庭审中，任亭亭数度伏案长泣；休庭前，任亭亭突然从公诉席上站起来，冲台下八位嫌疑人大叫：“杀人犯，我不会原谅你们。”被告席上一阵骚动，审判长忙出声制止。
年逾五旬的任亭亭，家住新疆自治区伊犁哈萨克族自治州伊宁市，其丈夫曾是老资格的警察，后因公殉职。其独子孙任泽，2018年3月27日因涉嫌寻衅滋事遭刑事拘留，被羁押于伊犁州察布查尔锡伯族自治县看守所。
2018年9月27日凌晨，孙任泽在伊犁州霍城县看守所接受警务人员长达七个多小时审讯后昏迷，之后辗转多家医院ICU。11月9日，一直未能醒来的孙任泽终告不治身亡，时年不满31岁。
警方称孙任泽是审讯中要求喝水结果被呛导致昏迷，审讯人员没有责任。目睹儿子在病床上遍体伤痕、人事不省的任亭亭无法接受这样的结论。此后五年，她顶着来自方方面面的压力，为儿子不明不白的死四处奔走，终于迎来真相大白的时刻。2023年11月6日，一起警务人员暴力逼供致人死亡案，由伊犁州奎屯市法院悄然宣判，八名被告人犯故意伤害罪，一审被分别判处3年至13年有期徒刑。
2018年9月18日，办案人员从羁押地伊犁州察布查尔锡伯族自治县看守所将孙任泽提出，带到伊犁州公安局交警大队办案中心地下一层，采用正反被凳子、捆绑、水浇等手段，连续审讯近一周。图：财新 王和岩
该案八名被告人白震华、何德富、吴学民、刘献永、师东华、靳博文、崔亮、朱生徳，均为伊犁州公安局及下辖各市县公安局干警：白震华，生于1976年8月，伊犁州公安局刑侦支队原支队长；何德富，生于1962年11月，奎屯市公安局法制大队原副大队长、四级高级警长；吴学民，生于1986年12月，霍城县公安局原副局长、清水河分局局长；刘献永，生于1991年5月，伊犁州公安局刑侦情报信息大队原三级警长；师东华，生于1983年8月，新源县公安局刑警大队原教导员；靳博文，生于1985年1月，霍城县公安局经济侦查大队原副大队长；崔亮，生于1985年7月，霍城县公安局经济侦査大队原副大队长；朱生徳，生于1976年10月，巩留县公安局食品药品环境侦查大队原大队长。
奎屯市法院查明，被告人白震华、何德福、吴学民、刘献永、师东华、靳博文、崔亮、朱生德，在五年前的一起涉恶团伙专案办案中，实施捆绑、悬吊、殴打、浇水等暴力行为，致被害人孙任泽死亡。法院认为，八名被告人作为从警多年的公安干警，应当能够预见行刑逼供可能导致的后果，但为了获取证据，刑讯逼供，最终导致被害人死亡的严重后果，其行为触犯《刑法》故意伤害罪相关规定，犯罪事实清楚，证据确实充分，构成故意伤害罪。
一审宣判后，白震华、何德富、吴学民、刘献永、朱生徳等五名被告人不服，提起上诉，目前在伊犁州中级法院二审中。
“警察说人是喝水呛死的”
任亭亭记得，2018年9月27日晚上8点多，她接到一个陌生电话，对方自称是伊犁州公安局刑侦支队警官崔亮，说霍城县公安局领导要见她，让她一会儿跟他们走。
自多年前当警察的丈夫因公殉职，任亭亭一直独居。眼看天色已晚，任亭亭没有应允。约半小时后，崔亮开着辆非警用三菱车来到任亭亭家所在小区，双方在大门口见面。崔亮说，领导找她了解情况。任亭亭坚称明天自己才能去，期间，“崔亮不断到远处打电话，时间很长”。
一审休庭后，孙任泽的母亲任亭亭带着儿媳、孙女在街边焚烧纸钱，告慰儿子的在天之灵。图：财新 王和岩
六个月之前的2018年3月，任亭亭的儿子孙任泽因涉嫌寻衅滋事，被伊宁市公安局刑事拘留，后被逮捕羁押在察布查尔县看守所。据任亭亭介绍，孙任泽是家中独子，自幼备受宠爱，上初中时父亲在工作岗位上突发心梗去世，没了父亲的管教，孙任泽日渐不驯，虽然后来上了警校，但并未从警，一直做生意，开酒吧。据财新了解，孙任泽喜欢交友，往来大多是成分比较复杂的社会人，前些年也曾“几进宫”。
任亭亭与警察僵持到10点半，警察坚持要立刻出发，任亭亭只好叫上此前给儿子请的律师陪她前往霍城。
邻近子夜，进入霍城县，车径直开到霍城县第一人民医院（又称霍城县江苏医院）门诊大楼前，崔亮让任亭亭、律师去二楼ICU，自己没有进去，远处还站着一个人。后来任亭亭得知，那人叫吴学民，时任伊犁州公安局刑侦支队副支队长。
“到ICU门口，我的腿都软了。”任亭亭说，“我儿子盖着被单，躺在病床上，身上插满管子，我哭着叫任泽、任泽，没有任何反应；右臂露在外面，手腕、肩胛骨各有一道淤青紫红伤痕，深深凹下去。我一把拉开身上的被单，我儿子全身赤裸，左臂打着夹板，小腿一道道伤痕，好多血痂，睾丸处红肿……”
任亭亭说，后来她才知道，肩胛骨和手腕上紫红色伤痕，是被用军带捆绑长时间悬吊造成的，血痂是电击后留下的。“我问他们左臂是不是骨折了？他们说我儿子喝水被呛倒在地下，他们往起拉就脱臼了。”
警方拿出保外就医单让任亭亭签字。任亭亭记得病历称有侦查人员反映，9月27日凌晨嫌疑人要求喝水被呛后倒地，患者几天没有吃饭，精神状态很差。
“这么多外伤，病历为何不写？”任亭亭质问。
崔亮此前所说的霍城县公安局领导一直未出现，吴学民说领导不在县里。任亭亭拒绝签字，“吴学民很着急，走来走去，不停打电话，像热锅上的蚂蚁”。
半夜两三点，任亭亭回到伊宁的家。“我大姐一直在等我，我全身发抖，哭着跟大姐讲了这个事情。”任亭亭说，这一夜她和家人没和眼。
天亮后，任亭亭和家人、律师又去霍城县第一人民医院。ICU门口站着辅警不让进，任亭亭找到参加抢救的马某娜医生，“她一听我是孙任泽的母亲，说我啥都不知道，拔腿就跑。我追上去拦她，说你也是做母亲的人，看见自己的儿子成了这样，难道不该弄清楚吗？她说你去找院长吧”。任亭亭没找到院长，参与抢救的医生告诉她，警察说人是喝水呛死的，胳膊是他们抢救时脱臼的。
几经交涉，霍城县公安局领导终于答应下午见他们。任亭亭和律师来到公安局，“任何东西不让带，全身上下搜了遍”。当时还担任伊犁州公安局刑侦支队副支队长的白震华和霍城县公安局的徐姓纪检书记见了任亭亭，接待律师的是霍城县公安局主管刑侦的王副局长。
“白震华一上来就套近乎，说他在伊宁县公安局工作时，我老公是他们的老领导。”对于孙任泽的情况，白震华的说辞和送医警察的说法一样，还说手腕、腿上的伤是戴手铐脚镣造成的。“我一听就知道是说假话。我儿子是犯罪嫌疑人，又不是死刑犯，在看守所怎么会一直戴手铐脚镣？”任亭亭提出要看视频监控，起初白震华说有监控视频，但不可能给她看，后又改口以后再说。王副局长则答复律师，想看视频需要请示。
2018年9月27日凌晨，孙任泽在霍城县看守所审讯室接受长达近8小时的连续审讯后，倒地昏迷。曾被送至霍城县icu重症监护室急救。图：财新 王和岩
“我们尽全力了”
9月29日，孙任泽出事第三天，医院院长告诉任亭亭，他们请了乌鲁木齐新华医院ICU主任过来会诊，患者已经是脑死亡，即使抢救过来也是植物人。任亭亭回忆，她问儿子身上一团一团青紫是不是抢救时电击造成的？院长说，人来的时侯都没呼吸了，还电击什么；她提出要看接诊病历，院长说医院做不了主，需要公安同意。而她在院长办公室交涉的过程中，吴学民一直站在门口，“之后凡是我和家人去医院看望儿子，或找医生咨询情况，一直都有警察在场、跟随”。
也是这一天，任亭亭向伊犁州政法委、公安局纪检组、检察院等单位送交了控告材料。
10月3日，孙任泽病情危重，气管被切开。任亭亭和家人到医院，ICU里外守着六名警察或协警，不让他们见。“我说患者家属有探视权，医生说要公安同意才行。协警推我大姐，我大姐双手本能的向前抓，协警就说我大姐打他，我大姐都快70岁的人。”任亭亭说，“警察对着对讲机叫喊，哗啦冲上来十几个警察，一下子把我们团团围住。”他们被带到当地的一间派出所，听任亭亭说明情况后，派出所警察很同情她们，也没为难她们。
任亭亭又去政法委、公安和检察院等单位，讨要探视权。经协调，她和家人被允许一周探视一次，每次一小时。
10月12日，孙任泽出事整整半个月后，被转到伊犁州友谊医院。友谊医院位于伊宁市，是伊犁州两所三甲医院之一。这期间，孙任泽已出现肾功能衰竭、肺部感染等多种危重症状。
任亭亭回忆，伊犁州友谊医院主治医生告知她，患者情况很不好，人说不行就不行了，让家属要有心理准备。自从孙任泽转院，任亭亭每天都去友谊医院看望儿子，尽管只能隔着玻璃远远望着ICU病房里人事不省的儿子，她还是满心期盼奇迹出现。
11月6日，任亭亭来到伊犁州友谊医院，ICU主任郭医生和自治区专家对她说，医院已经尽全力抢救了，但患者情况很不好，全靠意志活着，分分钟都有可能去世，你要有心理准备，“其他的事，你该怎样就怎么样，这是你的权利”。“我理解她的意思让我该告就告，该反映就反映。”任亭亭说。
三天后，2018年11月9日，在ICU抢救43天的孙任泽终告不治身亡。
“我就想要个真相”
孙任泽出事后，伊犁州警方也有积极作为。孙任泽转院伊犁州友谊医院后，伊犁州和霍城县公安局就提出民事补偿方案，“前提是家属认可警方没有任何过错”。
任亭亭回忆，2018年10月22日，伊犁州公安局纪检组将她叫到州公安局信访办。“吴学民、崔亮、霍城县公安局督察大队毛督查等都在场，毛督查说经过调查，孙任泽的死警方没有责任，但可以给我们一些司法救助，我没有答应。”任亭亭说，后来在律师办公室，白震华、霍城县公安局徐姓纪检书记和毛督查又提出可以为她家争取80万元的司法救助，但她坚持必须是国家赔偿。
任亭亭记得，2018年12月或2019年元月，伊犁州公安局局长助理陆建军和白震华称到任亭亭家来。陆建军早先在伊宁县公安局工作，曾是任亭亭丈夫的下属。“陆建军说，按照伊宁的标准，救助款很少，为了照顾我们家，州公安局帮着争取到一线城市标准救助，共有90万元。”但任亭亭还是没有答应，她说：“如果我儿子是病死的，或者出车祸死的，随着时间流逝，我的痛苦和伤心会慢慢减轻。一想起我儿子满身伤痕，死得不明不白，时间拖得越长我越痛苦。我就想要个真相：我儿子是怎么死的。”
孙任泽死亡当晚，霍城县公安局委托伊犁州中叶司法鉴定中心进行尸检。鉴定结论是多器官功能衰竭导致死亡。至于是何原因引发多器官功能衰竭，尸检报告只字未提。任亭亭质问法医为何对孙任泽身体外伤不鉴定，“法医说，他已经承受了很大的压力”。
这样的鉴定结论，任亭亭没法接受。她委托一家律师事务所向伊犁州检察院申请重新鉴定死因，州检察院接到申请后，迟迟未予答复。任亭亭说，之后四个多月里，自己就像上班一样，每周都去伊犁州政法机关询问进展，连续向自治区政法部门以及中央政法委、最高检察院、公安部等单位快递控告材料。
2019年春，伊犁州检察院终于同意进行二次尸检，但鉴定费一直没有着落。为早日揭开儿子死亡真相，任亭亭四处借贷，垫付13.6万元鉴定费。2019年3月8日，受湖北崇新司法鉴定中心（下称“湖北崇新”）指派，华中科技大学同济医学院法医学系教授、主任法医师刘良一行飞抵伊宁，鉴定孙任泽死因。6月，伊犁州检察院收到湖北崇新的鉴定报告。7月，州检察院的有关人士对任亭亭说检察院决定对此事进行调查。
再无所逃
湖北崇新的鉴定报告结论，无论伊犁州公安局还是检察院，至今未对外公布，亦未将其作为证据向法院提交，其鉴定结论无从知晓。
但湖北崇新向伊犁州检察院提交鉴定报告后不久，伊犁州政法委接到举报材料，称任亭亭及家人私自接待鉴定机构人员，行贿鉴定人。材料很快批转至伊犁州检察院，任亭亭被检察院叫去接受调查，这时她才知道自己早就被全方位监控，“我与家人、鉴定人的电话往来、银行转账、接触等等，都在警方掌握中”。
根据《司法鉴定程序通则》规定，司法鉴定人不得违反规定会见诉讼当事人及其委托人。任亭亭辩称，自己和律师当时并不了解该规定，她曾委托律师去机场接送刘良教授一行，任亭亭也通过刘良教授支付了鉴定费，这都成为警方指控其程序违法、鉴定报告不能采纳的理由。
“（鉴定人）本来应该是检察院负责接送，但他们把这件事推给了我们；我请检察院转交（我垫付的）鉴定费，他们让我直接打到刘良教授提供的账户。”任亭亭说，对举报信中罗列的任亭亭涉嫌违规违法线索，伊犁州检察院都逐一做了调查，还派专人去武汉核实鉴定费问题。
鉴定费的问题搞清楚了，任亭亭称，警方又在孙任泽的死因上做文章，称孙任泽曾患有癫痫，审讯中因癫痫发作倒地，不治身亡。这次警方拿出了证据，孙任泽2006年被劳教时，任亭亭欲为儿子办理保外就医，曾在警方做过问讯笔录，并提交了孙任泽罹患癫痫的假材料。任亭亭承认自己当年救子心切，说了假话，但当年警方带孙任泽先后到伊犁州三家医院进行检查，未予确诊其患有癫痫，孙任泽保外就医申请因此被驳回，三年劳教期满方被释放。
这之后，孙任泽2015年的一桩旧案又被重提。任亭亭介绍，2015年时，孙任泽曾帮商人张怀远要账，与同事将债务人邓雪飞弄到一家宾馆看管起来，期间邓雪飞从看管地坠楼身亡。张怀远、孙任泽等人被法院认定犯非法拘禁罪，因积极赔偿受害人家属，获得谅解，所有被告人均被判为缓刑，其中孙任泽被判三缓四。
“伊犁州公安局一个姓肖的女干部，曾专程上门半是劝说半是警告我，人死不能复生，让他们赔些钱算了。刑警队都是搞重大案件的，那么强势的部门，你能斗得过？再告下去，把2015年的案子扯出来，对你家很不利。”任亭亭说，之后就传她给主审法官送了钱，儿子才被从轻处罚。她没有理睬，继续奔走申诉——当时她只以为，翻出几年前的邓雪飞坠楼案，是为了阻吓自己追索真相，尽快拿钱闭口，直到2023年7月公开庭审中她才得知，2018年全国性的扫黑除恶专项斗争开始后，当年3月伊犁州警方相继抓捕了一批涉黑人员，孙任泽被认定为其中一起“伊犁扫黑除恶第一案”的团伙成员。但包括涉黑案主犯在内的多名嫌疑人归案后，审讯进展缓慢，迟迟未能取得关键证据。为拿下该案，邓雪飞坠楼案被警方确定为突破口，而作为邓雪飞案重要当事人的孙任泽，也成为警方重点审讯对象。对孙任泽刑讯逼供，正是为了获得他们想要的口供。
在反复中，一直拖到2022年，孙任泽案才有了进展。因任亭亭与鉴定机构人员私下接触，警方质疑湖北崇新鉴定结论的公正性与合法性，伊犁州检察院重新委托广州中山大学法医鉴定中心，对孙任泽死因进行第三次鉴定。
2022年3月10日，中山大学鉴定中心出具鉴定报告，认定孙仁泽符合“因患有心肌桥、左冠状动脉轻度粥样硬化而致急性心功能障碍，后继发重症肺炎、多器官功能衰竭死亡，其生前所受外伤可诱发或促进其死亡进程的发展，为辅助死因。”
2022年4月1日，经伊犁州检察院指定，白震华等八名涉嫌刑讯逼供的嫌疑人由奎屯市检察院继续侦查。4月3日，吴学民、刘献永、师冬华、靳博文、崔亮、朱生徳等六人，因涉嫌刑讯逼供被指定监视居住，同年4月17日被刑事拘留；7月18日，白震华和何德富也因涉嫌刑讯逼供被刑事拘留。直到此时，任亭亭才知道，从儿子孙任泽被送到医院抢救直至死亡的43天里，伊犁州警方安排“日夜守候”在医院的刘献永、朱生徳、崔亮等干警，“竟然就是涉嫌刑讯逼供致孙任泽死亡的凶手”。
“他们名为看护，实则监视我和被害人家属的一举一动，严防警方内部知情者或医护人员与我们接触。”面对记者，任亭亭愤怒地控诉，从这些涉嫌刑讯逼供的警官殴打自己的儿子致其不治身亡，到对他们执行强制措施，已经过了将近四年时间，如此漫长的时间，八名嫌疑人每天进出公安局上班下班，甚至照常晋升、提拔，并有足够充裕的时间串供，订立攻守同盟，阻挠侦查。而任亭亭则面临的是“全天候监听、监视和管控”，社区警察经常来入户登记，离开伊犁必须提前报备……
“拿不下，你们就是他背后的保护伞”
2023年3月7日，奎屯市检察院以白震华、何德富、吴学民、刘献永、师冬华、靳博文、崔亮、朱生德等八名被告人，涉嫌故意伤害罪致人死亡，向奎屯市法院提起公诉。7月4日，奎屯市法院一审开庭审理此案，庭审现场位于克拉玛依市中级法院最大的法庭，奎屯市法院此番借用该院法庭开庭。
财新获悉，相关部门对该案审理非常重视，伊犁州公安、检察院有关领导坐镇克拉玛依中院，通过视频观看了两天庭审；法院不仅对旁听人员严格控制，被害人和每名被告人只允许两名家属旁听，总共18名旁听者坐在有100多座位的多旁听席上，显得法庭空空荡荡。被害人亲属与被告人亲属被分别限制在旁听席前后左右遥遥相隔的位置，法警自始至终分别紧挨着他们正经危坐，以防庭审中双方亲属情绪过激发生意外。
检方指控，2018年3月，伊犁州公安局成立赵祥涉恶团伙案专案组，时任州公安局刑侦支队副支队长的白震华任赵祥专案组副组长，吴学民、崔亮、师冬华、靳博文、刘献永、朱生德等人为成员，吴学民、崔亮后分别被指定为审讯组小组长。
赵祥是伊犁当地知名地产商，后又成立伊宁县东信小额贷款有限公司担任法定代表人。2018年初扫黑除恶开始后，赵祥即被逮捕。3月27日，孙任泽作为该团伙犯罪嫌疑人之一，也因涉嫌寻衅滋事遭到刑拘。
白震华在庭审中说，赵祥案号称是伊犁州“扫黑除恶第一案”，是自治区公安厅挂牌督办的案件，要求一定要办成铁案。“上面要求赵祥案10月份要结案，自治区公安厅也来人专门督查。伊犁州公安局、专案组压力很大，就将扫黑除恶就交给了霍城公安局。”据当地律师介绍，霍城公安局办案以严厉著称，在伊犁公安系统中，案子拿不下时一句“用霍城公安局的方法”，大家就心领神会。
2018年3月18日，伊犁州公安系统下辖各县市公安局抽调办案骨干，组成赵祥专案组，州公安局主管刑侦的副局长亲任组长，白震华任副组长，吴学民等人相继从各自单位被抽调到赵祥专案组。同年5月，时年55岁的何德富经新疆自治区公安厅刑侦总队有组织犯罪侦查支队指派，加入专案组指导案件。何德富工作关系在奎屯市公安局法制大队，长期借调至自治区公安厅刑侦总队有组织犯罪侦查支队。
但是一直到当年9月，专案组成立已逾半年，案件侦查一直未获得实质性突破。专案组决定从该案重要嫌疑人孙任泽入手，找到突破口。9月18日，孙任泽被从羁押地察布查尔县看守所提出——九天后孙任泽在霍城县看守所审讯室倒地昏迷，再也没能醒来。
庭审中，多名被告人称，刑讯逼供孙任泽的目的是为了拿下赵祥案。赵祥案迟迟未能突破，没有命案和保护伞，就没法定性黑社会性质组织。伊犁州公安局领导及专案组负责人商量后，决定从邓雪飞案入手，若能证实赵祥参与邓雪飞案，其黑社会“命案”这一条指标即可达到。孙任泽作为赵祥的手下，又是邓雪飞非法拘禁案主犯之一，被确定为突破赵祥案的重点对象。
公诉人指出，孙任泽被采取强制措施后，一直不承认赵祥指使他非法拘禁邓雪飞。为获取赵祥案相关证据，白震华、何德富等决定，将孙任泽从察布查尔县看守所提出，重点审讯，并将专案组成员分成两组，每组五人，轮流审讯。第一组由吴学民任组长，组员有刘献永、师冬华、靳博文、朱生德；第二组崔亮任组长，另有组员五人。
庭审中查明，9月23日，经白震华协调后，由专案组将孙任泽从察布查尔县看守所押至伊犁州公安局交警支队办案中心进行审讯。9月23日至25日期间，吴学民、崔亮、靳博文等人在该办案中心审讯孙任泽，采取了正反背凳子、捆绑、水浇等手段。期间白震华、何德福均去过审讯现场。
经白震华协调后，9月25日中午，专案组又将孙任泽从州公安局交警支队办案中心转至霍城县公安局办案区进行审讯，至9月26日中午期间，吴学民、刘献永、靳博文、崔亮等人在该办案区审讯孙任泽，将孙任泽吊在办案区后门卫室的门梁上，对其采取背凳子、抹芥末、PVC管子殴打、老式电话摇把子电击等刑讯逼供手段。
庭审调查显示，孙任泽之所以被带离原羁押地察布查尔县看守所，是因为在那里警方对孙任泽的审讯很不顺利，在看守所，审讯室侦查人员与嫌疑人中间有铁栅栏隔离，“不方便审讯”；之所以到伊犁州交警大队地下室办案中心后又离开，是因为审讯期间交警大队有领导表示，交警大队来往人员很杂，很容易传出去；但办案人员将孙任泽转移到霍城县公安局后院办案点进行审讯后，“县公安局长说，孙任泽被打的叫声传到前院（办公区），影响不好，让把人带到看守所去审讯”。
9月26日上午，白震华、何德富在霍城县公安局后院办案点召集专案组全部人员开会，决定将孙任泽押解到霍城县看守所审讯。白震华称，他和霍城县看守所所长孙某亮、副所长柴某联系，要求安排一间没有视频监控的房间。
吴学民在法庭上说，他之前曾跟白震华提出，“审了一周多，该休息一下，白震华说要一鼓作气，拿下口供，圆满完成任务。”另有几名被告人也当庭先后表示，9月26日上午的会上，大家提议审讯差不多了，应该休息一天；邻近中秋，办案人员也需要休息。但遭到何德富的严词拒绝。“何德富说，应该加大力度，彻底摧垮孙任泽的精神意志。拿不下孙任泽，你们就是他背后的保护伞（或：黑恶势力最大的保护伞）”。
其中一名被告人还提到，何德富曾对他们说，审讯中将毛巾放在一根细棍子，让孙任泽跪在上面，外表看不出伤痕。
何德富矢口否认说过此话，强调自己没有参与9月26日上午的会，还称自己2018年6月才到专案组，主要负责做笔录审查，并不参与具体审讯工作。对其他被告人刑讯逼供的行为完全不知情。但除何德富和一名看守孙任泽的专案组成员，其他六名被告人都表示何德富说过类似的话。吴学民说，“何德富的那句‘拿不下审讯，你们就是黑社会背后的保护伞’，让我非常震撼。”
公诉人员称，孙任泽9月18日从察布查尔县看守所到州交警大队，再转到霍城县公安局，以及后来又被转移到霍城县看守所审讯，均是白震华决定。但白震华表示，孙任泽口供一直没能突破，时任伊犁州公安局局长正副局长经常询问审讯情况，指示他们在保证人员安全的情况下，加快审讯节奏，争取早日拿下上级重点督办的自治区扫黑第一案。于是，他与何德富等建议将孙任泽从察布查尔县看守所提出，转移到伊犁州交通公安分局交警大队地下室专门审讯，两位领导同意，并叮嘱他们注意安全。
将孙任泽带离羁押地审讯，“涉及伊犁州、县公安局及看守所多个单位的沟通交涉事宜，我一个刑警支队副支队长，根本没有权限。”白震华说，都是州公安局主管副局长与上述单位领导沟通后，安排他执行的。而两名时任州公安局正副局长笔录则称，对孙任泽被从察布查尔县看守所提出毫不知情。
致命的七小时
9月26日下午16时许，吴学民、刘献永、靳博文、师东华、朱生德，驾车将孙任泽从霍城县公安局办案区带至霍城县看守所。孙任泽浑身满是伤痕，若按正常入所程序，会被拒收。专案组将孙任泽装进押解车里，没有办理入所登记，从B门入所。
因孙任泽之前被刑讯逼供导致双腿不能正常行走，吴学民等人借了辆轮椅，将坐着轮椅的孙任泽推进了审讯室，看守所内走廊监控视频显示，时间为当日下午16时许。之后的七个多小时里，参与审讯的吴学民一组警察，包括吴学民、刘献永、靳博文、师东华、朱生德，对孙任泽共同或者分别实施了捆绑、殴打、悬吊、水浇等刑讯逼供行为。9月27日凌晨0时37分，陷入昏迷的孙任泽被抬出审讯室。直到43天后故去，孙任泽再也没能醒来。
庭审显示，这间审讯室由霍城县公安局国保大队办案人员办案专用，俗称国保办案室，平时不大使用。审讯室里其实有监控视频设备，分别安装在前门和后窗附近。看守所所长孙某亮事先吩咐副所长柴某将监控视频关闭，但柴某多了个心眼儿，为以防万一祸及自身，后来又偷偷打开了后窗附近的监控视频。正是柴某“留了一手”，记录的七个多小时审讯过程，成为该案扭转乾坤的关键证据。
现场视频显示，审讯室内靠近门的位置有办公桌，两三把椅子。室内有一张铁制高低床，一头对着门一头靠着墙，墙上有小窗，小窗附近装有监控视频。
多名被告人当庭陈述，审讯中，他们或让孙任泽正背、反背铁制审讯椅（俗称“老虎凳”），每次背40多分钟；或抽掉铁架床下铺床板，将仅穿短裤的孙任泽双手、双脚分别捆绑铁架床前后两头，使其赤裸的身体承重在铁格挡上，并将哑铃放在肚子上，增加孙任泽腰部的难受程度；或将孙任泽悬空吊起，用毛巾敷脸浇水。
监控视频显示，从下午4点到11点半，长达七个多小时的时间内，孙任泽被毛巾敷面浇水、或直接浇水十几次，其中长达16分钟和15分钟的有两次。其余时间每次悬吊20多分钟。
据知情者介绍，孙任泽被固定在靠近门的铁架床那头，视频只拍摄到其被刑讯逼供的背面部分，且许多画面被铁架床遮蔽，但能看到审讯人员有戴塑胶手套、拿可乐瓶、哑铃和毛巾等动作。“视频中当审讯人员作出浇水动作时，无法看到孙任泽的表情和反应，但看见铁架床长时间剧烈晃动，可以想象人有多痛苦。”
被告人说，审讯中，他们还抽孙任泽耳光，用白色PVC管抽打其小腿和脚后跟，用老式摇把电话机电击其身体，为防止留下体外伤，用军用带捆绑孙任泽手腕、脚腕时，特意垫有毛巾。审讯进行到最后，孙任泽曾大声惨叫，连连求饶。
几乎所有被告人都指称，年龄最小、首次参加刑侦专案组的刘献永，在八名被告人中表现最兴奋、最积极，逼供手段也最“变态”。他们说，审讯中，刘献永或用胶带拔孙任泽的腿毛，或将装满水的可乐瓶悬挂在孙任泽的生殖器上，或用戴着塑胶手套捏生殖器。而拔阴毛、毛巾敷面浇水、直接水浇面部，大都是刘献永所为。
庭审中，刘献永承认上述行为，“我想侮辱孙任泽的人格，摧毁他的心理防线”。
有知情者说，刘献永到案后一直不认罪，直到审讯人员提到其母，他一下子崩溃了，哭着说：这几年这个事就像石头一样压在心上，现在说出来了，反而轻松了。
本不在吴学民这一组的崔亮于当晚19：39进入审讯室，之后协助刘献永等人将孙任泽捆绑在床板抽出等。20时41分许，何德富也进入审讯室，见孙任泽被捆绑在铁床上，仍要求吴学民等人加大审讯力度。后吴学民、刘献永等人将孙任泽先后控制在审讯椅中、捆绑在铁床上，对并多次用水浇淋孙任泽面部。
靳博文对孙任泽最后时刻的回忆是：“……把孙任泽绑在高低床的下口，绑好后就开始给他灌水，还将芥末抹到孙任泽的眼睛、鼻子上让他难受，用可乐瓶子给孙任泽扣鼻灌水，中间有人拿毛巾过来堵孙任泽的口鼻，然后接着灌水，这样灌了有三四次，孙任泽在灌水的过程中就昏迷了。”
朱生德的回忆是：“……将孙任泽绑在床上，拿毛巾盖在孙任泽的脸上浇水，并接了一桶新水，然后又开始对孙任泽脸上浇水，浇了几下孙任泽就没有反应了，没有挣扎也没有喘息。”
2018年9月27日凌晨0时37分，连续刑讯逼供七个多小时后，孙任泽出现昏迷。审讯者将孙任泽从老虎凳上放下来，摸手腕没有脉搏跳动，拍打脸部也无反应，刘献永把孙任泽放在地上做心肺复苏，吴学民让人去叫看守所医生，之后送医院急救。霍城县医院的接诊记录显示：27日凌晨1点半，患者被送来，呼吸、脉搏均无，瞳孔有放大。送医警察说，患者要求喝水，被呛后出现昏迷。
任亭亭说，参与抢救的医院院长9月28日曾对她说，孙任泽现在就是脑死亡，即使抢救过来也是植物人。医院记录显示：“抢救时患者停止呼吸已有40多分钟，曾电击做心脏复苏，因时间较长已经脑死亡……”
吴学民笔录中供述，孙任泽送医前已处于昏迷状态，没有脉搏、心跳、呼吸。而在法庭上，吴学民则表示，自己不是专业人员，没法判断人是否脑死亡。
被害人律师及家属认为，吴学民改口，包括后来串供，都为掩盖孙任泽实际上死在看守所的事实。犯罪嫌疑人死在看守所和死在医院，性质完全不同，在法律上定罪量刑会有很大区别。
孙任泽先后做过三次尸检和一次补充尸检。前两次尸检，因受害人家属及警方分别提出异议，公诉机关未予采纳。审理中，公诉机关作为证据向法庭提交的是广州中山大学司法鉴定中心副主任罗斌教授等署名的鉴定报告（下称“第三份鉴定报告”）及补充尸检报告。
罗斌教授从事法医鉴定工作30多年，曾做过6000多例尸检。其2022年3月10日出具的这第三份鉴定报告称：孙仁泽符合因患有心肌桥、左冠状动脉轻度粥样硬化而致急性心功能障碍，后继发重症肺炎、多器官功能衰竭死亡。其生前所受外伤可诱发或促进其死亡进程的发展，为辅助死因。
2022年3月，霍城县看守所副所长柴某，在压力下为减轻罪责，主动交出了审讯视频。之后伊犁州检察院向中山大学司法鉴定中心罗斌团队提交了审讯视频，要求其对孙任泽死亡责任做出认定。2023年3月2日，罗斌及助手出具补充鉴定报告。报告称：孙任泽符合在患有心肌桥及左冠状动脉粥样硬化的基础病上，合并外伤、寒湿等条件下，因被他人用毛巾覆盖口鼻并用水浇淋，引起机械性窒息及中枢神经系统功能障碍，最终因多器官功能衰竭死亡。在死亡责任认定中，被毛巾覆盖口鼻并用水浇淋为主要因素，参与度为60%；外伤及寒湿环境的参与度为25%；自身疾病参与度为15%。
据知情者介绍，庭前会议时，曾当场播放审讯视频，“看完后，所有律师心情都很沉重，无人说话”。
“没想过”
庭审显示，白震华、何德富没有参与具体审讯，二人也自始至终否认对刑讯逼供知情。其他六名被告人则说，审讯孙任泽期间，每天或隔几天，白震华、何德富都要组织大家开会，汇报昨天审讯情况以及审讯手段。
白震华辩解说，他不仅是专案组副组长，还兼任州公安局刑侦支队副支队长，队里的其他案件也要负责，工作需要他两边跑，不常在专案组，对下属刑讯逼供的手段并不知情。“我只是跟他们说，审讯中要讲究策略，这个唱白脸，那个唱红脸。有次吴学民说孙任泽怕水，我问为什么，他们说用水浇孙任泽，我制止了。”他表示，审讯中打几个耳光、踢几脚可以，但不知道他们用那么残忍的手段刑讯逼供。
白震华说，9月26日早上组织所有人员开会，两个小组的人员都参加了。他说每天早上都要召集大家开会，听取头天晚上审讯情况汇报，他不在的时侯，就是何德富负责召集大家开会。他跟组员宣布，他不在时听何德富的，何德富代表他。其他被告人证实白震华的确曾说何大队是省厅下来的专家，他不在时，大家要听何大队的。
何德富则否认这一说法。他说自己进专案组最晚，从来没有正式文件对他进行过任命，也没有被上级口头任命过。他只是负责审核笔录，对审讯情况完全不知情，直到看了视频才知道他们对孙任泽进行刑讯逼供。何德富是所有被告人中唯一坚持不认罪，也拒绝对受害人家属作出赔偿。
The prosecutor or the chief judge asked several defendants what He Defu meant by increasing the intensity of the interrogation. They replied: it means to use methods and increase the intensity of torture to extract confessions.
He Defu’s defense lawyer said that He Defu was the deputy captain of the Legal Affairs Brigade of the Kuitun City Public Security Bureau. Due to his outstanding work, he was long seconded to the Criminal Police Brigade of the Autonomous Region Public Security Department. He Defu was assigned to the special case team, only to review the records and be in charge of the materials group. Because he was particularly strict with the records, he repeatedly pointed out that the records of other defendants were unqualified, which caused them to harbor resentment and unanimously pointed out that it was revenge. The lawyer emphasized that the surveillance video of the interrogation scene on September 26 showed that He Defu had stayed at the scene for more than 4 minutes. After the incident, other defendants formed an alliance to coordinate their statements, and there was no He Defu, “which fully shows that He Defu is not in the same group as them.”
He Defu was approved for bail pending trial due to tuberculosis. During the trial, he kept wearing a mask and often spoke in a weak voice, and the chief judge repeatedly reminded him to speak louder. Sun Renzhe’s wife in the audience often said indignantly: “Playing dead.”
Zhu Shengde was one of the defendants who confessed to less involvement in torture to extract confessions. He repeatedly emphasized in court that he was passive and passive in the interrogation. The surveillance video shows that Zhu Shengde made a gesture of slapping Sun Renzhe with his hand.
Zhu Shengde stated in his statement that since he joined the public security work, he has been conscientious and diligent. He has been thinking in the detention center these days, if at the beginning… He has always been passive and passive in the interrogation; from the first day he entered the public security team, he knew to obey orders and obey the organization. This has become his unconscious action over the years. When the lawyer asked Zhu Shengde if he had ever thought that torturing suspects was illegal? He said he had not thought about it.
The trial also revealed that after Sun Renzhe was sent to the hospital for rescue in the early morning of September 27, the interrogators, who were aware that the situation was not good, began to frantically destroy and fabricate evidence. On that day, Wu Xuemin and others stayed in the hospital to guard, while Cui Liang was assigned to quickly return to the interrogation room of the Huocheng County Detention Center to remove items such as torture tools left at the interrogation scene.
The indictment stated that in order to cover up the truth of Sun Renzhe’s entry into the Huocheng County Detention Center, Bai Zhenhua, He Defu, Wu Xuemin and others also filmed fake videos and submitted them to the Discipline Inspection Team of the Ili Prefecture Public Security Bureau of the Ili Prefecture Discipline Inspection Commission, attempting to cover up the truth and get away with it.
Bai Zhenhua said that he reported the matter of Sun Renzhe to the leaders of the Ili Prefecture Public Security Bureau, and it was the bureau leaders who proposed to make fake videos to deal with the investigation of the discipline inspection department. According to this instruction, he notified Chai, the deputy director of the Huocheng County Detention Center, to provide the filming site, and asked Cui Liang, who had a similar figure to Sun Renzhe, to wear a black hood to pretend to be Sun Renzhe, pretending to enter the detention center normally, and made a fake video. However, the leaders of the bureau denied knowing about it in the records.
The appearance of the fake video seriously interfered with and delayed the investigation of the procuratorial department. Until March 2022, the judicial appraisal center of Zhongshan University submitted the autopsy report, and Chai voluntarily handed over the interrogation video. On March 8, the Ili Prefecture Procuratorate officially established a special case team for the “9.27 case”. After that, the suspects were successively taken compulsory measures.
The prosecution believes that Bai Zhenhua, He Defu, Wu Xuemin, Liu Xianyong, Shi Donghua, Jin Bowen, Cui Liang, and Zhu Shengde, as judicial staff, did not perform their duties according to law and implemented violent confessions, causing death. Their actions violated the provisions of Article 247 and Paragraph 2 of Article 234 of the “Criminal Law”. The facts of the crime are clear, and the evidence is sufficient. They should be held criminally responsible for the crime of intentional injury. In this case, the eight defendants cooperated with each other and worked in division of labor. They are joint crimes. Among them, the defendants Bai Zhenhua and He Defu are the organizers and leaders, and the defendants Wu Xuemin and Liu Xianyong are actively implementing violent confessions. The four played a major role in the joint crime and are the principal offenders. The defendants Shi Donghua, Jin Bowen, Cui Liang, and Zhu Shengde played a secondary or auxiliary role in the joint crime and are accomplices.
Official duties or intentional injury?
From the occurrence of the case on September 27, 2018 to the criminal detention of all suspects in July 2022, in the nearly four years, Bai Zhenhua and other eight suspects suspected of serious criminal offenses were all promoted for their merits in the Zhao Xiang case. Among them, Bai Zhenhua was awarded a second-class merit and was promoted from the deputy captain of the Criminal Police Brigade of the Ili Prefecture Public Security Bureau to the captain. “At the same time, they used the opportunity and ample time to perform their duties normally, on the one hand, concealing and destroying evidence, fabricating and coordinating their statements, and on the other hand, they were active everywhere, using various relationships and public power to monitor the actions of Sun Renzhe’s family and try to settle everything with taxpayers’ money.” Ren Tingting said that the trial showed that except for He Defu, the other defendants had coordinated their statements twice, one of which used Dingding’s coordination, which could not be verified after the fact, to deal with the investigation. Ren Tingting’s litigation agent also stated that from the filing of the case to April 2022, most of the first three records of the defendants were coordinated.
One defendant once said in court, “Everyone was very sad in the hospital that day when Sun Renzhe had the accident.” But what Ren Tingting remembers is that in the face of the victim’s family who rushed to the hospital, the defendants showed more of a kind of indifference and contempt, even disdain. “At the gate of the county hospital, Wu Xuemin directly declared that you can sue as you like.”
The court debate was held in two rounds. At the end of the trial, after the prosecutor delivered the public prosecution opinion and sentencing recommendation, he specifically said a paragraph of “educational warning” significance: The two-day trial is a heavy lesson in the legal system for all the defendants, the law enforcement officers who participated in the trial, and the audience. The defendants in the audience were glorious people’s police yesterday, and today they have become defendants. They have been police officers for many years and hold leading positions. But they knew the law and violated the law, using violence to control violence, and the means were extremely cruel. Where is the law? Their actions have tarnished the image of the Party and the people’s police, caused a bad impact on the people, brought irreparable pain to the victim’s relatives, and also brought harm to their own families. Several relatives of the defendants in the audience covered their faces and sobbed.
When the court adjourned for lunch on the first day of the trial, Zhu Shengde’s daughter in the audience shouted “Dad” as her father was about to walk out of the court. Zhu Shengde, whose hair was gray, turned his head and looked at his wife and daughter in the audience. There were also several family members of the defendants shouting “Come on” to their relatives. On the second day, when the prosecutor spoke, he condemned: In yesterday’s trial, many family members of the defendants ignored the pain of the victim’s family and shouted “Come on” in court. Where is the conscience?
During the trial, due to Ren Tingting’s sudden physical discomfort, the court had to adjourn for a while. The court police took Wu Xuemin to the restroom. Ren Tingting, who was resting, saw it and was immediately agitated, shouting “Murderer” and trying to rush over, but was firmly held down by a doctor who was waiting nearby.
Ren Tingting’s husband had worked in the police system for a long time and had also served in the criminal investigation department. Ren Tingting claimed to have some understanding of the nature of criminal investigation work. “I understand that the police (personnel) beat criminal suspects, which is just a few slaps, but I didn’t expect them to beat my son to death.” She said, “I am also a mother, and I will also be soft-hearted. But no one in the state public security has ever expressed any apology to me.”
In the final statement stage, only Jin Bowen had prepared written materials in advance. When he read “I have been a police officer for more than ten years, and I have taken off my beloved police uniform,” he choked up for a while. He expressed his confession and repentance and was willing to actively compensate the victim’s family. Cui Liang, Zhu Shengde and other defendants bowed to Ren Tingting and said sorry. He Defu did not plead guilty, while Bai Zhenhua, Wu Xuemin, Liu Xianyong and Zhu Shengde believed that they constituted the crime of torture to extract confessions, but not the crime of intentional injury.
Bai Zhenhua had objections to the facts and charges of the crime alleged in the indictment. He stated that he did not agree with the prosecution’s identification of the special case team as a criminal gang, and that the improper behavior of individual police officers in handling the case could not be regarded as the behavior of the case team; he was appointed as the team leader, and he was only responsible for reporting to the leaders, and his work was all reported to the leaders, and he did not know about the torture to extract confessions. “We do not have the common intention to harm, nor do we have the motivation and purpose of the common intention, and objectively, we do not have the act of jointly implementing the harm.” His defense lawyer stated that the appraisal opinion in this case cannot be used as the basis for the verdict; it is obviously inappropriate to treat the criminal investigation special case team of the public security organ as a criminal group; as the deputy leader of the special case team, Bai Zhenhua carried out his work under the command and arrangement of the leaders, reported the case interrogation to the leaders, and conveyed the leaders’ instructions to the subordinates. There is no problem in saying that the confession was taken during the handling of the case. As for the means that may cause harm to the person being interrogated, Bai Zhenhua also said to stop it. As for letting other defendants increase the intensity and interrogation methods, it is the personal understanding of some of the implementers. Bai Zhenhua did not go to the interrogation scene and did not implement any torture methods, and should not be held criminally responsible. At most, he should bear the dereliction of duty as a leader.
He Defu had objections to the facts and charges of the crime alleged in the indictment, and believed that he did not have the subjective intention to inflict physical or disguised physical punishment on the victim, nor did he carry out the act of torture to extract confessions, and insisted that he was innocent. His defense lawyer believed that in this case, the victim did not die immediately after being tortured to extract confessions, but died more than a month after being rescued. The third and fourth appraisal reports finally resulted in the victim’s death due to multiple causes. The prosecution’s determination of intentional injury resulting in death was factually wrong, and this case was an accidental event; the evidence used by the prosecution to prove He Defu’s crime of intentional injury was, first, the confessions of other defendants, proving that He Defu was the principal offender who instructed or instigated, and the other was video evidence, proving that He Defu appeared at the scene at the end, but the law stipulates that the defendant cannot be convicted only on the basis of oral confessions without other evidence, and it is not possible to use the language of getting angry at the meeting as evidence; He Defu was just a seconded person and an outsider, without any position, and it was impossible to lead the special case team. The confessions of other defendants were highly consistent and may be false confessions. The subject of the crime should be directly implemented by the special case team for torture to extract confessions. He Defu was in the materials group and did not implement the means of torture to extract confessions, nor was he a leader, and did not have the power to instruct the members of the special case team to torture to extract confessions, and He Defu’s crime cannot be determined.
Wu Xuemin had no objection to the facts of the crime alleged in the indictment, but had opinions on the charges, believing that he was guilty of torture to extract confessions, but not of intentional injury. His defense attorney believed that Wu Xuemin did not have the subjective purpose of the result of intentional injury resulting in death, and all the actions were based on the arrangement of the organization personnel. Before the accident occurred from September 26 to September 27, including Wu Xuemin, everyone proposed to slow down, and he did not pursue the subjective intention of torture to extract confessions; the act of torture to extract confessions on the victim lasted for many days, and it should not be judged by the situation on the last day. The prosecutor did not have evidence to prove that Wu Xuemin played a prominent role in the whole process of participating in torture to extract confessions. He did not make specific arrangements for torture to extract confessions, and had no way to solve the direction, intensity, method, and time of the interrogation. He was passively involved in the interrogation team and had obvious accomplice attributes. He did not have the intention to actively participate, and his behavior had the circumstances of confession and should be given a lighter punishment. In addition, in terms of the nature of the case, the defense lawyer believed that the judicial appraisal opinion was inconsistent with the facts. The victim had been taking drugs for a long time, and the fact of choking on water had not changed. The victim did spit white foam at the time, and the cause of his death could not rule out the reasonable suspicion of death caused by epilepsy, and the rationality of death caused by his own heart and brain diseases could not be ruled out.
Liu Xianyong had objections to the facts and charges of the crime alleged in the indictment, and did not agree with the prosecutor’s accusation that he was the principal offender, actively participated, and was the implementer. His lawyer’s defense opinion believed that the crime of torture to extract confessions resulting in injury and death should be determined as intentional injury and intentional homicide, which is conditional, and it is necessary to take the attitude of the perpetrator’s indulgence of the victim’s injury and death as the necessary conversion condition. Liu Xianyong did not have the intention of negligence and indulgence in the death of the victim, otherwise he would not have performed two cardiopulmonary resuscitation rescues on him. It can be reflected from the fact that the defendant Liu Xianyong actively implemented artificial respiration and sent the victim to the hospital for treatment after the victim fell into a coma that he was very resistant to and rejected the death of the victim. In addition, although Liu Xianyong had the behavior of pouring water on the victim’s face, the victim’s lower limbs were not caused by the defendant Liu Xianyong, and this behavior was also the cause of the victim’s multiple organ failure. In addition, the defense attorney also believed that Liu Xianyong’s circumstances did not constitute the principal offender. In the special case team with the leadership of the leaders and the participation of the leaders of the various branches, Liu Xianyong did not have the subjective intention of seeking quick success and instant benefits, and objectively did not provide tools for violence and confession, and did not have a common intention with other defendants, and should be punished as an accomplice.
Zhu Shengde had objections to the basic facts and charges alleged in the indictment, and believed that he was only passively and negatively involved in the act of torture to extract confessions, and that he was executing orders and obeying orders, and did not have the subjective intention to harm the victim. He emphasized that as a special group, the police’s actions are the performance of their duties. The “People’s Police Law” and other regulations stipulate that if the consequences are caused by the execution of orders, the person who issued the orders shall bear the responsibility. His defense lawyer believed that it was inappropriate to hold the defendant Zhu Shengde criminally responsible for the crime of intentional injury. The defendant did not have the intention of intentional injury. Participating in the special case team and interrogation work was based on the particularity of his own work. He completed the work tasks arranged by the leaders without any discount and unconditionally. The only purpose of the four-day torture to extract confessions was to obtain confessions, not to intentionally harm his health and cause death; the victim’s death was formed by multiple causes, and his act of confession was to obey orders and act in a unified manner under a special historical background, which is understandable. It is recommended that the defendant Zhu Shunde be convicted of the crime of torture to extract confessions and be exempted from criminal punishment.
The two-day trial was intense and fierce. At about 8 p.m. on July 5, the chief judge announced the adjournment. Caixin learned that more than a month later, the case was tried for half a day again in response to the defense attorney’s questioning of the appraisal procedures and qualifications of the appraisal center of Zhongshan University.
Ren Tingting was very dissatisfied with the “no remorse” of the defendants’ family members during the first hearing. She proposed to play the video surveillance in court, “Let them see how their good sons, good fathers, and good husbands beat my son to death in their eyes. They all said they didn’t need it, and no one had the courage to watch.”
A defense lawyer said that the two-day trial gave him a lot of feelings. “I was also a police officer, and I feel particularly sad about the occurrence of this case.” He said that the defendants were all case-handling backbones who had worked on the public security front for many years, and hoped that in view of the “special situation of the 2018 crackdown on organized crime,” the defendants could be given a lighter punishment. Several other lawyers also hoped that the court would consider the special circumstances of the crackdown on organized crime at that time and, in the spirit of the modesty of the criminal law, give the defendants a lenient punishment.
The final judgment of the Kuitun City Court on November 6, 2023, found that Bai Zhenhua, He Defu, Wu Xuemin, Liu Xianyong, Shi Donghua, Jin Bowen, Cui Liang, and Zhu Shengde were guilty of intentional injury. The court held that the eight defendants were all public security police officers who had been police officers for many years and should have foreseen the possible consequences of torture to extract confessions, but in order to obtain evidence, they adopted the act of torture to extract confessions, which ultimately led to the serious consequence of the victim’s death, and should be held criminally responsible for the crime of intentional injury. The eight defendants were members of the special case team of the Zhao Xiang case and jointly implemented the act of torture to extract confessions on the victim, and were jointly involved in the crime. Although the defendants Bai Zhenhua and He Defu, as the main responsible persons of the special case team, did not actually participate in the act of torture to extract confessions, they knew that the team members had implemented the act of torture to extract confessions in order to obtain confessions, and adopted an attitude of indifference and non-prevention, which ultimately led to the result that the victim died due to torture to extract confessions. The two defendants should bear criminal responsibility for the consequences and are the principal offenders. The defendants Wu Xuemin and Liu Xianyong actively implemented violent confessions during the torture to extract confessions, and played a major role in the joint crime, and are the principal offenders, and were sentenced to 10 years and 12 years in prison respectively; the defendants Shi Donghua, Jin Bowen, Zhu Shengde, and Cui Liang played a secondary or auxiliary role in the joint crime, and are accomplices, and were sentenced to 5 years, 5 years, 4 years, and 3 years in prison respectively.
As the trigger of Sun Renzhe’s death from torture to extract confessions, although the police failed to confirm from Sun Renzhe’s mouth that Zhao Xiang instructed them to illegally detain Deng Xuefei and caused her to fall to her death, thus confirming that Zhao Xiang was a criminal gang, in 2021, Zhao Xiang was still identified by the Ili Prefecture Intermediate Court as the principal offender of the criminal gang, and was sentenced to 25 years in prison for multiple crimes. Zhao Xiang, who is currently serving his sentence in prison, is not satisfied with the judgment and has been appealing.
An Ili local lawyer said: At the beginning, the police publicized that this case was the largest organized crime case in Ili Prefecture. After searching for a long time, the murder case was not implemented, and no protective umbrella was found. In the end, the “black” was removed and made into an evil force. Zhao Xiang was sentenced to 25 years, and more than 40 other accomplices were sentenced. When the Zhao Xiang case was tried, the relevant departments organized many people to attend the hearing, and the publicity was overwhelming, but the Ili Prefecture official website and the China Judgment Documents Network could not find the information on the trial and judgment of the Zhao Xiang case.
Caixin learned that Sun, the director of the Huocheng County Detention Center, and Chai, the deputy director, who were handled separately, were accused of the crime of dereliction of duty and had been tried in the Kuitun City Court. The two were given a letter of understanding from the victim’s family due to their active compensation, and have not yet been sentenced.
Discover more from 自由档案馆
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.