The defendant/exoneree
Zheng Yonglin (郑永林), born in 1968. He was 18 when he was detained.
Facts
About 4 p.m. on June 4, 1987, Zheng Yonglin was hanging out at his sister’s grocery store while his sister and her fiancé Wang (the co-owner of the store) were gone. The 12-year-old girl of the Wang family (the sibling of the fiancé) was alone in the store attending business. Zheng drank some water and turned on music for a few minutes at the store. When he was stepping out of the store to go home, he saw a man coming into the store for some soda. Zheng told the young girl to check out the soda and left the store. Around 5:20 p.m. that day, the mother of the young girl (Zheng’s sister’s mother-in-law) found that the store was locked from the inside. When she opened the door, she found her daughter dead and lying in a pool of blood. When the police arrived, neighbors and relatives had already contaminated the crime scene. On June 7, 1987, Zheng was detained and interrogated by the police. He was subsequently placed under sheltering for investigation till January 23, 1992 when he was arrested.
Other special facts about this case:
Sheltering For Investigation was a police compulsory measure and was abolished on January 1, 1997.
A witness testified that at 4:50 p.m. on the day of the crime, he noticed that the door of Wang’s grocery store was locked.
Multiple witnesses testified to the police that Zheng left the grocery store around 4:20 p.m. and went home on the day of the crime. Multiple witnesses testified that after Zheng went home, between 4 p.m. and 5 p.m. that day, he went out to watch people fishing after fetching some vegetable from a farmer’s market for his mother.
The victim’s family put a lot of pressure on this case. The fiancé of Zheng’s sister cut off his finger and threatened to kill everyone in the Zheng family if Zheng was found not guilty and released.
The Political-Legal Committee of the Jinzhou City intervened in the case and created a solution plan – having the Beining District Court take the first instance trial and the Jinzhou Intermediate Court sustain the district court’s decision upon the defendant’s appeal. This way, the final decision of this case could be under control of the Jinzhou government. But according to the Criminal Procedure Law, a district court should not have jurisdiction over such a serious crime.
Procedural history
In 1993, Zheng was convicted of intentional murder and was sentenced to death with two years suspension by the Jinzhou Intermediate Court of Liaoning Province.
Upon Zheng’s appeal, in 1995, the Liaoning Provincial High Court remanded the case back to the Jinzhou Intermediate Court for retrial citing insufficient evidence and unclear facts.
On January 2, 1997, the Beining District Court tried this case, convicted Zheng of intentional murder and sentenced him to 15 years imprisonment. Zheng appealed.
On October 30, 1997, the Jinzhou Intermediate Court sustained the district court’s decision.
Date of the conviction
1993
Date the wrongful conviction was reversed
January 29, 2014
Days incarcerated
5,114
Why was the case reopened/reversed
On June 6, 2001, Zheng was released after having served his time.
Zheng’s family and his lawyers, one of whom is a retired judge, former prosecutor and police officer, had been petitioning on Zheng’s behalf for over 20 years.
In May 2013, the influential newspaper “Southern Weekend” reported on the case and attracted nationwide attention.
Starting 2013, the Central Political-Legal Committee and the Supreme People’s Court began to stress the importance of prevention and redressing wrongful convictions. Soon after, the Chinese Communist Party’s Congress meetings also stressed the significance of “rule of law“ in China.
On November 26, 2013, the Jinzhou Intermediate Court decided to re-open this case.
On January 16, 2014, the Jinzhou Intermediate Court announced that Zheng Yonglin was not guilty.
Factors contributing to the wrongful conviction
False confession
Zheng was interrogated for three consecutive days and nights. He had undergone electric shot and sleep deprivation. The police told Zheng that they knew he did it because there was a photo of the culprit in the victim’s eyes. Zheng finally confessed.
Problematic forensic evidence
No forensic samples were collected on the fingerprints, footprints and bloodstained clothes from the crime scene.
In his forced confession, Zheng said that he used a knife to kill the girl. But the knife was not found.
The blood trace found on Zheng’s bicycle handle was too little to test. It could not be verified as human blood or animal blood.
There was a glove found at the crime scene, but no forensic testing was done to find out whether it was used during the crime.
Flawed police investigation
The police did not pursue the man who was at the store when Zheng left despite Zheng’s testimony and other witnesses’ testimony.
Defense lawyer's errors/absence
None. The defense lawyers defended Zheng’s innocence.
Prosecutorial errors
Failed to keep the threshold of indictment. The procuratorate refused the police’s application to arrest Zheng four times on the ground of insufficient evidence. But it compromised with the police and approved the arrest after the Jinzhou City Political-Legal Committee intervened.
Court's errors
The court realized that there was no direct evidence to prove that Zheng was guilty; however, it had already compromised and agreed with the Jinzhou City Political-Legal Committee to convict Zheng.
Other developments
No lawsuit has been filed for state compensation (last updated on June 22, 2022)
Information sources