dubious witness identification

Nie Shubin Rape and Murder Case (聂树斌故意杀人、强奸案)

The defendant/exoneree 

  • Nie Shubin (聂树斌), born on November 6, 1974; he was 21 when he was convicted and executed for rape and intentional murder.

Facts

  • On August 5, 1994, a decomposed female body was found in a corn field nearby an industrial compound. Nie, who was working at one of the factories in the compound, was found to be suspicious for “often riding a mountain bike following women,” as some unnamed witnesses stated. Nie was detained and questioned on October 1, 1994. While in custody, he did not confess until the sixth day. On October 9, 1994, Nie was formally arrested.

Procedural history 

  • On March 15, 1995, the Shijiazhuang Intermediate Court convicted Nie of intentional murder and rape and imposed the death sentence on him.

  • On April 25, 1995, the Hebei Province High Court affirmed the conviction and sentence.

  • On April 27, 1995, Nie was executed.

Date of the conviction

March 15, 1995

Date the wrongful conviction was reversed

December 2, 2016

Days incarcerated

Executed

Why was the case reopened/reversed 

  • Nie Shubin’s mother kept petitioning ever since he was detained.

  • The victim’s family had doubted Nie’s capacity to commit the crime since day one. They claimed the victim was a 36-year-old married woman with some martial arts training and Nie was a 21-year-old lightly built man. 

  • In January 2005, Wang Shujin, who was then a suspect of several other rapes and murders, was detained by the police in Henan Province.  He voluntarily confessed many times that he had raped and murdered a woman in a corn field of the west of Shijiazhuang City, Hebei Province. After his case transferred to the Hebei police, Wang first learned that the Shijiazhuang case had been cleared and “the perpetrator” had been executed. Nevertheless, Wang had still insisted that he was the real perpetrator in Nie’s case.

  • A local new paper profiled this unusual case with the title - “one murder two real perpetrators.“

  • After Wang Shujin’s confession, Nie’s case attracted a lot of public attention, which pushed for clarification of the Nie case and delayed Wang’s execution.

  • On March 16, 2005, the Hebei Provincial Political-Legal Committee promised to investigate the Nie case and release a conclusion in one month. But a conclusion had not been released before Nie was exonerated by the SPC.

  • In December 2014, the SPC appointed the Shandong Provincial High Court to exercise jurisdiction over Nie’s case review. After review, the Shandong Provincial High Court concluded that the original conviction is not supported by sufficient evidence and that the possibility that Nie was not the real perpetrator cannot be excluded. It further suggested the SPC to re-open this case.

  • In March 2015, Nie’s lawyers were allowed the first time to review the entire case files.

  • In June 2016, the SPC decided to re-open this case.

  • On December 2, 2016, the SPC publicly announced that Nie was not guilty.

Factors contributing to the wrongful conviction

False confession

  • Nie was tortured by the police and forced to confess. According to Nie’s lawyer, and a police officer Zheng who worked at the same police station where Nie’s case was handled, Nie confessed because he was beaten by the police. According to police officer Zheng, it was very common in the 1990s, especially during the “strike hard” campaign, that suspects were beaten and forced to confess.

Dubious witness identification/statements

  • No eye witnesses at the crime scene.

  • Some witness statements indicated that a young man that likes to ride a mountain bike was following women and looking at them with “evil eyes.”

Problematic forensic evidence

  • No sperm collected. No DNA test done.

Defense lawyer's errors/absence

  • Nie’s lawyer Zhang Jinghe was appointed by the court for free. He did not claim Nie was innocent, but raised that Nie was a first-time offender and had shown repentance after the crime, with hope that Nie could receive a lenient sentence.

Court's errors

  • Failed to exclude the forensic report and the crime scene investigation report even though those two documentations were not signed by two witnesses as required by the law.

  • Failed to exclude the illegally extracted confession.

Other developments

  • In March 2007, Wang was convicted of a series of murders and rapes and was sentenced to death, but was acquitted of the murder and rape in Nie’s case.

  • During Wang’s trial, Wang and his lawyer tried to prove Wang committed the crime in Nie’s case, while the prosecutor contested that Wang did not commit that offense.

  • In April 2007, Wang appealed his conviction on the ground that his offense in Shijiazhuang was not prosecuted.  

  • In September 2013, Wang’s appeal was overturned and the conviction was affirmed on the ground that Wang’s confession on that crime does not match some physical evidence. For example, Wang confessed that he stepped on the chest of the body after the crime, but the forensic evidence does not show there is any chest fracture on the body; Wang confessed that the victim was wearing a shirt with a pattern of small flowers, but the physical evidence shows that the pattern is different. However, the victim’s father claimed that the police came to their home and took more than one of the victim’s shirts. The victim’s father also claimed that the shirt the police presented at Nie’s trial is different from the one they presented at Wang’s trial.

  • During the death penalty review process, in November 2020, the SPC remanded Wang’s case to the trial court for a new trial, citing discovery of new evidence.

  • The trial court again convicted Wang of murder and rape, and sentenced him to death. Wang appealed.

  • Wang’s conviction and sentence was affirmed by the appellate court in December 2020.

  • Wang was executed on February 2, 2021 after the SPC reviewed and affirmed Wang’s death penalty sentence.

  • There is speculation that Wang was seeking credit by confessing to the offense in Nie’s case because it could lead to a lenient sentence if he confessed to a crime committed by him but not known by the investigator before his confession.

  • In March 2017, Nie’s parents received 2.68 million RMB of State compensation.

Information sources

She Xianglin Murder Case (佘祥林故意杀人案)

The defendant/exoneree 

  • She Xianglin (佘祥林), born on March 7, 1966; he was twenty-eight when he became suspected in the case and was thirty-nine when he was finally acquitted.

Facts

  • In the beginning of 1994, She Xianglin’s wife Zhang Zaiyu disappeared. A few months later, a badly decomposed female body was found at a nearby reservoir. Zhang’s family identified the corpse as Zhang Zaiyu and suspected She killed Zhang because Zhang had a mental disorder. It was rumored that She was having an improper relationship with a young woman. About eleven years after She had been convicted of intentional murder of Zhang Zaiyu, Zhang reappeared alive in She’s village.

  • Other special facts about this case:

    • After She’s conviction, Zhang Zaiyu sent letters to her brother. But her brother did not disclose this until Zhang Zaiyu came back to the village in person.

    • When the female body was found, another family came to the police claiming that the victim was their family member.

Procedural history 

  • On April 12, 1994, She was put on residential surveillance. On April 22, 1994, She was criminally detained and six days later he was arrested.

  • She Xianglin was charged with intentional murder of his wife.  On Oct 13, 1994, She was originally convicted and sentenced to death by the Jingzhou Intermediate Court of Hubei Province.

  • On January 6, 1995, She’s appeal was heard and the Hubei High Court remanded the case for retrial on the ground of insufficient evidence and unclear facts.

  • During the first retrial, this case was twice returned to the local county procuratorate for supplementary investigation.

  • On November 23, 1997, when the local county procuratorate referred this case the third time to the city procuratorate and requested the latter to prosecute She at the intermediate court, the city procuratorate rejected the case on the ground that the alleged offense was not serious enough to be prosecuted in an intermediate court and referred the case back to the local county procuratorate to prosecute at a local district court.

  • On June 15, 1998, She was convicted by the Jingshan District Court for intentional murder and was sentenced to 15 years imprisonment.

  • On September 22, 1998, She’s appeal was denied by the Jingmen Intermediate Court and his conviction was affirmed.

  • On March 28, 2005, Zhang Zaiyu reappeared in She’s village.

  • On April 1, 2005, She was released from the prison by obtaining a guarantor.

  • On April 13, 2005, She was exonerated.

Date of the conviction

June 15, 1998

Date the wrongful conviction was reversed

April 13, 2005

Days incarcerated

3,995

Why was the case reopened/reversed 

She’s mother and brother petitioned for She since She was detained. Eleven years after She’s detention and conviction, the alleged victim reappeared in person.

Factors contributing to the wrongful conviction

False confession

  • She was physically and verbally abused by the police and gave four different confessions. He was interrogated for ten consecutive days, was beaten and lost part of a finger.

Flawed police investigation

  • Witnesses who testified that there was a stranger in their village who might be Zhang Zaiyu were detained for months for alleged perjury. Some defense witnesses were tortured and detained until they changed their testimony.

  • When the police learned of exculpatory evidence, they tried to suppress the evidence.

  • Police ignored the other family who claimed that the victim was actually their family member.

Dubious witness identification/statements

  • Zhang’s family did not see the victim’s body. Their identification was based on the police’s description about the height and the build of the victim. Zhang’s family identified the body despite the fact that the body did not have a scar on the stomach, which was one of the Zhang’s identifying features.

  • Witnesses changed their testimony after being detained and threatened by the police.

Problematic forensic evidence

  • No DNA evidence collected to identify the body.

  • No tools for the alleged crime were found.

Prosecutorial errors

  • Prosecutors acquiesced to the Political-Legal Committee’s decision, knowing it was not supported by evidence.

  • Prosecutors did not explain the conflicting evidence during the prosecution.

Defense lawyer's errors/absence

  • None. She was represented by a lawyer who maintained She’s innocence.

Court's errors

  • Acquiesced to the Political-Legal Committee’s not-evidence-based decision.

  • Ignored the unexplainable doubts in this case. For example, the missing stones, bags, and ropes allegedly used by She during the act; whether She was capable of taking the alleged route of killing the victim at one place and hauling the body to dump it, by himself, at another place; and why She’s confessions yielded four different versions of the story.

Other developments

  • During She’s appeal, Zhang’s family organized 220 villagers to petition the appellate court (Hubei Provincial High Court) to pressure the court to reject She’s appeal.

  • One of the police officers in She’s case was charged with torturing She and committed suicide.

  • In September 2005, She received about RMB700,000 from the state in compensation.

Information sources

Wang Benyu Rape and Murder Case (王本余故意杀人、奸淫幼女案)

The defendant/exoneree 

  • Wang Benyu (王本余), born in 1954; he was 42 when he was arrested and was 60 when he was finally released.

Facts

  • In December 15, 1994, when Wang came back to his rental apartment from work, Li Yanming, Wang’s roommate, told Wang that he killed a little girl. Li asked Wang to help him dispose of the body. Li threatened that if Wang turned him in, Li was going to kill Wang and Wang’s six-year-old daughter, who was living with them, just like he killed the girl. Later Li also begged Wang not to report the incident. That night, Wang carried Li and the body in Wang’s tricycle to dump the body at a place about six thousand yards away from their rental apartment. The next day, Li ran away and Wang was detained by the police.

  • Wang did not appeal because he was told by a ward at the detention center that he would get transferred to a prison sooner without any further delay from the appellate proceeding (usually the living conditions in a prison are considered better that that in a detention center). Wang later said that he would rather die than be kept in a detention center.

Procedural history 

  • In March 1995, the police sent the case to the Baotou City Procuratorate for review and prosecution. The procuratorate later sent the case back to the police for supplemental investigation due to lack of forensic evidence to connect Wang to the crime and the suspicion that Li Yanming might be the real perpetrator.

  • In November 1996, Wang Benyu was charged with the crime of rape and intentional murder. He was originally convicted and sentenced to death with two years suspension by the Baotou Intermediate Court of Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region. Wang Benyu did not appeal.

  • In March 1997, the High Court of Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region reviewed and approved Wang’s sentence.

Date of the conviction

March, 1997

Date the wrongful conviction was reversed

July 22, 2013

Days incarcerated

6,793 days

Why was the case reopened/reversed 

  • After Wang was sent to prison to serve his time, he started to write petition letters claiming that he was wrongfully convicted. But he stopped petitioning after the first two years of imprisonment because he realized that his petition made his sentence commutation difficult.

  • On February 13, 2012, Li Yanming was arrested by the police in Beijing for another murder. Li confessed that he committed the rape and murder in Wang’s case.

  • On July 22, 2013, Wang was released.

  • In September 2013, the Baotou Intermediate Court re-tried the case and found that Wang was not guilty of rape and murder, but was guilty of concealing a crime. Wang was sentenced to three years imprisonment. Because Wang had served his time for 18 years before the second conviction, he was released right away.

Factors contributing to the wrongful conviction

False confession

  • Wang did not confess until he was severely physically tortured by the police. He gave 10 statements before trial, with eight statements indicating that Li Yanming was the real perpetrator, and two indicating himself.

Problematic forensic evidence

  • The victim had a bite mark on her face. Wang has two protruding teeth. Without any testing, the police told Wang that they think the mark must have been left by him. No semen was found, though Wang confessed that he ejaculated inside of the victim’s body. No DNA testing had been done in this case.

Dubious witness identification

  • Wang Benyu’s daughter, who was eight at the time, gave written statements identifying her father as the perpetrator who killed the victim.

Ignored exculpatory evidence

  • Wang told the police that Li Yanming was the real culprit and provided the police with Li’s hometown address. But the police did not conduct a thorough investigation on Li’s whereabouts.

Prosecutorial errors

  • Both the procuratorate and the court compromised with the Baotou City Political-Legal Committee, which had set a tone for the case in September 1996. The compromise was that although this is a difficult case, the procuratorate still could charge Wang for rape and murder, and the court should make its decision according to the actual circumstances.

Defense lawyer's errors/absence

  • None. Wang was represented by a lawyer who defended him by arguing that the case lacks evidence to implicate Wang, and that Wang is an accessory offender of the crime charged.

Court's errors

  • Compromised with the local political-legal committee.

Other developments

  • In November 2013, Wang received state compensation of 1.5 million RMB.

Information sources

Yang Botao Murder Case (杨波涛故意杀人案)

The defendant/exoneree 

  • Yang Botao (杨波涛), born in 1975

Facts

  • On August 16, 2001, the victim Li Yueying called Yang Botao’s sister (her former classmate) to tell her that she wanted to travel to Yiwu, which is a city in Zhejiang Province. Yang’s sister told Li that if she could not get a bus ticket in Shangqiu that day, Li could stay with her overnight and Li could get the door key at her brother’s (Yang Botao) store. Yang’s sister did not hear from Li after that. Yang testified that he did not meet with Li either. On September 7, 2001, Li’s mother reported her daughter’s disappearance to the police. Three days later, the police received reports about six human segments at two locations. On September 10, 2001, the police questioned Yang Botao as one of the 27 suspects, and later excluded him because his fingerprint did not match the one found at the crime scene. Two years later, the DNA test showed that these segments were all from Li. On December 27, 2003, Yang was put under residential surveillance by the police. He was detained on June 27, 2004 and was arrested on July 6, 2004.

  • Other special facts about this case:

    • There were multiple crime scenes in this case. During the police investigation, the police did not reach and investigate every crime scene.

    • It is not clear why there is two-year gap between the discovery of the human segments and the DNA testing of these samples, which eventually identified the victim.

    • In February 2004, Liu Yuzhou took the office to become the head of Liangyuan Police in Shangqiu City, where the case was handled. One of his tasks was to investigate this case.

    • Yang Botao claimed that Liu Yuzhou interrogated him in person. He was severely tortured. Among many interrogations, one of his interrogation lasted 17 consecutive days.

    • After 17 days of interrogation, Yang confessed. The police did not conduct any further inquiries.

    • Before 2013, there was no limits in the Criminal Procedure Law in China as to how many times a case can be remanded by the appellate courts. Beginning in 2013, according to the amendment to this law, it is limited to two times in each case.

Procedural history 

  • On September 5, 2004, the police sent the case to the Shangqiu City Procuratorate for prosecution. It was sent back by the prosecutor’s office twice for supplementary investigation.

  • On July 25, 2005, the Shangqiu City Procuratorate indicted Yang with the charge of the crime of intentional murder.

  • On September 1, 2005, he was convicted and sentenced to death with two years suspension by the Shangqiu Intermediate Court of Henan Province.

  • The Henan Provincial High Court remanded this case for retrial on the ground of uncleared facts after Yang’s appeal.

  • On Oct 16, 2006, the Shangqiu Intermediate Court again convicted Yang and sentenced him to death with two years suspension.

  • On Oct 29, 2007, the Henan Provincial High Court remanded for retrial for the second time on the same grounds of unclear facts.

  • On June 12, 2009, the Shangqiu Intermediate Court convicted Yang again for the same crime but changed the sentence to life imprisonment.

  • On September 26, 2009, the Henan Provincial High Court remanded for retrial for the third time for the same reasons.

  • After a hearing that was not open to the public, the Shangqiu City Procuratorate withdrew the case and referred the case back to the police on August 23, 2013.

  • On February 12, 2014, the police changed the compulsory measure against Yang from detention to released on guarantee pending trial.

  • On Feb 10, 2015, the police terminated their investigation on Yang Botao, but claimed that they were continuing investigating new evidence in this case.

Date of the conviction

September 1, 2005

Date the wrongful conviction was reversed

On February 10, 2015, Yang was released from the police compulsory measure because the police terminated investigation against him. But his original conviction was not vacated.

Days incarcerated

3,087

Why was the case reopened/reversed 

  • Yang and his lawyer maintained his innocence. Yang’s family petitioned on his behalf through the years.

  • Yang insisted that he confessed only once during the police interrogations. He confessed only because the police interrogated him for 17 consecutive days and nights. He was severely tortured.

  • Starting 2012, the Central Political-Legal Committee and the Supreme People’s Court began to stress the significance of preventing and redressing wrongful convictions.

  • In 2013 and 2014, the Chinese Communist Party stressed how to prevent and redress wrongful convictions during the Third and Fourth Plenums.

Factors contributing to the wrongful conviction

False confession

  • Yang was severely tortured. According to Yang, he had been subject to various torture methods, including being forced to swallow chili water and human waste fluids; body hair being pulled out, including his pubic hair; being physically assaulted; and being hung in the air by his wrists. He had been interrogated for 17 consecutive days before he gave the first and only confession.

Dubious witness identification

  • The police used a jailhouse informant to solicit Yang’s confession. The informant provided an audio recording in which he testified that Yang Botao confessed to him about the murder.

Problematic forensic evidence

  • No DNA testing had been done for two years after the human segments were found.

  • No test had been done on the alleged murder weapon, a metal saw, as to whether there was blood stain or fingerprints.

Defense lawyer's errors/absence

  • None. The defense lawyer pointed out more than 100 problems in this case and defended Yang’s innocence.

Prosecutorial errors

  • The prosecutor listed 15 witnesses, including 5 from Yang’s cell. None of these witnesses testified in court.

Court's errors

  • Failed to admit Yang’s in-court testimony. Failed to exclude illegally gathered evidence.

Other developments

  • In 2011, Liu Yuzhou, the then head of the Liangyuan Police of Shangqiu City, was convicted of the crimes of bribery and torture, and was sentenced to prison for 17 years.

  • Yang Botao’s lawyer is helping him seek state compensation. However, the lawyer thinks that Yang might not be eligible according to the current State Compensation Law because he did not have a not-guilty judgement from the court, a non-prosecution decision from the procuratorate, or a case withdrawal decision from the police. The police refused to issue a case withdrawal decision because they claimed that the investigation will continue, just not against Yang Botao (last updated June 20, 2022).

Information sources

Zhao Zuohai Murder Case (赵作海故意杀人案)

The defendant/exoneree 

  • Zhao Zuohai (赵作海), born in 1952; he was 47 when he was arrested and was 58 when he was acquitted.

Facts

  • On October 30, 1997, Zhao Zuohai had a fight with Zhao Zhenshang (赵振晌), in which the former was injured. Zhao Zhenshang was not seen afterward. In February 1998, police detained Zhao Zuohai for investigation for 20 days and then released. On May 8, 1999, a body was found in an advanced state of decay in Zhao Zuohai’s village. The police did not find the head or the legs of the body. The next day, police again detained Zhao Zuohai. From May 10 to June 18, 1999, Zhao Zuohai confessed nine times after being seriously tortured by the police.

  • Other special facts about this case:

    • The body was identified by Zhao Zhenshang’s family. No DNA identification was done.

    • Zhao Zuohai did not appeal his conviction.

    • Zhao Zuohai was represented by a legal intern, not a lawyer.

    • The procuratorate delayed charging Zhao Zuohai because of insufficient evidence until directed to do so by the local political-legal committee as part of a campaign to clear a backlog of cases.

Procedural history 

  • Zhao Zuohai was charged with the crime of intentional murder of his fellow villager Zhao Zhenshang. He was convicted and sentenced to death with a two-year suspension by the Shangqiu Intermediate Court of Henan Province. Zhao Zuohai did not appeal.     

Date of the conviction

December 5, 2002

Date the wrongful conviction was reversed

May 9, 2010

Days Incarcerated

2,712

Why was the case reopened/reversed 

On April 30, 2010, Zhao Zhenshang reappeared at his village and confessed that on the night of the fight with Zhao Zuohai, he injured Zhao Zuohai’s head with a chopping knife. Out of concern that Zhao Zuohai might die, Zhao Zhenshang grabbed some personal belongings and fled. Zhao Zhenshang survived by collecting and reselling recyclables during his absence.  Zhao Zhenshang came back to his village because he had had a stroke and could not afford any treatment.

Factors contributing to the wrongful conviction

False confession

  • Zhao Zuohai was tortured by the police, who kicked, punched, and hit him with gun handles and sticks. They set off firecrackers on his head. He confessed after torture, but recanted and claimed his innocence in court.

Flawed police investigation

  • In order to find an excuse to explain the fight between Zhao Zuohai and Zhao Zhenshang, the police tortured a witness surnamed Du to force her to admit that the two men fought over her.

Dubious witness identification/statements

  • Zhao Zhenshang’s family identified the body as Zhao Zhenshang without checking any personal features on his body (such as the clothes).

  • Zhao Zhenshang’s family did not report that Zhao Zhenshang’s personal belongings were missing after his disappearance.

Problematic forensic evidence

  • The police did not look for a weapon.

  • No DNA identification indicated that the victim was Zhao Zhenshang.

Prosecutorial errors

  • The procuratorate returned the case to the police twice for additional investigation, but compromised with the police after the Shangqiu City Political-Legal Committee intervened.

Defense lawyer's errors/absence

  • Zhao Zuohai was represented by a legal intern who was not a qualified lawyer.

Court's errors

  • Failed to admit Zhao Zuohai’s in-court testimony.

  • Did not exclude illegally gathered evidence (such as Zhao Zhuhai’s coerced confession and Ms. Du’s coerced statements).

  • Although no DNA test was done to identify the victim as Zhao Zhenshang, the court convicted the defendant and imposed a lenient sentence under the consideration of unforeseen circumstances (whether the victim was Zhao Zhenshang).

Other developments

  • Three police officers in Zhao Zuohai’s case were arrested after Zhao Zuohai’s exoneration.

  • Four judges responsible for reviewing the case were suspended and investigated.

  • This case triggered awareness of the problem of wrongful convictions.

  • The chief judge of the Henan Provincial High Court apologized to Zhao Zuohai after his exoneration.

  • Zhao Zuohai received RMB 650,000 from the government as state compensation.

Information sources