Retrial: Lin Jinhe (defendant in the original instance Lin Guodong's father), male, Han nationality, born in 1945 December 20, Jiangxi Province, Shangrao, Xinyu iron and Steel Co. Ltd. marketing company workers, retired, lives at ring mountain village 509 Building 2 floor, No. 6.

Retrial: Zheng Luying (defendant in the original instance Lin Guodong's mother), female, born 21 July 1955, Han nationality, address.

Retrial, Zheng Luying Lin Jinhe, because Lin Guodong was found guilty of intentional homicide, robbery, intentional injury crime capital punishment case, the Jiangxi Provincial Higher People's Court (2001) the final penalty criminal No. ninety-third ruling, the retrial.

Retrial request

1, the revocation of Jiangxi Province Higher People's Court (2001) the final penalty criminal No. ninety-third order;

2, to declare the defendant in the original instance Lin Guodong is innocent.

The facts and reasons

A retrial, based on the following reasons, request the Supreme People's court for a retrial of the case.

A pairLin Guodong executed judgment, ruling has no effect.

Lin Guodong executed judgment, ruling in January 12, 2001, the Xinyu City Intermediate People's Court of criminal cases of Lin Guodong the only one session and no court pronouncement of judgment and no regular sentence cases respectively in January 15, 2001, April 15, 2001, has made. Lin Guodong executed judgment, ruling has no effect lies in:

A trial without closing.

Method [2000] No. 29 "interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the strict implementation of trial period system of certain provisions of the" Tenth stipulates: "the people's court verdict verdict, ruling that the date of..." "Criminal Procedure Law" the 163rd stipulation: "declaratory judgment, will be open to the public. The court judgment, shall within five days of the judgment by the parties... Regular declaratory judgment, shall be declared immediately after the verdict will be delivered to the party......." Provisions on some problems in the implementation of "the people's Republic of China Criminal Procedure Law" interpretation of the Supreme People's court "article 182nd: the court judgment, shall within five days of the judgment by the parties... And the defendant's close relatives. Regular pronouncement of a judgment, the collegial panel shall before the verdict, sentencing announced in advance of the time and place, the judgment is pronounced, immediately after the verdict will be delivered to the party... And the defendant's close relatives." Rule 184th: "declaratory judgment, shall be heard in public." "When a judgment is pronounced, the staff should stand up in court."As mentioned before: "the Lin Guodong executed judgment, ruling in January 12, 2001, the Xinyu City Intermediate People's Court of criminal cases of Lin Guodong the only one session and no court pronouncement of judgment and no regular sentence cases respectively in January 15, 2001, April 15, 2001, has made." In other words: the Lin Guodong executed without a trial case. The trial of Lin Guodong capital punishment will not have the appeal to elements; then the final verdict on forest Guodong executed does not have the final decision to elements.

So, the Lin Guodong executed judgment, ruling has no effect.

(two) the original decision, ruled that the fact that there are errors.

(2001) the final penalty criminal No. ninety-third ruled that: "the appellant Lin Guodong for the purpose of illegal possession, together with others, gun, knife, resort to violence, threats and other means, robbed two times, the principal their acts constitute robbery, lines, and has the" PRC Criminal Law "provisions of article 263rd of households robbery, armed robbery plot, should be in accordance with the participation of all criminal punishment; Lin Guodong involved in helping others to kill a person, his behavior constituted the crime of intentional homicide, accomplice; Lin Guodong for revenge, others gathered knife deliberately hurt a person, wounded B, their behavior constitutes the crime of intentional injury, Department of principal." The criminal judgment is indeed wrong that is:

1Two robberies, Lin Guodong is not the principal.

"Criminal law" the provisions of the first paragraph of article twenty-sixth:"...... Who plays a principal role in a joint crime."

(1) the principal Lin Guodong not in late June 15, 1998 11 about the robbery.

The fact is: Xinyu City District People's Court (1999) Yu Xing early word number ninetieth criminal judgments accused Jia Guimin of Hebei, in the processing of oil steel markets business, in April 98 invited Lin Guodong and partnership from Hebei province into the egg to Xingang vegetable wholesale market, but he never let Lin Guodong went to Hebei to purchase, he was just one link supply. Jia to monopoly steel market egg business, 98 years in June 15th, Hebei found a transport egg to Xinyu automobile, which is called to Lin Guodong et al find Hebei egg people's troubles, the purpose is not to let the people of Hebei to the new steel egg. Lin did not want to stir up trouble, and that evening 8 when, Jia Guimin once again call Lin, and told to transport egg car parking place, Lin only promised to have a look, to this end, Lin Guodong did not get off, not involved in the robbery, apparently, Lin Guodong determination for the June 15, 1998 night around 11 robbery committed by "unwarranted main".

(2) Lin Guodong is not the May 16, 1999 night at eight forty robbery principal.

In the new public security office "battalion of the criminal investigation office" in October 15, 2000 at twelve fifteen to 16 days 1 when to Lin Guodong's "the interrogation record (the first)" Lin Guodong confession:"...... Then with a transparent plastic put my hands, feet tied, I struggle, I say: do not rob? I quit! Mountain monkey took out a restructuring of the rifle against my head, forcing said, you don't have to dry......" To the place...... "Mountain monkey and another people you do not know me upstairs, I said I can't climb up, wait for you in the taxi, Yama Monkeyko said, you go up, Zhang Junhua said:" OK, let Lin Guodong get away in a taxi, they four people upstairs I call taxi to leave the." Recorded October 29, 2000 "Xinyu City People's Procuratorate the arrest report in case":"...... At the beginning of Lin Guodong refused to pay, Xinlin threat Lin said: fuck you, I'll kill you......". Xinyu City Intermediate People's Court (2001) more than at the beginning of the word no. first penalty criminal judgment: "May 16, 1999 night at eight forty, accomplice Fu Xinlin (already sentenced) into the defendant Lin Guodong, Li Ganmin, Zhang Junhua (already sentenced), the intention to commit a crime, and ordered Li Ganmin to step on good point......".Obviously, Lin Guodong determination for the May 16, 1999 night at eight forty robbery principal and the confession of the accused and the procuratorate identified by threat and the original judgment in the case, put forward to identify the criminal intent, to check for the Fu Xin forest contradictions.

2In May 14, 1999, Lin Guodong not an accessory to murder.

(2001) the final penalty criminal No. ninety-third ruled that: "in May 14, 1999, Zhang Junhua and the victim Li Xiaoqing conflict for his girlfriend, they gathered the appellant Lin Guodong Li Xiaoqing,...... Zhang Junhua fired one shot at Li Xiaoqing, Li Xiaoqing was lying on the ground...... 16 in the same month the death". According to the September 14, 1999 Wang Jiangrong "interrogation" confession: "Xiao Zhang beginning discuss with Lin Guodong, and said to me, to me with them to a mouse......" Lin Guodong said: "I know a mouse, I do not come forward, let Zhang to talk about. I also had to shelter from the building in the West crossing next to the relatively dark place...... I like Guodong in did not appear dark place, every sub sub clock will hear a gun shot rang out, we went away". After the murder, the defendant Lin Guodong not only did not kill Li Xiaoqing's subjective intention and not kill Li Wang behavior, apparently, an accessory that Lin Guodong for the May 14, 1999 murder of a purely "unwarranted".

3In November 28, 1998, Lin Guodong was not late 7 pm principal intentional injury case.

At noon on November 1, 1998, Lin Guodong's younger brother Lin Guozhu and students Wang Jun, Wang Jiangrong, Zhang Junhua et al. Lin in Xingang Yuan River Hotel next to the restaurant for dinner, underworld gang led by Wang Guigen Wang Weiping, more than 10 people with shotguns, kitchen knife, a knife and other weapons, suddenly burst into Lin Hotel, Lin Guodong's brother Lin Guozhu head, body cut more than 20 knife bleeding, faint on the ground, rushed at hospital, the hospital diagnosis, right ulna olecranon fracture, fibula fracture on the right, the left lower fibula comminuted fracture, right parietal bone fracture line, left leg muscle tendon. Caused by hemorrhagic shock, the hospital for three days and nights to save it out of danger, but Wang Jun left finger cut off two systemic multiple fractures cut hurt, Wang Jiangrong systemic multiple knife wounds, Zhang Junhua hiding in the toilet out of danger. The audience and the times of 110 came to the scene, the murderer will go swaying left the scene. After the victim Lin Guozhu and others during the rescue in the hospital, Wang Weiping, Wang Guigen, Xia Bo black society and others carrying weapons to keep in the hospital downstairs interference victim hospitalized. Once found Lin Guozhu's brother Lin Guodong chase. Lin Guozhu, Wang Jiangrong is forced to treatment during the wound has not healed case hospital doctor friend Wang Xiaobing please leave in tenth days late 12. Black society Wang Weiping, Wang Guigen and other 10 people and pursued to Wang Xiaobing home downstairs. 20 days after injury to return to their home treatment of a doctor. Black society Wang Weiping, Wang Guigen and other 10 people and keep the long-term in the building. In November 25th 98 or so one afternoon, Lin Guodong and Wang Jiangrong in the Zhang Junhua house, the underworld king Wei Ping, Wang Guigen, Wang Weiping, Wang Guigen et al found; that Zhang Junhua home, Lin Guodong jumped out of the window to escape into the. Every time after the timely report to the public security organs have no one tube. In November 28th 98, conflict, the victim Lin Guodong et al and Wang Weiping. When Wang Weiping left back slightly injured out of the blood, afterwards, home he sat moldova. Lin Guodong is not in late November 28, 1998 7 when Xu from the principal intentional injury case the case of intentional injury itself does not hold (see the petition below "the original judgment, ruling according to Yu. The medical technology in word for yellow Weiping to conviction and sentencing evidence does not really" in "(1999) No. 17" forensic medical books "was forged in the Huang Weiping case is made based on inaccurate identification").

(three) the original judgment, ruling according to conviction and sentencing evidence does not really.

1In the trial, the transcripts of interrogation, interrogation transcripts were changed package.

Lin Guodong was put into the jail in less than a week. The public security investigation team of investigators at sentencing Yao Feng tangled social unemployed Deng Xiaomin, will Lin Guodong criminal case person and the victim police roll all original files out to retrial retrial people, people all the original file security, made a careful reading, due to send up Deng Xiaomin account may not be copied, so one family, retrial only pen down the victim Wang Ruiqi's name, address, for verification. Unexpected is, in the trial, retrial one family witnessed Lin Guodong criminal and victim of police co rolls of the original file (the first interrogation, interrogation record, the first time the first record of inquiry) are all man-made hide (removed), replace sb. is make only superficial changes the interrogation, interrogation, interrogation record. Questioned the retrial: investigators Yao Feng and send volume Deng Xiaomin for revealing Lin Guodong criminal and victim in all the original volume were sentenced.

2For any leakage, little the facts of a case are punish with due severity.

The Lin Guodong trial had only one court second instance court, No. In January 12, 2001 the first instance court after the same day, the Xinyu Municipal People's Procuratorate deputy director Liu Changzheng called Lin Guodong's lawyer Wei Xinhui to get the Xinyu City People's Procuratorate at the "two October 29th OOO" "arrest cases report". The report that "20:40 May 16, 1999, the suspect Fu Xinlin invited Lin Guo Dong to get one in the north of the City boss, at the beginning of Lin Guodong refused to go to the Fu Xinlin threat Lin said: fuck you I fuck you......" Fair trial of defendant in the original instance and retrial appeal, one of the people as clearly evidence hoping to appeal, the court of second instance is "decided not to court," is, the public prosecutor in the court of first instance after the day that the defendant Lin Guodong defense lawyer Wei Xinhui to get the hospital arrest at OOO for two years in October 29th "" "arrest cases report" of the Xinyu Municipal People's Procuratorate deputy director Liu Changzheng for leaking the report was removed and transferred out.

3On the Lin Guodong case, only one session without any witnesses to testify in court(in other words: for all the testimony of witnesses Lin Guodong condemned to death in accordance with the law can not be used as the basis for a final decision).

"Criminal Procedure Law" the forty-seventh stipulation: "the testimony of witnesses in court by the public prosecutor, the victim and the defendant, counsel questioned both sides, questioning, listening to the testimony of witnesses and have been verified after, can serve as the basis for deciding."

In January 12, 2001, the whole family of retrial saw Xinyu City Intermediate People's Court of Lin Guodong case only one session, without any witnesses to testify in court. Obviously, all the testimony of witnesses Lin Guodong condemned to death in accordance with the law can not be used as the basis for a final decision.

4On the Lin Guodong case, only one session, not accused Lin Guodong of the indictment accused of carrying knives, guns and other evidence to show, cross examination(in other words, the Lin Guodong condemned to death without evidence).

"Criminal Procedure Law" forty-second stipulates: "all facts that prove the true circumstances of the case, is evidence. There are the following seven kinds of evidence: (a) material evidence, documentary evidence;...... The above evidence must be verified before it can be taken as a basis." Rule forty-sixth: "of all cases are to be sentenced to the weight of evidence, investigation and study, not credulous......"

In January 12, 2001, the whole family of retrial saw Xinyu City Intermediate People's Court of Lin Guodong case only a trial, prosecutors and judges are not in court on charges of the indictment and the resulting death sentence, sentence (that) the defendant Lin Guodong carrying the "double barreled shotgun" "knife" such as evidence of produce, quality certificate. Obviously, no evidence of Lin Guodong condemned to death.

5For Huang Weiping, Yu. The medical technology in the word (1999) No. 17 "forensic medical book" is forged in the Huang Weiping case is made based on inaccurate identification.

Xinyu City People's Procuratorate to Huang Weiping Yu. The medical technology in [1999]17 words "forensic medical book" written "excerpt" said: "the first pathological records:...... Debridement in 400 milliliters of blood transfusion...... Conclusion: Huang Weiping because of the force caused by the systemic multiple soft tissue trauma, right, left metacarpal phalangeal open skull fracture, and traumatic shock, and the degree of injury seriously b."

The fact is: 98 years in November 28th, the Lin Guodong and Wang Weiping conflict reason: Wang Weiping left back slightly injured out of the blood, afterwards, home he sat moldova. No hemorrhagic shock. Not to mention the open skull fracture!!! Retrial has been to the hospital to check, no blood transfusion of two a total of 800 ml of records, the forensic identification book forged in the Huang Weiping case is modeled as identification according to law shall be legally effective identification of invalid.

   (four) the original ruling, the applicable law is wrong.

The Jiangxi Provincial Higher People's Court (2001) the final penalty criminal No. ninety-third ruling ruling: "rejected the appeal, upheld the. The ruling shall be final. According to the "notice" provisions of the Supreme People's Court on the authorization of the higher people's courts and the PLA military court approved the death penalty cases, this ruling is approved by the defendant Lin Guodong robbery sentenced to death, deprived of political rights for life...... The crime of intentional homicide sentenced to eight years in prison, convicted of the crime of intentional injury was sentenced to eight years, the decision to death, deprived of political rights for life...... Criminal adjudication."

The ruling is indeed erroneous application of the law:

"Criminal Procedure Law" the fourth chapter "state death penalty review procedure" and the 202nd article about: "the Supreme People's court review of death penalty cases, the higher people's Court of judicial review of death sentence with a two-year suspension of execution shall be the case, the judge 3 people form a collegial panel to" confirmed, China's criminal law on the death penalty is imposed by the legal system of jurisdiction and the approval authority of phase separation, i.e. the review procedure of death penalty review procedure of death penalty is the effective judgment, ruling."License notice of the Supreme People's Court Notice" on the authorization to the higher people's courts and the PLA military court approval of death penalty cases of the Supreme People's court approved the right of death penalty cases, not cancel the review procedure of death penalty notice. Apparently the Jiangxi Provincial Higher People's court with appellate ruling made by the program instead of the death penalty review procedure (2001) the final penalty criminal No. ninety-third rulings in accordance with the applicable law is wrong to.

(five) the original ruling process illegal.

 1,The investigation, prosecution of illegal procedure.

"Criminal Procedure Law" 129th stipulates: "the end of the public security organ case investigation...... And write the prosecution of submissions, together with the case file and evidence, to the people's procuratorate together with the review decision."

Unit steel for the new public security punishment investigation team, the investigators Yao Feng, Yao Guohai et al. October 16, 2000 "to the families of detainees or unit", the word Yu notification (2000) No. thirty-first "the prosecution of submissions" cover is Xinyu City Public Security Bureau seal, so as to achieve the new Public Security Office (i.e. Yuan River Police Bureau) Lin Guodong penalty case on file for investigation by the leapfrog transferred to the upper level people's Procuratorate for examination and prosecution.

The people's Procuratorate of Xinyu city in October 30, 2000 to arrest people not only "family member or notice" and in December 28, 2000 Yu seized criminal word (2001) No. first "complaint" in the form of acceptance of different level public security to the miscarriages of justice, the deputy director Liu Changzheng to the plaintiff in the case by the people's Procuratorate to the Yushui district (and that the maximum of three years in jail), Xinyu City People's Procuratorate prosecution office intentionally hide away to favor Lin Guodong Zhang Junhua all the evidence materials, do not move to the court.

2Judgment, ruling, illegal procedure.

As mentioned before: a trial is not closed, the Lin Guodong executed judgment, ruling has no effect at the same time constitute illegal procedure; the Jiangxi Provincial Higher People's Court (2001) the final penalty criminal No. ninety-third ruling in the second ruling procedure instead of the death penalty review procedure which is erroneous application of the law at the same time. The illegal procedure.

   (six) the original ruling belongs to pervert the law ruling.

    As mentioned before, the Lin Guodong executed judgment, ruling has no effect; the original decision, ruled that the fact that there are errors; the original judgment, ruling according to conviction and sentencing evidence does not really; the original ruling, the applicable law is wrong; the original ruling process illegal. This has not been an effective judgment, ruling; wrong fact finding; no conclusive evidence that there is error in the application of the law; and the process is the premise of the law made: "this ruling is approved by the defendant Lin Guodong robbery sentenced to death, deprived of political rights for life, fined 3000 yuan, the crime of intentional manslaughter and sentenced to eight years in prison, convicted of the crime of intentional injury was sentenced to eight years, the decision to death, deprived of political rights for life, criminal verdict fined 3000 yuan" belongs to pervert the law ruling according to law

     Two, the request and the facts, reasons and evidence.

"Criminal law" the fifth stipulation: "the degree of punishment shall be with crime, criminal responsibility and commitment to adapt". Rule twenty-eighth: "who is coerced to participate in a crime shall, according to the circumstances of his crime, a mitigated punishment or be exempted from punishment."

As mentioned before: a trial is not closed, the Lin Guodong executed judgment, ruling has no effect at the same time constitute illegal procedure; principal Lin Guodong not the two robbery, accomplice not murder in May 14, 1999, not November 28, 1998 night 7 pm principal intentional injury case (due to the intentional injury does not of itself the establishment of the original judgment), which ruled that the fact that there are errors; trial in interrogation, interrogation transcripts were changed package, for any leaks little the facts of a case are punish with due severity, on the Lin Guodong case only one session without any witnesses (in other words: all the testimony of witnesses Lin Guodong condemned to death in accordance with the law can not be used as the basis for a final decision on the Lin Guodong case), only one session, not accused Lin Guodong of the indictment accused of carrying knives, guns and other evidence of produce, quality certificate (in other words, the Lin Guodong condemned to death without evidence), Xinyu City People's Procuratorate on Huang Weiping's "forensic medical book" forged in the Huang Weiping case is modeled as identification according to law shall be no legal effect The identification of the original judgment, ruling invalid form according to the conviction and sentencing evidence does not really; Jiangxi Province Higher People's court with appellate ruling made by the program instead of the death penalty review procedure (2001) the final penalty criminal No. ninety-third that there is some erroneous application of the law of the second instance (CFA) wrongly: principal, Lin Guodong robbery the crime of intentional homicide, principal and accessory crime of intentional injury death ruled lost according to "the last chance. The procedure for review of death sentence";The investigation, prosecution of illegal procedure,The trial, adjudication procedures illegal composition process, illegal;Obviously, the judgment of the first instance judgment, ruling, ruling of law. According to the "criminal law" article fifth, the provisions of article twenty-eighth, shall declare the defendant in the original instance Lin Guodong is innocent.

The main evidence:

  The motherZheng LuyingTo cause the death penalty son Lin Guodong        Provide evidenceMaterials Station

    Three, in accordance with the retrial "the provisions of article 204th of criminal procedure law" retrial conditions.

In summary, the retrial accords with the "Criminal Procedure Law" article 204th (a), (two), (three), (four) the provisions of item, request the people's court for retrial, retrial and to safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of the defendant Lin Guodong.

Yours sincerely:

Supreme People's court.

Retrial: Lin Jinhe

Retrial: Zheng Luying

TwoOIn February 18th one one