"It’s all said that you can’t get pregnant!"
A said so much that he slammed his girlfriend’s belly.After he held his girlfriend’s neck and waited for cruel atrocities, he had sexually assaulted his girlfriend.Everything is a crime that happened because of the previous girlfriend’s refusal to have sex.
In August 2019, a terrible crime occurred in a certain house.At the time of the incident, A was 14 years old and the victim was only 13 years old.This is difficult to believe that the cruel behavior of crimes committed by teenagers in her 10s.
In May last year, the court of first instance sentenced the defendant A for a long time for three years and two years and 6 months in the short term.However, A immediately appealed in less than a week after the verdict came out.The reason is that the sentence is too heavy.
[Although self -confession is denying "sexual relationship between the two sides" …]
The victim called his father after being raped by A.Hearing his daughter’s trembling voice, his father ran away in one breath. After learning that his daughter was injured, his father was very angry.He took the victim to the police station.
A resolutely denied his suspicion in the first investigation.
Called "this is the sexual relationship between the two sides."
Adults’ common justifications are also used in the case.A’s defense said: "It was agreed with sexual relationships under consent, and later remembered what the predecessors said," later, like a flower snake ", so they stopped sexual behavior."
However, in the subsequent investigation, A was frankly confessing the facts of rape.
The judge of the Criminal Ministry of the Ministry of Court of the Lishuyuan District Court, who is in charge of the first instance, believes that "the crime and criminal method of A are very bad."
Minister Judge Li Bingsen pointed out that the severity of a crime said: "The victim is only a 13 -year -old child and a teenager", "there is no victim recovery or agreement at all."
But ▲ Afterwards, frank crimes ▲ have not been punished by criminal punishment, these points are reflected in sentencing.In this way, A was sentenced to three years in prison and two years and 6 months in a short period of time.Because it was a juvenile, the court decided to sentence to irregular punishment (with an upper limit and lower limit sentence), and observed his attitude during his sentence.
[New propositions "False forced by the police", the protest can not be recognized]
A immediately appealed.At the same time, he also put forward a new idea, saying that "he is a minor, and he accepted the police’s investigation alone without the ‘adult’." "Therefore, he faked in accordance with the wishes of the police."
But the appeal trial did not accept the defendant’s claim.
What’s more, the focus of this "false self -confession" is the claim that suddenly appeared after the submission period of the appeal.From the perspective of the court’s position, it can be rejected directly without observing the defendant’s claims.However, the Court of Appeal tried himself one by one to refute his proposition one by one.
The judge of the First Criminal Department of the Mizura High Court said categorically: "In the investigation of police, prosecutors, and the original trial court, the defendant’s confession was credible."
First of all, the court pointed out that in the police investigation, the defendant’s grandmother had accompanied him, but because the defendant himself was burdened, his grandmother left.It is reported that at the time of the first police investigation, A asked the investigator to ask the investigator before the suspicion of the suspicion. "It should be more convenient."
In addition, the court also listed ▲ With the help of the defender, he accepted the trial with the help of the investigation authority in detail.False Confession ".
In addition, the victim’s statement is also regarded as evidence of proof of his crime.In the three statements, the victims stated in detail the situation at the time of the crime, and in court also consistently and clearly explained the crime situation. Based on this, the court said that "this is not a direct experience that it cannot be stated without statement.fact".
Based on this, the second instance court stated that "the defendant did not be forgiven from the victim and did not seriously reflect on the mistakes." He rejected the appeal.
