There are too many bizarre anomalies of the investigating authorities, which the legal language calls “a serious breach of the proceedings” during the investigation and prosecution and trial process which led to the death penalty of Ho Duy Hai.
Those who are concerned and follow the case happened at the Cau Voi Post Office (Long An) on January 13, 2008 and the subsequent trial sessions are easy to identify obvious false accusations against Hai. There are 4 of the most obvious signs of injustice:
– The fingerprint left at the scene does not belong to Hai’s.
– No witnesses identified Ho Duy Hai at the scene in the evening of the case (January 13, 2008).
– Any weapons that the perpetrator had used to commit a crime has not been collected, investigators took “fake weapons” from a local market.
– Case files are falsified: the defendant’s testimonies in the report had been changed by investigators without the defendant’s certification.
That is the former police colonel Nguyen Dang Quang’s judgment through an article entitled “The Ho Duy Hai case – unjust or substitute for someone?”
“In the first instance trial Hai was sentenced to death and the appeal hearing upheld the sentence, and in the both hearings, the procedural agencies made many mistakes, and these errors are very serious! Errors are not only of 1 but of all 3 agencies that are investigating (Police), Prosecuting (Controlling) and Judging (Court), especially at the stage of Investigation and Trial!
Everyone knows that in all criminal cases, especially murder cases, the most important evidence is the fingerprints of the perpetrators left on the scene and on the murder weapons. But in this case, the investigating agency did not find Ho Duy Hai’s fingerprints at the scene as well as on the murder weapons! Expertise conclusion No. 158 / KL-PC21 dated April 11, 2008, of the Office of Criminal Science Department of Long An Province recorded: “Fingerprint traces were collected at the crime scene on January 14, 2008, in Cau Voi Post Office did not detect a coincidence with just 10 fingers printed on Ho Duy Hai’s ones.”
The weapons that investigating authorities determined that Hai had used to kill 2 victims, the Special Project Department could not capture. The knife and the cutting board used as evidence of the case were bought by local official from the local market after the incident. The stainless steel chair was covered in blood because it was not known exactly which one it was so forced the Specialist Board had to take another similar one instead!
Of course, these three alternative weapons cannot have the fingerprints and bloodstains of Ho Duy Hai and the true culprit who I think is currently hidden,” Colonel Nguyen Dang Quang gave an analysis.
.
Based on the testimonies of field cleaners, Mr. Nguyen Van Thu, Vo Van Hung, Nguyen Van Vang and Nguyen Tuan Ngoc, on January 14, 2008, while participating in cleaning the scene they discovered a knife very new and clean, with no trace, and was stuck behind a hanging sign opposite the kitchen stairs, near where the two victims were killed. The incident was reported to the Commune and District Police but the police ignored. So the cleaners used that knife to scrape the blood off the tile floor and burned it away. The next day, the police returned to seek for the knife but could not find it, including its metal blade. Later when requested by the investigating agency, Mr. Nguyen Van Thu went to the market to buy another knife to replace.
The paper drew a knife with the words: “I confirmed I purchased this knife and handed over to the police.”
Similarly, the chopping board that is said to be the evidence used by Ho Duy Hai to smash the victim’s head was not seized during an examination of the scene. More than 5 months later, Le Thi Thu Hieu (friend of 2 victims) went to buy another wooden cutting board to submit to the investigating agency to make a simulation.
“However, the investigating agency of Long An Police Department still produced the” proper process “case file with full ‘exhibits’ and concluded that Ho Duy Hai was the only culprit and the Procuracy prosecuted. and then Long An provincial People’s Court sentenced to death!”
The sentencing of death of Duy Duy Hai is based only on the testimony of suspect Ho Duy Hai to the investigating agency! Seems like, in our country today, is it so easy and simple to take people’s lives ?!
Reportedly, right after the case happened, Long An Police investigating agency summoned about 20 suspects. After screening, the Special Project Team focused and “circled” the 4 suspects with the most suspicious signs. First and foremost, Nguyen Van Nghi was identified as the number one suspect. The next three suspects are 3 silversmiths (jewelers) who were temporarily staying in the locality. All 4 suspects knew 2 victims and were present at the scene in the evening of the case.
But later the investigating authorities released all of these suspects, including the four above suspects, including Nguyen Van Nghi.
Then, more than 2 months later, on March 21, 2008, the Specialized Committee summoned Ho Duy Hai to ask about football betting, but later arrested him and prosecuted Hai on charges of murdering 2 female employees at the Cau Voi Post Office!
Three weeks later, on April 11, 2008, the Office of Criminal Science Police of Long An Province confirmed that the fingerprints left on the scene were not those of Ho Duy Hai as mentioned above.
In this case of the Cau Voi Post Office, there is a very suspicious detail and needs to be clarified that after the release, the number one suspect Nguyen Van Nghi disappeared, and it is unclear where he is currently hiding.
Another suspicion is why all the information, documents, testimonies, records of the suspects – especially those of Nguyen Van Nghi – are removed from the Case File? Who did this and for what purpose? In Long An, there is a public opinion now that Nguyen Van Nghi is a nephew of a very important official in the state government apparatus and Nghi has a uncle working as a local senior official. So what is the true situation, it needs to be clarified to clear the doubts of the public opinion, including the public saying that Ho Duy Hai must die to rescue Nguyen Van Nghi,” Colonel Nguyen Dang Quang made a comment.
Investigation Agency also said that a witness saw a young man dressed like Ho Duy Hai and Nguyen Van Nghi. But because Nghi had an alibi, Hai was … that young man.
Since then, only based on Hai’s confession (while Hai made an unjust complaint, or conflicting testimony was not considered), the Investigation Agency concluded that Ho Duy Hai was the killer of two girls. .
However, Attorney Tran Hong Phong made a completely opposite assertion: that in the current case file, there were no details showing that Hai had an affair with Hong victims, and Hải did not send any emotional messages to Hong, the older victim.
Even according to the statement of Ms. Dang Thi Phuong Thao, a friend of two victims (Minutes of testimony on April 6, 2008): “Both Hong and Van do not have their own phones. At the post office, there is an old Nokia phone used to recharge the card for customers.” So why police had messages between Hai and Hong?
The biggest mistake of the investigating agency, in this case, is probably the wrong determination of the time the two victims were killed, subjectively, without science? Specifically, according to the indictment, the determination of the time of the crime (thought to be by Ho Duy Hai) is around 20:30, as follows: “Around 19:00 on of Jan 13, 2009, Hai took a motorbike to Cau Cau post office, come inside and talked to Ms. Hong.”
However, there are many details that can be identified and show that the time of the two victims was killed at least after 21.00, or about midnight, not at 20:30.
It was the misidentification of the time of the crime that served as the only basis for the investigating agency to make Nghi’s ability eligible and blame Ho Duy Hai, despite the fact that if the murder occurred at that time, Hai also could not be present at Cau Voi Post Office.
In Vietnam, the Judiciary, Legislature and Executive are all under the direction of the Communist Party, leading to monopoly and elimination of all arguments against lawyers and criminal sciences and the rule of law.
Through the case of sentencing the death of a Vietnamese citizen without sufficient evidence of crime, the authorities in Hanoi have deprived a man’s life, which shows that, more than ever this country needs a multi-party political system as well as separation of three most powerful branches.
Only in this way, people can be treated fairly, avoiding wrongful judgments which can lead to legal miscarriages of people.
Thoibao.de (Translated)
