Because the defendant Liang Yuncong retracted his confession in court, the evidence that directly proved the defendant's crime (the defendant's confession) was in an unstable state, and other evidence could not directly prove that the case was related to the defendant, Fang Yi felt a lot more relaxed. But even so, the lion still needs all his strength to fight the rabbit, and Fang Yi still doesn't dare to take it lightly.

In the process of cross-examination, Fang Yi refuted the evidence in the case one by one, and Yu Wendong cooperated very tacitly on the side.

"The facts of this case have been investigated, the court investigation has been completed, and the court arguments are now begining. Court debates revolve around disputed facts that have not been certified by the court and how the law should be applied based on the facts. The prosecutor will speak first. The presiding judge said.

"Presiding Judge, Judge: ...... In our opinion, the defendant's denial of his previous confession in court, but he was unable to provide reasonable reasons, his denial cannot be established.

We believe that the facts of this case are clear, the evidence is conclusive, and the defendant's conduct is extremely harmful to society and the nature of the conduct is extremely heinous, and we recommend that the defendant be sentenced to death. Complete. The inspector spoke.

"Defendant Liang Yuncong defended himself." The presiding judge said.

"I didn't kill Chu Ling, I really ......" Liang Yuncong repeatedly showed his innocence to the presiding judge, but the presiding judge was still expressionless.

Every year, the presiding judge has to hear many criminal cases, and although there are not many confessions retracted in court, it is not uncommon, and he has long been accustomed to it, and it is not strange to see it.

"The defendant's defender gives his defense opinion." The presiding judge looked at Fang Yi.

"Presiding Judge and Judge: The defender disagrees with the prosecutor's accusations, and we believe that the existing evidence on record is insufficient to prove the guilt of the defendant and cannot eliminate reasonable doubt. The specific reasons are as follows:

According to the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Law, there are three criteria for judging 'the evidence is credible and sufficient': first, the facts of the conviction and sentencing are proved by evidence; second, the evidence on which the verdict is based has been verified and verified through legal procedures; and third, the facts ascertained have been eliminated beyond reasonable doubt after the evidence of the entire case.

Based on the above criteria, the defender believes that the evidence provided by the prosecutor in this case does not meet the verdict standard of 'credible and sufficient evidence':

1. In this case, except for defendant Liang Yuncong's previous confession of guilt, there is no physical or verbal evidence with clear directions.

Based on the guilty confession made by defendant Liang Yuncong before, there should have been a J spot of Liang Yuncong at the scene or in the victim's body; The sickle used by Liang Yuncong to cut the victim's neck and the clothes he wore should also have traces of the victim's blood.

The evidence in the case showed that Liang Yuncong's J spots were not extracted at the scene or in the victim's body, and no traces of the victim's blood were detected from the sickle of Liang Yuncong's house and the clothes he was wearing.

Liang Yuncong always insisted in his confession of guilt that he raped SJ, and according to the defendant, after he committed the crime, there should have been traces at the scene and in the victim's body, but the prosecutor never mentioned this matter, and we believe that this evidence is key evidence, and in the absence of such evidence, the conclusion of this case should not be arbitrary, at least reasonable doubt cannot be excluded.

In addition, although there were many witnesses in this case, the testimony of these witnesses could only confirm the whereabouts of the victim before the crime and the circumstances of the discovery of the victim's body, and none of them had seen the incident with their own eyes, so it was impossible to link Liang Yuncong with the case.

2. Although defendant Liang Yuncong's confession of guilt is consistent with the location of the scene, some of the items left at the scene, the victim's clothing, and the state of the body, there are many doubts.

1. Liang Yuncong never confessed to the hidden circumstances beyond the control of the investigating organs, and his confession was inconsistent in details.

2. There are many contradictions between Liang Yuncong's guilty confession and the on-site investigation records and corpse appraisal opinions.

(1) Liang Yuncong claimed that he saw that the victim was not wearing underwear at the time of the crime, but the investigation at the scene showed that the victim was wearing underwear;

(2) Liang Yuncong claimed that he had SJ when he raped him, but there was no material in the file that reflected the detection of J spots from the victim's body;

(3) Liang Yuncong claimed that he cut the victim's neck with a sickle, but the victim had two wounds, one large and one small, on the victim's neck;

(4) Liang Yuncong claimed that he had struck the victim's crotch with a sickle, but the autopsy report did not show that there was a contusion on that part of the victim's body, and no DnA component was detected on the defendant's sickle;

(5) Liang Yuncong claimed that he strangled the victim's neck with a hemp rope and threw the hemp rope at the scene, but no hemp rope was found at the scene, and no other ropes were found;

(6) There were blood stains on the branches of trees near the scene, and there were traces of struggle on the ground, but Liang Yuncong did not make any confession to these episodes.

3. Defendant Liang Yuncong's confession of guilt may have been obtained through illegal means.

Liang Yuncong retracted his confession in court and said that he did not rape and kill the victim, and that his previous confession of guilt was forced to be fabricated because he could not sleep.

According to the materials in the file, investigators interrogated Liang Yuncong seven times. The interrogation times were:

1. From 3:15 a.m. to 4:00 a.m. the day after he was arrested, defendant Yun Cong denied the crime.

2. Two days later, from 20:10 to 21:20 in the evening, defendant Liang Yuncong confessed to the fact that he had raped and killed people.

3. From 4:10 a.m. to 6:50 a.m. three days later, defendant Liang Yuncong confessed to the fact that he had raped and killed people; All three interrogations were conducted at the police station.

4. From 15:00 to 18:30 on the afternoon of the 16th of the same month, the interrogation location was the Criminal Police Brigade, and the defendant's confession was the same as before.

5. From 15:00 to 15:20 on the afternoon of the 18th of the same month, the interrogation location was at the Criminal Police Brigade, and it was announced that Liang Yuncong was criminally detained.

6. From 15:20 to 16:00 on the afternoon of the 20th of the same month, the place of interrogation was the detention center.

7. From 15:30 to 16:30 on the afternoon of the 15th of the following month, the place of interrogation is the detention center. During the last two interrogations, the defendant's confession was the same as before.

Judging from the time and place of the above-mentioned interrogation, the investigators' first five interrogations of Liang Yuncong were conducted in places other than the detention center, and the second interrogation was in the early morning.

Although there is no direct evidence to prove that the relevant persons in this case used illegal methods to collect evidence, from the analysis of the time of the trial, the authenticity of Liang Yuncong's defense in court is relatively large, so the probative force of his guilty confession is low.

To sum up, the prosecutor accused the defendant Liang Yuncong of raping and killing the victim Chu Ling, and apart from Liang Yuncong's guilty confession during the investigation stage, there is no other evidence that can directly prove that Liang Yuncong is related to this case.

However, Liang Yuncong retracted his confession at trial, and the defense that he was illegally obtained evidence cannot be completely ruled out, so the evidence in this case is a situation that cannot be excluded from reasonable doubt, and does not meet the verdict standard of clear facts and sufficient evidence.

The defender believes that the evidence of the murder and rape of the defendant Liang Yuncong in this case is insufficient, and the facts are unclear. The court is requested to acquit the defendant in accordance with the law. Complete. Fang Yi expressed his defense opinion.

"The prosecutor may respond to the defender's arguments." The presiding judge looked at the prosecutor's bench.