sole conclusion that Li Yuqian committed intentional homicide and should be declared innocent. The court, based on the testimony of witnesses and judicial appraisal opinions, combined with the investigation experiments, investigation records and photos, blood fingerprints, blood mark appraisal opinions, scratches, Meng Ruihong's confession, Li Yuqian's confession and other evidence conducted by the public security organs, believes that the reasons for defense and defense opinions are not valid and will not be accepted.

In addition, the defense counsel of the defendant Meng Ruihong argued that "Meng Ruihong's behavior constitutes the crime of aiding in the destruction of evidence.". The court believes that Meng Ruihong, knowing that Li Yuqian was a criminal, falsely proved to have sheltered, and the circumstances were serious. Her behavior met the constitutive requirements of the crime of sheltering. Therefore, the defense opinion is not valid and the court will not accept it. The defense opinion put forward by the defendant Meng Ruihong's defense counsel, "Meng Ruihong truthfully confessed to his criminal facts and had a good attitude of confession after being brought to justice," is consistent with the facts found during the trial and is accepted by the court.