Trial of the case in Dong Tam: Many contradictions in the defendants' testimonies

In court, many defendants gave statements that contradicted their previous statements to the investigation agency and contradicted the documents and evidence in the case file.

Before questioning the defendants, the Council of Examiners showed the court a clip summarizing the entire process.land disputesin Dong Tam, My Duc; the defendants' wrongdoings in the early morning of January 9, 2020 led to serious consequences, causing the deaths of 3 police officers and soldiers. There are clips showing the defendants' statements at the investigation agency. These statements revealed many contradictions in the defendants' own statements at the trial.

The defendants listened to the representative of the Hanoi People's Procuracy read the indictment. Photo: Doan Tan/VNA

In his testimony at court, defendant Bui Viet Hieu stated that in 1981, he only signed the handover minutes of 47.36 hectares of defense land at Dong Senh. Defendant Hieu said the remaining 59.6 hectares of land at Dong Senh was agricultural land. Before this testimony, the Trial Panel announced defendant Hieu's petition sent to the Trial Panel on the morning of September 7, right before the start of the trial. In it, defendant Hieu asked for a reduced sentence, and at the same time, he clearly stated that he had signed the handover of land, received full compensation, and acknowledged that Dong Senh land was defense land, without dividing it into two parts as above.

Next, defendant Hieu stated that he actively participated in the “Consensus Group” with the aim of preventing and fighting corruption in the locality. However, when the Trial Council showed a clip of defendant Hieu’s testimony at the investigation agency, in which the defendant stated that he felt tired and wanted to leave the “Consensus Group”, butLe Dinh KinhThe defendant continued to participate in this group because of the objection: "Once you start something, you have to see it through." Faced with that contradiction, defendant Hieu had to admit that his statement at the investigation agency was true.

In court, defendant Hieu continued to state that on the evening of January 8, 2020, he went to Le Dinh Kinh's house to sleep because he was afraid that the "gangsters" would hire someone to kidnap him, so he went there to "take refuge". But in the testimony in the clip shown in court, defendant Hieu said that Le Dinh Cong called him to go to Le Dinh Kinh's house to sleep, so he went.

Similarly, defendant Le Dinh Chuc stated that when he poured gasoline into the hole, he did not know how many people were down there, but defendant Le Dinh Doanh and defendant Nguyen Quoc Tien both stated that Chuc clearly knew there were 3 people down there.

Defendant Chuc also stated that he used a pig-stabbing knife to stab down but did not know who was below. However, when questioned by the Trial Panel, Defendant Chuc stated that he clearly knew that no one was on his side below. Thus, Defendant Chuc clearly knew that the authorities were below and also knew that his action could cause death but still deliberately carried it out.

In his testimony, defendant Nguyen Quoc Tien said that he was not involved in discussing the purchase of grenades, but was only given money by Cong and Tuyen to buy grenades but did not say what they were for. However, according to the indictment, from the beginning of November 2019, Nguyen Quoc Tien was discussed by Le Dinh Cong with Bui Viet Hieu, Nguyen Van Tuyen, and Nguyen Van Due about buying grenades and preparing weapons, tools, and means to attack and kill police officers on duty.

Defendant Nguyen Quoc Tien’s testimony was also inconsistent when talking about buying gasoline to make Molotov cocktails. At first, defendant Le Dinh Cong said he “bought gasoline for us to use together” but “the defendant lacked knowledge and did not know what he was buying gasoline for.” However, when the Trial Panel asked further about the purpose of buying gasoline, defendant Tien stated: “Cong told us to use it when the police came.”

For his part, defendant Le Dinh Cong claimed that he was not invited to attend the announcement of the inspection conclusion on the origin of Dong Senh land. However, he later said that he himself had known the content of this inspection conclusion beforehand, so even though he was invited, Cong did not attend.

At the trial, the defendants Le Dinh Cong and Nguyen Van Tuyen admitted their wrongdoings and expressed remorse for the sacrifices of the three police officers and soldiers. The defendants apologized to the three victims’ families and hoped to be forgiven and receive leniency from the State and the law.

On the morning of September 8, the trial continued with the questioning.