The "Hubei Suixian Boai Special School ** Case" has made new progress. Following the review of the whole case, the prosecution filed a public prosecution with the court on suspicion of the crime of Liu Aiye, the principal of the Boai Special School, and the case was tried in September last year, on the evening of January 8, the top news reporter learned from the victim's family that Liu Aiye was sentenced to 13 years in prison for the crime of **, and was sentenced to three years and six months in prison in the original sentence of compulsory **, and was sentenced to 15 years in prison.
Top News previously reported that the victim's family had introduced that the victims in this case involved a total of three people. However, the top news reporter noticed that only two victims appeared in the verdict of the ** case. The lawyer of the victim ** in the case said that she will continue to communicate with the local government in Suixian County about the situation of the third victim and pursue Liu Aiye's relevant legal responsibility.
The content of the retrial verdict provided by the victim's family.
The principal of the special school** student was sentenced to three and a half years
He was sentenced to 13 years in prison after the first trial
On the evening of January 8, Mr. Tu, a family member of the victim of the "Hubei Suixian Boai Special School ** Case", told top news reporters that he got the retrial verdict of the case on the afternoon of January 8By the time of the "fifteen years" in the verdict, he was generally satisfied, saying that the results were within their expectations.
In mid-June last year, there was a case focusing on the "Hubei Suixian Boai Special School" case, which aroused widespread concern in the society. The case, which was called "the realistic version of "The Melting Pot" by netizens,The principal of the special school was suspected of assaulting a number of disabled female students, and the court convicted him of the crime of compulsory **, and the principal involved, Liu Aiye, was sentenced to three years and six months in prison. This has caused a lot of controversy among the public
Subsequently, on June 17 last year,The Suixian County People's Court in Hubei Province issued a statement on the situation, saying that a special working group was set up as soon as possible and the case was being reviewed in its entirety
After more than three months of full case review,The prosecutor filed a public prosecution with the court on suspicion of Liu Aiye's ** crimeThe case was heard on September 4 last year.
Now it is carried out in the name of omission, and after this kind of full case review, it is found that there is no problem with the sentencing of the crime of compulsory **, but there may be a crime of omission, and then the prosecution will prosecute in the name of this crime of omission. Mr. Tu said this in an interview at that time.
Now, after more than three months, the results of the first trial of the omission crime have come outLiu Aiye committed the crime of ** and was sentenced to 13 years imprisonment and deprivation of political rights for three years, which was concurrently punished with the original sentence of three years and six months imprisonment, and it was decided to enforce the sentence of 15 years imprisonment and deprivation of political rights for three years
On the afternoon of January 9, the top news reporter learned from a source close to the caseLiu Aiye appealed when he signed for the retrial judgment
The verdict concerned two victims
The court accepted the statement of a victim with an intellectual disability
It is understood that the verdict in this ** case involves two victims. The content of the verdict shows that the court has ascertained that although there is no other evidence that can directly prove the fact of the defendant Liu Aiye** except for the statements of the two victims, the victims Chen Sisi (pseudonym) and Zhou Xiaoruo (pseudonym) have repeatedly stated the fact that they were Liu Aiye**, and the content of the repeated statements is relatively stable and in line with the age, intelligence level and cognitive ability of the two victims. Combined with factors such as the relationship between the second victim and defendant Liu Aiye, and their status as they get along, the possibility that the second victim falsely accused and framed defendant Liu Aiye may be ruled out
In addition, the court pointed out that although there were inconsistencies in some details such as the time of infringement and what he was wearing at the time in the statements of the second victim on several occasions, the description of the basic facts of the defendant Liu Aiye's ** act was relatively stable, and the expression of some details could not be known without personal experience, which was also in line with the age, intelligence level and expression ability of the second victim. 2. The victims' statements are all expressions of their true intentions and conform to objective facts, and are accepted by the court in accordance with law.
It is worth noting that during the trial, Liu Aiye and his defender proposed that "if the appraisal opinion finds that Zhou Xiao is incapable of testifying, his statement should not be accepted".
The court held that Zhou Xiaoruo was a victim rather than a witness in this case, and although the victim's statement and witness testimony were both descriptions of the case, there was an essential difference between the two. The victim's statement of the circumstances of the crime is a statement of what he personally experienced and perceived, not a description of the facts he saw and heard after the witness refined and summarized it.
The court found that in this case, although Zhou Xiaoruo, as the victim, had a certain intellectual disability, his statement of the process of his infringement was relatively clear and relatively stable, and his statement of some details was not known without personal experience, so his statement could be used as evidence in the verdict of this case。The conclusion of "no ability to testify" made in the judicial appraisal opinion issued by the Judicial Appraisal Institute of Suizhou Central Hospital [2023] Jing Jian Zi No. 65 lacks a scientific appraisal basis, and is also inconsistent with the objective reality of this case, and does not apply to the circumstances of this case, so the appraisal opinion is not accepted. The above-mentioned defense opinions and defense opinions put forward by Liu Aiye and his defender have no legal basis and are inconsistent with objective facts, and the court will not support them.
The missing "third victim".
Previously, the victim's family told the top news reporter that there were three victims involved in this case, but only two victims appeared in the verdict of this ** case. Although Mr. Tu is satisfied with the current verdict, butHe said that if Liu Aiye's crime against the third victim, Zhang Yangyang (pseudonym), is added, he will face a higher sentence
Why was Zhang Yangyang's situation not transferred to the procuratorate for prosecution?Zhang's brother said that his sister had a language barrier, coupled with a fear of communicating with strangers, which led to ".After two inquiries with the county public security bureau before, she couldn't clearly tell the policewoman about the process of being ** by Liu Aiye
The Public Security Bureau gave up on my sister on this ground. ”Zhang Yangyang's brother said that his sister could tell the victim Zhou Xiaoruo and his most trusted self about the whole processand they all understand. “**My sister has intellectual disability and speech impairment and does not accept or cannot complete the inquiry, and our family has great doubts about this
Zhang Yangyang's brother said that on December 6, 2023, he and his sister's ** lawyer went to the Suizhou Judicial Bureau and the Suixian Public Security Bureau again to inquire about the matter"At that time, the Suixian Public Security Bureau promised us that it would continue to do supplementary investigation for my sister, but it has not been done so far. ”
Victim lawsuit in the case**Lawyer Wan Miaoyan said that she will continue to communicate with the local authorities in Suixian County about the situation of the third victim, Zhang Yangyang, and pursue Liu Aiye's relevant legal responsibility
On the morning of January 9th, the top news reporter contacted the police in charge of the above case with the Suixian Public Security Bureau, he said that Zhang Yangyang was the victim of the previous compulsory ** crime, and he said that "it should not be handed over to the procuratorate" for the relevant investigation of the ** crime by the public security organs.
The police handling the case said that Zhang Yangyang has a certain language barrier, but also has certain communication skills, "It's not that she can't express it at all, and we have also questioned her several times." ”
A staff member of the Propaganda Department of the Suixian People's Procuratorate said that because the verdict in the case had just come down and the verdict had not yet taken effect, the undertaker was still conducting a review. "If there are any specific details of the case, we will give a reply after review. ”