Chen Fuxiang, who committed the case of double corpses in the Emei parking lot in Ximending, was sentenced to death from the first instance to the second instance. The case was remanded by the Supreme Court, and the High Court pronounced the verdict today. The collegial panel held that Chen Fuxiang killed one person and then killed him within 3 minutes 1 person, with brutal methods, is still sentenced to death. The whole case is appealable.
Chen Fuxiang appeared in court today to hear the sentence. When he was remanded in custody, he was asked by the media whether to file an appeal, but he did not answer. During the third trial of the High Court, Chen Fuxiang admitted his mistake and asked the judge to give him a chance to reform himself, but the mother of the deceased asked the judge to impose the death penalty.
The Taiwan High Court further pointed out in the news materials of the third trial that the collegial panel found that following killing the victim Cai Zongyu, Chen Fuxiang murdered the victim Cai Kaiyang in less than 3 minutes, and the method was extremely cruel. Although Chen Fuxiang is not absolutely impossible to educate, but Considering the circumstances of this case, it is really necessary to permanently isolate him from society, and there is no way to avoid the possibility of indoctrination.
The third trial pointed out that following considering all the advantages and disadvantages related to the death penalty one by one, following a comprehensive evaluation, it is believed that Chen Fuxiang should still be sentenced to death, and the whole case can be appealed.
The previous judgments pointed out that Chen Fuxiang met with men Cai Zongyu and Cai Kaiyang to deal drugs on January 13, 2014. He shot and killed Cai Zongyu and Cai Kaiyang successively in the Emei parking lot in Taipei City. In this case, Chen Fuxiang was sentenced to death in the first instance, second instance, first instance, and second instance. In December 2010, the Supreme Court held that the reason for the death penalty in the second instance was insufficient, so it revoked the judgment of the second instance and sent it back, and the case was heard by the Taiwan High Court in the third instance.
