In those days, the public concern finding the victim’s body was Le Thi Thanh Huyen Nguyen Manh Tuong thrown into the river determining non-evidence. Many readers ask questions: In case not found Huyen’s body, authorities convicted proceedings can only rely on the testimony wall or not?
Article 10 of the Criminal Procedure Code specifies: “Investigation Agency, Procuracy and the Court shall take all legal measures to determine the facts of the case in an objective, comprehensive and complete and clarify the evidence to determine whether there is evidence to determine guilt and innocence, the aggravating and the extenuating circumstances of the criminal responsibility of the accused, the accused. Criminal burden of proof belongs to the agency conducting the proceedings “. When the investigation, prosecution and trial of criminal cases, the agency conducting the proceedings must prove the offense occurred or not, the time, place and other circumstances of the offense, and who carried out the offense; guilty or not guilty, intentionally or unintentionally; capable of criminal responsibility; purposes, criminal motives. These are issues related to the nature of the case, if not clarified could not bring the case before the law handle.
To prove all the above problems, the agency conducting the proceedings must have sufficient evidence. Evidence is what actually happened, were collected in the order and procedures specified by the Criminal Procedure Code provisions. Evidence of the case can be gathered from various sources, such as physical evidence, the testimony of those involved, assessment conclusions and proceedings of investigation and trial, the documents, other items.
Under paragraph 2 of Article 72 of the Criminal Procedure Code, a confession by the accused, the accused can only be regarded as evidence, if consistent with the other evidence in the case. The law states that “should not be used confessions of the accused, the defendant only as evidence to convict.” This means that if the investigating authorities rely on the testimony of Khanh Tuong and Walls to conclude that crime is done contrary to order and proceedings. The autopsy is required to conclude the assessment. This is an important basis to examine the testimony of the Wall, pinpoint crime and the punishment. If the assessment concludes showed the victim was not dead when thrown into the river, the walls will be prosecuted for criminal liability for murder.
As stipulated in Article 93, may have the aggravating circumstance is “to carry out or conceal another crime” and “murder motivated despicable”. Frame highest penalty for this offense is death. Conversely, if it is determined the victim was dead before being thrown into the river due to the weakness of expertise in the surgical process, the behavior of the Wall with signs of crime “unintentionally causing death due to violation of rules occupation “under Article 99 of the Criminal Code or the offense of” violating regulations on medical examination and treatment “under Article 242 of the Criminal Code, there may be aggravating factors” can act treacherous and aggressive in order to escape avoid or conceal crime. ” The level of punishment for the lesser charges of charges of “murder”, the highest of 15 years in prison.
Thus, the results of forensic evidence is important to verify the testimony of Khanh Tuong and true or not. It decided to crimes and the punishment of the object concerned.