Trial of the Dong Tam case: Highlights of the first instance trial

The first-instance trial of the case of “Murder” and “Resisting a person on official duty” that occurred in Hoanh village, Dong Tam commune (My Duc district, Hanoi) has ended the debate, the Trial Council deliberated and is expected to announce the verdict on the afternoon of September 14.

After 4 days of trial, the court session was noted with positive changes of the parties involved in the proceedings.

Those changes are reflected in the reasonable and creative management of the Trial Council; the recognition and appropriate adjustment of the representative of the People's Procuracy; and above all, the sincerity and repentance of the defendants at the trial.

Review of visual testimony

During the questioning session, the Trial Panel showed clips summarizing the entire process.land disputein 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.

Defendant Le Dinh Chuc gave his final statement before the court announced the verdict. Photo: VNA

Among them, there are clips quoting the defendants’ statements at the investigation agency. It is worth noting that through these statements, many contradictions in the defendants’ own statements at the trial were revealed.

Thereby, many defendants have recognized their mistakes, admitted their crimes and asked the Council to consider reducing their sentences.

On the afternoon of September 7, at court, defendant Bui Viet Hieu stated about the origin of the land in Dong Senh and said part of it was agricultural land.

Before this testimony, the Trial Panel showed a clip of defendant Hieu's testimony at the investigation agency and announced defendant Hieu's petition sent to the Trial Panel on the morning of September 7, right before the start of the trial.

In which, defendant Hieu asked for a lighter sentence, and at the same time, he clearly stated that he had signed the land handover, received full compensation, and acknowledged that Dong Senh land was national defense land. After this comparison, on the morning of September 8, defendant Hieu apologized to the Trial Council for making false statements about the origin of the land in Dong Senh.

Next, defendant Hieu stated that he actively participated in the “Consensus Group” with the aim of preventing and combating corruption in the locality. However, when the Trial Council released the 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 Kinhprevented: "Once you start something, you have to see it through" so the defendant continued to participate with this group. Faced with that contradiction, defendant Hieu had to admit that his statement at the investigation agency was true.

At 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 "mafia" 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 stated that Le Dinh Cong called him to go to Le Dinh Kinh's house to sleep, so he went.

Faced with this contradiction, on the morning of September 8, defendant Hieu asked to testify again and admitted that it was because Le Dinh Cong called him to go to Le Dinh Kinh's house to sleep that defendant Hieu went. Defendant Hieu apologized to the Trial Panel for these statements and hoped that the defendant would receive leniency from the law.

In court, defendant Le Dinh Chuc confessed that he had committed acts that were the direct cause of the deaths of three police officers and soldiers, such as using an iron pipe with a knife attached to it to stab the police force multiple times; and directing Le Dinh Doanh to carry a bucket of gasoline and pour it into the pit where the three police officers and soldiers fell. At the same time, defendant Chuc also confessed that he was the one who poured gasoline into the pit multiple times.

In addition to the testimony of the defendant Chuc, the Trial Panel showed images and clips of the events of the night the crime occurred. The defendant Chuc admitted that there were images of him using various weapons to resist the police force.

During the debate, some lawyers questioned the origin of the clips shown in court. The representative of the Procuracy said that these clips were taken from two sources. One was a public source, interviewed by press agencies and reporters and shown on television for the whole country to know, and had evidentiary value, so the Investigation Agency collected them; the other source was made during the interrogation and recording of the defendants' statements according to the provisions of Article 183 - Criminal Procedure Code 2015, which can be recorded in audio and video at the same time as recording the statements in the records of the case file.

Timely records of the People's Procuracy

The jury. Photo: Doan Tan/VNA

In this case, the Hanoi People's Procuracy issued an indictment to prosecute 29 defendants, of which 25 defendants were prosecuted for the crime of"Killing". Assessing the overall interrogation process, the representative of the Procuracy found that the actions of these 25 defendants had sufficient grounds to constitute the crime of “Murder” through contributing money to buy grenades, buy gasoline, make petrol bombs, make steel wool soaked in gasoline… to attack the authorities. The indictment of the Procuracy prosecuting these defendants for the crime of “Murder” has a legal basis.

As for the 19 defendants, including Le Dinh Uy, Le Dinh Quang, Nguyen Van Quan, Bui Van Tien, Bui Van Tuan, Trinh Van Hai, Le Dinh Quan, Bui Van Nien, Bui Thi Noi, Tran Thi La, Nguyen Van Due, Nguyen Thi Bet, Nguyen Xuan Dieu, Nguyen Thi Lua, Bui Thi Duc, Mai Thi Phan, Dao Thi Kim, Le Thi Loan, Nguyen Van Trung, the representative of the Procuracy said that most of these defendants were farmers. When they heard Kinh, Cong and Hieu inciting them and promising to be divided land, they joined the "Consensus Group", committed illegal acts, affecting the order and security in the locality.

Each of the 19 defendants participated in the crime at a certain stage and level. Among them, there was a defendant who was the treasurer, gave money, contributed money to buy gasoline, buy grenades; there was a defendant who directly made petrol bombs, steel wool, gasoline, bought flares, prepared bricks and stones; there was a defendant who participated in transporting and preparing tools and means to help Cong's group commit the murder.

Through public questioning at the trial, the representative of the Procuracy said that these defendants basically knew that because of limited legal awareness, due to promises, they blindly trusted and followed Le Dinh Kinh. The defendants were aware of their wrongdoings, confessed honestly, and repented.

In essence, these defendants were not fierce opponents, did not participate to a certain extent, committed crimes with indirect intent, and especially did not directly commit the acts that resulted in the deaths of 3 police officers and soldiers.

Therefore, the Procuracy has applied the criminal law policy and the State's lenient and humane policy to apply lighter charges and accordingly apply lighter penalties below the lowest level of the penalty framework for a number of defendants, creating conditions for the defendants to have the opportunity to rebuild their lives.

On that basis, pursuant to Article 319 of the 2015 Criminal Procedure Code, the Hanoi People's Procuracy decided to change the charges against the 19 defendants named above from "Murder" to "Resisting a person on official duty" and requested the Trial Panel to consider reducing the defendants' sentences, so that the defendants can see the leniency of the law and feel secure in reforming and cultivating themselves into good citizens, useful to society.

No defendant pleaded guilty.

Throughout the trial, from the questioning to the debate, all defendants recognized their mistakes, admitted that their actions violated the law and hoped that the Trial Panel would consider reducing their sentences and enjoying leniency under the law.

Defendant Le Thi Loan gave her final statement before the court announced the verdict. Photo: VNA

None of the defendants pleaded guilty or claimed that their actions did not violate the law. Most of the defendants expressed remorse and apologized to the families of the three police officers who died.

During the trial, many defense attorneys requested that the Trial Panel return the case file for further investigation. In response to this argument, the representative of the Procuracy holding the right to prosecute at the trial stated that there was no basis to return the case file for further investigation. The attorneys defending the legal rights and interests of the three families of the victims also requested that the Trial Panel not return the case file for further investigation.

Even some defendants share the same wish not to return the case file, because for them, prolonging the proceedings in this case would worsen their situation.

Defendant Bui Van Tien, in his final statement, admitted that although he did not directly participate in the murder of three police officers and soldiers, he realized that he was partly at fault and hoped that the victims' families would forgive him and ask for a lighter sentence.

The defendant thanks the representative of the People's Procuracy for transferring the charges to the defendant, and thanks the lawyers who participated in defending the defendant. The defendant hopes that the defense lawyers will not request the case file to be returned, so that the defendant can soon return to his wife and children. The defendant has 3 very young children, and the defendant himself has many serious illnesses.

In their final statements at the trial, the defendants expressed their wish that the Trial Panel consider reducing their sentences so that they could return to society and their families soon, and promised not to violate the law. The six defendants asked their lawyers to stop defending them, and wished to stop the case here. It is worth noting that before the first instance trial, all six defendants and their families proactively invited defense lawyers.

After thanking the lawyers who defended him, defendant Le Dinh Doanh asked to stop and no longer need the lawyers to defend him. Defendant Doanh asked for leniency from the State and to return to being a useful citizen to his family and society.

Defendant Nguyen Quoc Tien affirmed that he did not invite and did not need a lawyer to defend him. Defendant Bui Thi Duc admitted that he was wrong and asked the lawyers to stop defending him. He promised that he would not do anything illegal against the law, the Party and the State in the future. Dao Thi Kim and Tran Thi Phuong thanked the lawyers for defending them. The defendants themselves clearly recognized their crimes and asked the lawyers not to continue defending them...

In a case, for justice to be served, it requires a fair and objective investigation, prosecution and trial process, but more importantly, the honesty of the defendants. Each defendant needs to be aware of his or her mistakes, honestly confess his or her crimes and awaken his or her conscience, thereby repenting, truly wishing to correct his or her mistakes and become a useful person to society./.