Su Shi once said: "Reading thousands of books without reading the laws will lead to Jun Yao and Shun knowing no skills." The Paper·Private History has specially launched the "Removal of Injustices" series, which provides a glimpse of ancient society through real cases in the past dynasties.
In the Qing Dynasty, civil disputes such as household marriages, land, money and debts, and minor criminal proceedings were handled and adjudicated by state and county officials themselves, which was called "state and county self-care litigation". In contrast, cases involving human life, robbery, rape, etc. Serious criminal cases such as kidnapping should be punished with a sentence of imprisonment or above. Although such "serious life-stealing cases" are initially tried by state and county officials, they need to go through "level-by-level review" and are ultimately made by the provincial governors, the central Ministry of Punishment, and even the emperor himself.
Regarding the "serious cases of life theft" in the Qing Dynasty, the basic judicial concept can be summarized as "the relationship between love and law is equal." Mr. Hiroaki Terada once made the following conclusion: "The overall criminal justice system in China can be summarized as the emperor of the country faithfully punishing the evildoers on behalf of heaven, redressing the grievances of the victims, and keeping people away from crime. The implementation concept is 'the crime must be consistent, and the justice should be equal." ', in a nutshell, it is 'the balance of emotion and law'. The 'emotion' here refers to the criminal circumstances/degree of evil deeds of each crime, and both 'crime/law' are the punishments imposed. . The criminal circumstances/degree of evil deeds of each criminal act must accurately correspond to the severity of its punishment." ([Japanese] Hiroaki Terada: "Reexamination of the Role of Statutes in Criminal Trials in the Qing Dynasty - Regarding Positive Laws". "Irregular" form", written by Zai Shi: "Rights and Injustice: A Collection of Chinese Legal History by Hiroaki Terada", translated by Wang Yaxin and others, Tsinghua University Press, 2012 edition, p. 326) In other words, the fate pursued by the Qing court The ideal handling model of the case is: on the basis of ascertaining the truth of the case, officials must find appropriate penalties to deal with the criminals, and the criteria for finding penalties are mainly recorded in the "Qing Code" promulgated by the Qing court.
However, judicial practice has shown a phenomenon that deviates from the pursuit of the goal of "equal feelings and law" in the true sense. As Professor Xu Zhongming pointed out: "From the perspective of judicial practice, even in serious robbery cases, judicial officials in the Ming and Qing Dynasties did not blindly stick to legal provisions and make so-called 'judgments according to law'. In fact, for In such cases, they can (and will) make very flexible rulings based on comprehensive reasons." (Xu Zhongming: "Diagnosis of "Judgment According to Law" in Criminal Procedure in the Ming and Qing Dynasties", "Law and Business Research", Issue 4, 2005. Page 155) So, how did officials in the Qing Dynasty, especially state and county officials, handle life theft cases? What kind of deviation from existing concepts does the judicial process reflect? This article uses a case recorded in "Du Fengzhi's Diary" as a clue to analyze the deviation from judicial concepts during the trial of life theft cases in the late Qing Dynasty, and explores the institutional factors behind it based on relevant titles.
In the late Qing Dynasty, the government agency tried the murder case
with twists and turns, and the vicious twists and turns were punished
This day is September 20th of the seventh year of Tongzhi. In recent days, Du Fengzhi, the county magistrate, kept hearing the hooting of owls at night, even after dawn, and felt a faint ominous feeling in his heart. Sure enough, local security guards Xie Yashi and Geng Lian Chen Yayu came to report that a murder case was reported in Yao Shapu, seven miles away from the city. It is said that the body was discovered by a cowherd boy in the grassland at the bottom of the slope. After learning about it, the land guard went to check and saw that the deceased was carrying a small scale and there was a carrying pole next to him. He looked like a salesman doing small business. Thinking that it might be a case of seeking money and murder, I didn't dare to neglect it and immediately rushed to the Yamen to report the case. Du Fengzhi immediately ordered an inspection. (The materials in this article are all quoted from "Du Fengzhi's Diary" (Volume 2), annotated by Qiu Jie, 2021 edition of Guangdong People's Publishing House, and will not be quoted again below)
At a quarter past noon the next day, Du Fengzhi took people to Yao Shapu for an autopsy. . The autopsy showed that the deceased was a male, in his thirties, with a strong body. There was an obvious stab wound on his throat, his face was covered in blood, and there were also wounds on his lips and teeth, and on his left wrist. It was confirmed that he had been hacked to death. After on-site investigation, it was found that the deceased was wearing cloth clothes and had a shoulder bag, a cloth bag, a bag, an abacus, a rain hat and other items. There were the words "Jiang Zhai Han Ji" behind the abacus, and there was a small knife and scabbard in the deceased's arms, but no knife. ; In addition, there were blood stains extending from the embankment to the bottom.Du Fengzhi initially judged that the man, whose surname was probably Jiang, set out from Shigouxu and arrived here in the middle of the night. He was robbed and killed by gangsters because he had silver coins on him, and there may be more than one assailant. Du Fengzhi immediately summoned the local gentry, but because the locals lived far away from the crime scene, no one was heard shouting that night. Therefore, Du Fengzhi ordered the body to be collected and buried shallowly, waiting for the family of the deceased to come to claim it, and appointed Wu Yuan, Chen Guang, Xie Taiban and other officers to continue investigating the case.
Book cover of "Du Fengzhi's Diary"
On the 28th, Wu Yuan and other police officers came to report that they had captured a murderer named Jiang Yahua, and captured him at Hesheng Store on Dongmen Heng Street. Du Fengzhi was overjoyed and hurriedly asked for details of the case. It turned out that the deceased's name was Jiang Kunhan, and he and Jiang Yahua were first cousins, and they both lived near Didou Market. The two went out to do business together. Jiang Yahua sold the piglet and got one or two taels of silver, while Jiang Kunhan was going to Dashatang to do fish business. On the way, Jiang Yahua lost the money from selling the pigs in a bet, so he went to Hongsheng Temple to borrow money from Bing Yong Jiang Yatuo, but he failed. Jiang Yatuo asked Jiang Yahua who he was going out with. Jiang Yahua told him that he was coming with Jiang Kunhan, so Jiang Yatuo and Jiang Yahua discussed following Jiang Kunhan to rob and kill people near Yao Shapu. According to Jiang Yahua's confession, he and Jiang Yatuo followed Jiang Kunhan to the river. He left behind due to internal urgency and therefore fell behind. Only Jiang Yatuo followed Jiang Kunhan across the river. When Jiang Yahua caught up, he saw only Jiang Yatuo and asked if he succeeded. Jiang Yatuo said that he had succeeded, and after giving Jiang Yahua eight coins, they went to Jiang Kunhan's house together, lying that Jiang Kunhan was seriously ill outside. His father, Jiang Longming, was kept in the dark. He did not know that his son had been hacked to death until his body was discovered, so he reported Jiang Yahua and Jiang Yatuo's visit to the house, and then Jiang Yahua was captured. Du Fengzhi immediately ordered Jiang Yahua to be handcuffed and under strict guard, and sent someone to inform Mr. Jiang that his soldier Jiang Yatuo was an important criminal suspect, and then escorted Jiang Yatuo to the Yamen.
In the afternoon, Du Fengzhi personally went to court to interrogate the two criminals Jiang Yahua and Jiang Yatuo. Jiang Yahua's confession was consistent with what he told the police officer at the time, but Jiang Yatuo did not admit it and insisted that he did not commit robbery or murder. At this time, Jiang Longming, the father of the deceased, cried in front of Du Fengzhi, pointing out that Jiang Yatuo had always been uneasy about his duties, gambling and doing evil, and begged the elder to avenge his son's grievances. Du Fengzhi tortured Jiang Yahua and Jiang Yatuo, but Jiang Yatuo still refused to confess, so he had to take them into custody first.
The case changed the next day. Mr. Jiang personally rushed to the Yamen to testify for Jiang Yatuo, claiming that he did not go out on the night of the 19th and did not get up very late on the 20th. The lives of ten soldiers who lived with him could vouch for this. . At the same time, Mr. Jiang pointed out that Hesheng Store could prove that at the fifth watch of the day, Jiang Yahua called Jiang Kunhan early and went out together after dinner, without anyone else. The boatman at Nanmen Ferry can also testify that there were only two people on the boat, and one person came back after a while, and he looked very much like Jiang Yahua. According to the above statement, this case was committed by Jiang Yahua alone and had nothing to do with Jiang Yatuo. In order to verify the testimony of relevant witnesses, Du Fengzhi ordered the owner of Hesheng Store and the Nanmen boatman to come to the Yamen for questioning. He also specifically instructed the Yamen servants not to threaten or extort when summoned, and to release the witnesses immediately after the questioning.
On the first day of October, Du Fengzhi tried the case again. This time, Du Fengzhi only tortured Jiang Yahua. Although his confession was different from that last time, he still insisted that Jiang Yatuo did it. Du Fengzhi simply asked the two to confront each other. Jiang Yatuo claimed that he was wronged, claiming that he was wronged because of the testimony of brave soldiers. Jiang Yahua also swore to God that what he said was true. There were many brave soldiers, so why did he only falsely accuse Jiang Yatuo? one person? Du Fengzhi carefully observed the confrontation between the two and believed that Jiang Yatuo might not be able to escape the relationship and that there were some untruths in his confession. In order to further understand the facts of the case, Du Fengzhi ordered the arresting officer to imprison the two together and sent someone to monitor their conversations in prison. Then, Du Fengzhi asked the owner of Hesheng Store and the boatman of Nanmen. The shop owner testified that Jiang Yahua and Jiang Kunhan entered the shop when it was time to turn on the lights and went to bed after eating. At the fifth watch, Jiang Yahua got up first to cook, and then asked Jiang Kunhan to get up and eat.
Su Shi once said: "Reading thousands of books without reading the laws will lead to Jun Yao and Shun knowing no skills." The Paper·Private History has specially launched the "Removal of Injustices" series, which provides a glimpse of ancient society through real cases in the past dynasties.
In the Qing Dynasty, civil disputes such as household marriages, land, money and debts, and minor criminal proceedings were handled and adjudicated by state and county officials themselves, which was called "state and county self-care litigation". In contrast, cases involving human life, robbery, rape, etc. Serious criminal cases such as kidnapping should be punished with a sentence of imprisonment or above. Although such "serious life-stealing cases" are initially tried by state and county officials, they need to go through "level-by-level review" and are ultimately made by the provincial governors, the central Ministry of Punishment, and even the emperor himself.
Regarding the "serious cases of life theft" in the Qing Dynasty, the basic judicial concept can be summarized as "the relationship between love and law is equal." Mr. Hiroaki Terada once made the following conclusion: "The overall criminal justice system in China can be summarized as the emperor of the country faithfully punishing the evildoers on behalf of heaven, redressing the grievances of the victims, and keeping people away from crime. The implementation concept is 'the crime must be consistent, and the justice should be equal." ', in a nutshell, it is 'the balance of emotion and law'. The 'emotion' here refers to the criminal circumstances/degree of evil deeds of each crime, and both 'crime/law' are the punishments imposed. . The criminal circumstances/degree of evil deeds of each criminal act must accurately correspond to the severity of its punishment." ([Japanese] Hiroaki Terada: "Reexamination of the Role of Statutes in Criminal Trials in the Qing Dynasty - Regarding Positive Laws". "Irregular" form", written by Zai Shi: "Rights and Injustice: A Collection of Chinese Legal History by Hiroaki Terada", translated by Wang Yaxin and others, Tsinghua University Press, 2012 edition, p. 326) In other words, the fate pursued by the Qing court The ideal handling model of the case is: on the basis of ascertaining the truth of the case, officials must find appropriate penalties to deal with the criminals, and the criteria for finding penalties are mainly recorded in the "Qing Code" promulgated by the Qing court.
However, judicial practice has shown a phenomenon that deviates from the pursuit of the goal of "equal feelings and law" in the true sense. As Professor Xu Zhongming pointed out: "From the perspective of judicial practice, even in serious robbery cases, judicial officials in the Ming and Qing Dynasties did not blindly stick to legal provisions and make so-called 'judgments according to law'. In fact, for In such cases, they can (and will) make very flexible rulings based on comprehensive reasons." (Xu Zhongming: "Diagnosis of "Judgment According to Law" in Criminal Procedure in the Ming and Qing Dynasties", "Law and Business Research", Issue 4, 2005. Page 155) So, how did officials in the Qing Dynasty, especially state and county officials, handle life theft cases? What kind of deviation from existing concepts does the judicial process reflect? This article uses a case recorded in "Du Fengzhi's Diary" as a clue to analyze the deviation from judicial concepts during the trial of life theft cases in the late Qing Dynasty, and explores the institutional factors behind it based on relevant titles.
In the late Qing Dynasty, the government agency tried the murder case
with twists and turns, and the vicious twists and turns were punished
This day is September 20th of the seventh year of Tongzhi. In recent days, Du Fengzhi, the county magistrate, kept hearing the hooting of owls at night, even after dawn, and felt a faint ominous feeling in his heart. Sure enough, local security guards Xie Yashi and Geng Lian Chen Yayu came to report that a murder case was reported in Yao Shapu, seven miles away from the city. It is said that the body was discovered by a cowherd boy in the grassland at the bottom of the slope. After learning about it, the land guard went to check and saw that the deceased was carrying a small scale and there was a carrying pole next to him. He looked like a salesman doing small business. Thinking that it might be a case of seeking money and murder, I didn't dare to neglect it and immediately rushed to the Yamen to report the case. Du Fengzhi immediately ordered an inspection. (The materials in this article are all quoted from "Du Fengzhi's Diary" (Volume 2), annotated by Qiu Jie, 2021 edition of Guangdong People's Publishing House, and will not be quoted again below)
At a quarter past noon the next day, Du Fengzhi took people to Yao Shapu for an autopsy. . The autopsy showed that the deceased was a male, in his thirties, with a strong body. There was an obvious stab wound on his throat, his face was covered in blood, and there were also wounds on his lips and teeth, and on his left wrist. It was confirmed that he had been hacked to death. After on-site investigation, it was found that the deceased was wearing cloth clothes and had a shoulder bag, a cloth bag, a bag, an abacus, a rain hat and other items. There were the words "Jiang Zhai Han Ji" behind the abacus, and there was a small knife and scabbard in the deceased's arms, but no knife. ; In addition, there were blood stains extending from the embankment to the bottom.Du Fengzhi initially judged that the man, whose surname was probably Jiang, set out from Shigouxu and arrived here in the middle of the night. He was robbed and killed by gangsters because he had silver coins on him, and there may be more than one assailant. Du Fengzhi immediately summoned the local gentry, but because the locals lived far away from the crime scene, no one was heard shouting that night. Therefore, Du Fengzhi ordered the body to be collected and buried shallowly, waiting for the family of the deceased to come to claim it, and appointed Wu Yuan, Chen Guang, Xie Taiban and other officers to continue investigating the case.
Book cover of "Du Fengzhi's Diary"
On the 28th, Wu Yuan and other police officers came to report that they had captured a murderer named Jiang Yahua, and captured him at Hesheng Store on Dongmen Heng Street. Du Fengzhi was overjoyed and hurriedly asked for details of the case. It turned out that the deceased's name was Jiang Kunhan, and he and Jiang Yahua were first cousins, and they both lived near Didou Market. The two went out to do business together. Jiang Yahua sold the piglet and got one or two taels of silver, while Jiang Kunhan was going to Dashatang to do fish business. On the way, Jiang Yahua lost the money from selling the pigs in a bet, so he went to Hongsheng Temple to borrow money from Bing Yong Jiang Yatuo, but he failed. Jiang Yatuo asked Jiang Yahua who he was going out with. Jiang Yahua told him that he was coming with Jiang Kunhan, so Jiang Yatuo and Jiang Yahua discussed following Jiang Kunhan to rob and kill people near Yao Shapu. According to Jiang Yahua's confession, he and Jiang Yatuo followed Jiang Kunhan to the river. He left behind due to internal urgency and therefore fell behind. Only Jiang Yatuo followed Jiang Kunhan across the river. When Jiang Yahua caught up, he saw only Jiang Yatuo and asked if he succeeded. Jiang Yatuo said that he had succeeded, and after giving Jiang Yahua eight coins, they went to Jiang Kunhan's house together, lying that Jiang Kunhan was seriously ill outside. His father, Jiang Longming, was kept in the dark. He did not know that his son had been hacked to death until his body was discovered, so he reported Jiang Yahua and Jiang Yatuo's visit to the house, and then Jiang Yahua was captured. Du Fengzhi immediately ordered Jiang Yahua to be handcuffed and under strict guard, and sent someone to inform Mr. Jiang that his soldier Jiang Yatuo was an important criminal suspect, and then escorted Jiang Yatuo to the Yamen.
In the afternoon, Du Fengzhi personally went to court to interrogate the two criminals Jiang Yahua and Jiang Yatuo. Jiang Yahua's confession was consistent with what he told the police officer at the time, but Jiang Yatuo did not admit it and insisted that he did not commit robbery or murder. At this time, Jiang Longming, the father of the deceased, cried in front of Du Fengzhi, pointing out that Jiang Yatuo had always been uneasy about his duties, gambling and doing evil, and begged the elder to avenge his son's grievances. Du Fengzhi tortured Jiang Yahua and Jiang Yatuo, but Jiang Yatuo still refused to confess, so he had to take them into custody first.
The case changed the next day. Mr. Jiang personally rushed to the Yamen to testify for Jiang Yatuo, claiming that he did not go out on the night of the 19th and did not get up very late on the 20th. The lives of ten soldiers who lived with him could vouch for this. . At the same time, Mr. Jiang pointed out that Hesheng Store could prove that at the fifth watch of the day, Jiang Yahua called Jiang Kunhan early and went out together after dinner, without anyone else. The boatman at Nanmen Ferry can also testify that there were only two people on the boat, and one person came back after a while, and he looked very much like Jiang Yahua. According to the above statement, this case was committed by Jiang Yahua alone and had nothing to do with Jiang Yatuo. In order to verify the testimony of relevant witnesses, Du Fengzhi ordered the owner of Hesheng Store and the Nanmen boatman to come to the Yamen for questioning. He also specifically instructed the Yamen servants not to threaten or extort when summoned, and to release the witnesses immediately after the questioning.
On the first day of October, Du Fengzhi tried the case again. This time, Du Fengzhi only tortured Jiang Yahua. Although his confession was different from that last time, he still insisted that Jiang Yatuo did it. Du Fengzhi simply asked the two to confront each other. Jiang Yatuo claimed that he was wronged, claiming that he was wronged because of the testimony of brave soldiers. Jiang Yahua also swore to God that what he said was true. There were many brave soldiers, so why did he only falsely accuse Jiang Yatuo? one person? Du Fengzhi carefully observed the confrontation between the two and believed that Jiang Yatuo might not be able to escape the relationship and that there were some untruths in his confession. In order to further understand the facts of the case, Du Fengzhi ordered the arresting officer to imprison the two together and sent someone to monitor their conversations in prison. Then, Du Fengzhi asked the owner of Hesheng Store and the boatman of Nanmen. The shop owner testified that Jiang Yahua and Jiang Kunhan entered the shop when it was time to turn on the lights and went to bed after eating. At the fifth watch, Jiang Yahua got up first to cook, and then asked Jiang Kunhan to get up and eat.When the shop owner saw that he was about to go out after eating, he asked him where he was going. The two said they were going to Dasha Market to buy dried fish and shrimp, so they left early. The boatman was so focused on ferrying across the river that he failed to identify who was on the boat that day.
On the third day of October, Du Fengzhi interrogated Jiang Yahua again. During this interrogation, Jiang Yahua changed his confession and admitted that he was responsible for the murder and robbery. According to Jiang Yahua's confession, on the evening of September 19, he and Jiang Kunhan went to the city to rest in a store. Around five o'clock, he got up to cook and urged Jiang Kunhan to get up to eat and go out as soon as possible. After crossing the river, he struck a vicious blow in a deserted place. He first slashed Jiang Kunhan on the head with the knife he carried. When Jiang Kunhan turned around to resist, he slashed his face, neck and left hand again, killing Jiang Kunhan. He was hacked to death. After Jiang Yahua committed the murder, he found two to five coins on Jiang Kunhan's body, pushed his body down the embankment, and then crossed the river by boat back to the city. At this time, he discovered that he had left the scabbard beside the body in panic, so he discarded the murderous knife in the water at the south gate. It was not until the 22nd that news of Jiang Kunhan's death came out. Jiang Yahua returned home and informed his father Jiang Longming that Jiang Kunhan had been hacked to death. Jiang Longming learned that his son had been killed and was eager to find the murderer, so he and Jiang Yahua went to the fortune teller to open the words in order to catch the real murderer. Coincidentally, the fortune teller happened to be staying at Hesheng Store that day, so he recognized Jiang Yahua and Jiang Kunhan who were out together on the spot, and was captured by the official. At that time, the police officer determined that the case was not committed by one person, so he warned Jiang Yahua that if you have an accomplice and confess as soon as possible, this can also reduce the crime. Jiang Yahua heard that Jiang Yatuo was the main culprit, but in fact Jiang Yatuo had nothing to do with the case. So Du Fengzhi released Jiang Yatuo in court, asked Wu Ying to take him there, and rewarded him with four hundred coins for recuperation. Jiang Yahua continues to be under custody.
After retiring from the church, Du Fengzhi discussed with his master and believed that Jiang Yahua was seeking money and killing his fellow brothers. He was "worse than a jackal and a deer" and was really extremely vicious. He also falsely accused others with the intention of getting away with it. It was outrageous. However, if the case was reported step by step in accordance with regulations, it would take a lot of time to finally finalize the case and execute him. Instead, the criminal would be lucky to live longer. Even if he was eventually sentenced to death and executed, Jiang Yahua felt that it was an advantage. Therefore, Du Fengzhi planned to discuss with the deceased's father, Jiang Longming, not to report the case, but to impose the punishment of standing in a cage on the prisoner, "to slow down his death, add more torture, and suffer more, so that he can be satisfied."
But before Du Fengzhi contacted Jiang Longming, Jiang Longming first submitted a petition to the Yamen, expressing doubts about Jiang Yahua's change of confession, and whether Jiang Yatuo was being shielded because he was a brave soldier in the military camp, so he asked Du Fengzhi to interrogate him again. Du Fengzhi promised to interrogate Jiang Yahua again tomorrow and allow Jiang Longming to confront him. At the same time, Du Fengzhi sent someone to tell Jiang Longming his preliminary opinions on how to deal with the prisoner: "If Yahua is dealt with in detail, he will have to raise the government and the provincial government, and he will be sent back again. After many twists and turns, he will be included in the autumn trial, and he will not be executed until the winter solstice next year." , if one blessing is not resolved, and one year of life is added to the case, ten deaths are not enough to protect the guilty, and it will be advantageous to delay it. It is better to deal with it strictly on the spot, or to set up cages or live nails, so as to suffer more. Suffering is enough to cheer people up and comfort the dead." Jiang Longming agreed.
However, Jiang Yahua suddenly recanted his confession during the interrogation on October 17, causing another setback in the case. Jiang Yahua claimed at this time that he and Jiang Yatuo had negotiated the death of Jiang Kunhan, and it was Jiang Yatuo who actually did it. Du Fengzhi asked why he admitted in the previous interrogation that he committed the crime alone. Jiang Yahua said that when Jiang Yatuo was in prison, he promised to give ten taels of silver to his family so that he could bear the responsibility of the crime alone, but Jiang Yatuo did not fulfill it after he was released from prison. So he retracted his confession. Du Fengzhi was furious when he heard this. He severely punished Jiang Yahua and still imprisoned him. Due to various suspicious circumstances in the case, Du Fengzhi did not dare to conclude the case hastily, so he ordered Jiang Yatuo to be brought back for detailed investigation.
On October 20, Du Fengzhi interrogated Jiang Yahua and Jiang Yatuo again and asked them to confront each other in court. Jiang Yahua insisted that Jiang Yatuo was his accomplice and that Jiang Kunhan was killed by Jiang Yatuo, but Jiang Yatuo firmly denied it. Du Fengzhi asked Jiang Yahua whether he took a large boat or a small boat to cross the river that day, and how many people were riding with him. Jiang Yahua confessed that he, Jiang Yatuo and Jiang Kunhan crossed the river in a small boat.In view of the impasse in the trial of the case, Du Fengzhi ordered the two men to be imprisoned. Immediately, Du Fengzhi sent someone to call the ferryman Chen Shanji to the Yamen, and then asked about the situation of crossing the river that day. The boatman was hesitant at first and his words were vague, but Du Fengzhi comforted him and asked him to tell the truth and he would not be implicated for testifying. If he concealed anything, wouldn't it be an injustice to the deceased. The boatman was still hesitant at first. After repeated questioning by Du Fengzhi, he confessed that there were only two people on the ferry that day, and they took a small boat to cross the south bank. However, there were many people on the boat when they came back, and they did not know whether those two people came back.
In order to verify the authenticity of the confession, Du Fengzhi led his masters and officers to bring Jiang Yahua, Jiang Yatuo, Jiang Longming, boatman Chen Shanji and others to the City God Temple and asked them to kneel before the City God God to confess. The boatman said that he did not dare to deceive the gods. It was indeed two people crossing the river in a small boat that day. Because it was still dark, they could not see their faces clearly, and the two did not speak on the boat. However, Jiang Yahua still confessed that it was only three people who crossed the river. Even though Du Fengzhi ordered him to hang on a bench and kneel before God to endure the interrogation, he did not change his confession. Du Fengzhi had no choice but to temporarily stop the torture and take Jiang Yahua and Jiang Yatuo into custody separately.
At this time, the truth of the case is unclear, and pressure from the outside is also coming. On the one hand, Mr. Jiang from Wuying actively traveled back and forth for his soldiers and inquired in many ways in order to exonerate Jiang Yatuo, so that many people felt that there was no money here, which aroused suspicion; on the other hand, Jiang Longming determined that Jiang Yatuo was an accomplice in killing his son, and there may have been instigators behind the scenes in order to profit from it. In order to find out the facts of the case as soon as possible, Du Fengzhi continued to interrogate Jiang Yahua and Jiang Yatuo the next day.
Since each of Jiang Yahua's confessions was different, inconsistent, and full of doubts, Du Fengzhi decided to interrogate Jiang Yahua alone. At first, Jiang Yahua still claimed that Jiang Yatuo was his accomplice, and that Jiang Kunhan was killed by Jiang Yatuo alone. When asked about the murder weapon, Jiang Yahua confessed that Jiang Yatuo had a knife but he did not have one.
Du Fengzhi asked back: "Then why did the previous interrogation confession include the plot of throwing the knife into the Nanmen River?"
Jiang Yahua hesitated for a moment, then changed his words: "Yato has Yatuo's knife, and the small one has the small one." "
Du Fengzhi ordered someone to take the scabbard and asked: "Is this your scabbard?"
Jiang Yahua admitted that it was his scabbard.
Du Fengzhi asked again: "Since you have the knife, where is it now?"
Jiang Yahua said that the knife had been thrown into the water.
Du Fengzhi took advantage of the situation and asked: "Why should you throw away such a good knife into the water? There must be blood on the knife for fear that others will see it and discard it and destroy the traces."
Jiang Yahua was at a loss and could only nod in recognition.
Du Fengzhi then said: "Since there is blood, Jiang Kunhan must have been killed by you alone."
Jiang Yahua was stunned for a moment, and then argued: "Xiao Yuan's theory is not without merit. Xiao slashed twice, and Yatuo slashed Two cuts were made."
Du Fengzhi asked where he had cut them.
Jiang Yahua offered: "One knife in the hand, one knife in the neck."
At this time, Du Fengzhi suddenly shouted angrily: "Yahua, you don't need to say anything, you killed Kunhan alone. You recognize the scabbard, and so does the knife." It's yours, you said Yatuo had the knife, and you have already confessed that he made two cuts, so there is no doubt that you were the one who made the four cuts." Then he ordered the execution.
Perhaps this situation was frightening. Before the execution was carried out, Jiang Yahua repeatedly begged for mercy and expressed his willingness to confess truthfully. According to Jiang Yahua's confession, Jiang Yahua lost all the money from selling piglets because of gambling with others. Suddenly he remembered that Jiang Kunhan owed him some money, so he asked for it, which led to a fight. Jiang Yahua took out a knife and struck Jiang Kunhan on his head, neck, and hands. The last knife struck him on the neck, causing his death. Afterwards, Jiang Yahua found the silver on Jiang Kunhan's body and fled back to the county in a hurry, leaving the scabbard beside the body. Because the knife was stained with blood, he threw the knife into the Nanmen River. As for falsely accusing Jiang Yatuo, he was trying to get away with it and had nothing to do with Jiang Yatuo. Du Fengzhi repeatedly confirmed the confession, and finally found it to be correct, and ordered him to draw a confession and take a palm print.
Later, Du Fengzhi called Jiang Longming to court and informed him that Jiang Yahua had confessed to being the murderer of Jiang Kunhan and had nothing to do with Jiang Yatuo, and asked Jiang Longming to inquire in person.After Jiang Longming confirmed Jiang Yahua's confession, Du Fengzhi called him to the custody room and said the following to him: "This case has been going on for a long time, and it is difficult to get into details. Now that Yahua has admitted it, I will handle it strictly for you on the spot." It will be put into the autumn trial, and it is uncertain whether he will die or not. Even if the situation is not lenient, Yi Jiu will live for a year; if he is not hooked, it is even more difficult to say. It will be an advantage for Yi, and he hates it so much that he wants to make him suffer all the time. He died slowly. You brought the body in a knot, and stated that Yahua's confession was conclusive, and that he had been hacked to death by one person, and that he would be punished immediately. Your injustice will be redressed, and you will be at peace." Obviously, Du Fengzhi still chose to fight with him. Jiang Longming, the father of the deceased, discussed how to deal with the prisoner. The plan he proposed was to severely punish the prisoner on the spot and make him die in pain, instead of reporting the crime to each level and waiting for the autumn trial in accordance with the regulations.
Jiang Longming did not respond directly to how the prisoner should be dealt with. He just said: "The people have no one to support them after their son dies. Even if they collect the body, they have no money. I ask the great master to make a decision and open a way for the people." Du Fengzhi heard. He couldn't help but laugh. These words just proved that Jiang Longming had always been obsessed with whether Jiang Yatuo was an accomplice, and his purpose was to take advantage of the opportunity to ask for money. Du Fengzhi asked Jiang Longming to complete the case first and take the body away, and they would discuss the money requested at that time.
On October 22nd, Du Fengzhi came to discuss with his master. He believed that although Jiang Yahua was a murderer and a robber, his family property should not be confiscated. Moreover, his family was poor, and all his property was valued at only two taels of silver. He also had a wife and daughter at home. Need to live. Therefore, Du Fengzhi discussed with General Jiang of Wuying and asked him to provide twenty taels of silver as Jiang Longming's pension money.
On October 23, Du Fengzhi interrogated Jiang Yahua for the last time, confirmed that his confession was correct, and summoned Jiang Longming to confront him. Jiang Longming still wanted to ask for money from Jiang Yatuo, so he blindly persuaded Jiang Yahua to involve Jiang Yatuo, claiming that his son must not have been killed by one person, and begged the elder to redress his injustice. Du Fengzhi was worried that if the case was not reported as required, Jiang Longming would be prosecuted in the future and he could not afford to be punished, so he planned to report the case in detail. Unexpectedly, the next day, when Wuying handed over the twenty taels of silver to the Yamen, Jiang Longming immediately expressed his willingness to complete the case and implement the plan proposed by Du Fengzhi. Immediately, Jiang Longming took the body of his son Jiang Kunhan to be buried, and specifically requested that the prisoner be punished on the spot rather than report the case in detail.
On October 26, Du Fengzhi was promoted to the lobby, and Jiang Yahua was escorted in. He was beaten with a cane 200 times and a small board 200 times. After that, he was thrown into a standing cage and placed at the north gate for public display. Du Fengzhi also gave Jiang Longming twenty taels of silver as a compensation as promised. The so-called standing cage is to fix the prisoner's body in a wooden cage. Only the head passes through the round hole on the top of the cage, covers the neck, and is exposed outside the cage. The prisoner's feet need to step on the stacked wooden boards or bricks. Once standing, If it is unstable or the bottom plate is removed, the prisoner will suffocate to death. Sure enough, the next day Jiang Yahua's hands and feet were swollen in the standing cage and he was gasping for breath. At the fourth watch on the third day, the local security guard came to report that Jiang Yahua was dead.
Deviation from the judicial concept of "equality between love and law"
In order to avoid transfer of cases and avoid the review of superior officials, state and county officials often try to eliminate the cases at the grassroots level during the trial of serious life theft cases, that is, at the grassroots level. When the parties and their families apply for exemption from examination or dismissal of the case, they no longer investigate the facts of the case in detail, or even if they know the truth of the case, they do not strictly follow the laws and regulations, but work hard to persuade the parties and their families to seek a judgment that everyone can accept. result. As Professor Deng Jianpeng pointed out: “Some state and county officials have concealed certain important circumstances in judicial trials and even closed serious life-stealing cases that should have been included in the trial transfer review system directly locally, bypassing the authority of superior officials. Supervision.” (Deng Jianpeng: “Departures from the System in the Judicial Practice of Prefectures and Counties in the Qing Dynasty”, “Qing History Research” Issue 2, 2022, p. 5) This will inevitably lead to a deviation from the judicial concept of “equality between love and law”. For example, in Du Fengzhi's treatment of the murderer in this case, after ascertaining the facts of the case, he did not report the case step by step in accordance with the transfer procedure, nor did he enter the prisoner into the autumn trial procedure in accordance with the regulations, nor did he impose the statutory death penalty on the prisoner , but after seeking the consent of the deceased's family, Jiang Yahua was executed by standing in a cage to close the case.
The more typical situation of non-compliance with the law is often seen in cases of suspected false accusations. For those who make false accusations, the punishments in the "Regulations of the Qing Dynasty" are very severe: "Anyone who falsely accuses someone and is beaten will be punished by the second level of the false accusation. For the crime of exile, disciple, and cane, the third level of the false accusation will be added. Each crime will be punished with a cane. "Hundred, three thousand miles." At the same time, it also stipulates: "If you accuse two or more things, accuse the truth of the minor matter, and accuse the false accusation of the serious matter; or if you accuse one matter of false accusation, the rest will be settled." If the crime is not resolved, the punishment will be punished by flogging or cane; if the punishment is punished by a hundred sticks, the remaining crimes will be punished." However, in practice, state and county officials mostly did not deal with false accusations, and at most they reprimanded and warned them. Or fines, canings and other minor penalties may be imposed, but the responsibility for false accusations is rarely strictly followed. For example, in a case heard by Du Fengzhi on December 9, the seventh year of Tongzhi, Luo Yilin accused Luo Wenlai of raping his wife Wang, but Luo Wen did not admit it, and the two sides argued. Du Fengzhi believed that Luo Wenlai might have coveted Wang's beauty and might have touched or teased her with words, but there was no concrete evidence of rape, so he ordered that Luo Wenlai be temporarily handed over to the custody of the arresting office and entrusted local gentry Luo Yuanhua and others to investigate. specific situation. A few days later, the arresting office reported to Du Fengzhi that after interrogating Luo Wenlai, it was found that he had become lustful because of Wang's young lady's beauty. Although he did not commit rape, he molested her twice. After Du Fengzhi learned about it, he did not pursue Luo Yilin's false accusation of rape. Instead, he ordered Luo Wenlai to be fined a thousand taels of silver and confiscated, and then released. Similarly, in another case, Zhong Xiyuan was accused of abducting Zhong Fangxing's granddaughter-in-law Huang, and taking her to Chen Qiyou's home for gang rape. However, after interrogation, Du Fengzhi discovered that the relevant circumstances of abduction, gang rape, etc. were indeed false accusations. Chen Qiyou only took in the lost Huang family and received six yuan of foreign silver as a thank you gift from the Zhong family. He did not do any other wrongdoing. In the end, Du Fengzhi ordered Chen Qiyou to return his capital and fined him 40 yuan in foreign silver and confiscated it on the grounds that he had admitted an ignorant woman without permission. As for Zhong Xiyuan, although there was no evidence to prove that he had committed rape and abduction, Du Fengzhi believed that the reason why he was accused was not groundless. He was afraid that he had misbehaved on weekdays, so he was beaten with forty boards and released. However, Du Fengzhi did not impose any punishment on the false accusers, and the two organizations closed the case.
From "the situation is equal to the law" to "avoiding responsibility": a helpless move under the principle of result attribution
From the results of the above-mentioned life theft case, it can be seen that state and county officials are not obsessed with seeking the truth of the case, and then strictly follow what has been Make judgments based on laws and regulations that set the standard of "equity between love and law". Some scholars have elaborated on the reasons for the deviation between system settings and judicial practice, pointing out that this deviation is related to factors such as the administrative responsibilities of state and county officials, the limited judicial resources, and the supervisory pressure of superior officials. (See Deng Jianpeng: "Departure of the Judicial Practice of Prefectures and Counties from the System in the Qing Dynasty", "Qing History Research" Issue 2, 2022, pp. 1-13) In fact, the goals demonstrated in judicial practice have deviated, whether it is Do officials let the case be closed at the grassroots level, thereby preventing the case from entering the trial transfer process and being known to superior officials? Or do officials use active means to embellish the circumstances of the case, achieve the effect of empathizing with the law, and create the effect of "equality between emotion and law". In the end, The purpose is to avoid falling into the dilemma of being held accountable.
The liability investigation system for wrongful convictions in the Qing Dynasty embodies the basic model that is oriented to the results of wrongful convictions, which is expressed as the "results accountability principle". Specifically, from the perspective of the construction of legal norms in the Qing Dynasty, although there are some exemptions or reduced penalties, they generally show a trend of accountability for wrong cases, that is, as long as the cases accepted or transferred by officials are objectively If there is an error, you need to bear corresponding responsibility. Under the influence of this principle, the accountability for wrongful cases has become overly stringent. Although the trial officials strive to make judgments that balance the circumstances and the law, it is sometimes difficult to escape from greater liability risks. Therefore, local officials at all levels have tried to take measures to confront and circumvent the accountability system for wrongful convictions to a certain extent.
The legal norms of liability for wrongful convictions in the Qing Dynasty presented a results-oriented accountability model. The relevant legal texts in the "Laws of the Qing Dynasty" clearly reflect the characteristics of responsibility for results.For example, the "Crimes of Entering and Entering Persons in Litigation" stipulates that for those who intentionally enter or exit persons, their liability will be determined based on the degree to which they convict or convict the criminal. That is, if the innocent person is found guilty or guilty, If the person is found not guilty, the relevant person shall be sentenced to the same penalty as the wrongly convicted penalty; if the penalty is only increased or reduced, the penalty shall be offset according to the degree of increase or decrease. Officials who negligently cause miscarriages of justice will also be dealt with according to the above principles, but the penalty will be reduced for those who intentionally cause wrongful convictions. The "Legal Order for Judgment of Crimes" stipulates that the emperor's special decree for temporary convictions cannot be used as a law. If officials make mixed comparisons, resulting in discrepancies in crimes, they must be convicted and sentenced according to the punishment standard of "criminal offenses in lawsuits" . It is also based on the result of wrongful conviction as the criterion for accountability. The liability provisions for wrongful convictions in the "Regulations on the Punishment of Officials" also reflect the result-oriented tendency of accountability. It also distinguishes between intentionality and negligence. However, no matter what the circumstances, as long as there is a discrepancy in the crime, the regulations will It will be included in the consideration of liability for wrongful convictions, and the intensity of the punishment will be determined based on the seriousness of the error. Although there are some provisions concerning the specific behaviors of officials in judicial activities, such as altering confessions, hastily drafting, etc., the Qing court did not use the behavior itself as the standard for accountability, but used it as the basis for judging the subjective aspects of officials, that is, through These behaviors infer that the officials were intentional and thus increase the punishment. Therefore, the focus of these provisions is still on the specific consequences such as "inconsistency" and "criminal conviction" caused by the alteration of confessions and hasty drafting. (See Volume 123 of "Instances of the Qing Dynasty Huidian, Ministry of Personnel, Disciplinary Examples" (Guangxu Dynasty), "Officials' Improper Prison Sentences", revised edition in the 25th year of Guangxu's reign)
It can be seen from the regulations of the Qing court , Under normal circumstances, as long as there is a deviation between the proposed crime result and the final judgment result, it constitutes a wrongful conviction, and the accountability system will be launched immediately. Subjective factors related to intentionality or negligence are only considerations for the degree of punishment after the wrongful case accountability begins. Even the provisions involving official behavior are only intended to examine the degree of subjective fault in order to increase or decrease corresponding sanctions. From this point of view, the liability system for wrongful convictions in the Qing Dynasty reflected the principle of result attribution at the normative level. This result-oriented imputation model does not use the subjective intentions and specific behaviors of officials as the criteria for initiating accountability, but focuses on the result of whether the intended crime is inconsistent. It places excessive demands on the trial officials. Even if they try their best to pursue a verdict that balances the situation and the law, if there is a slight discrepancy, they will fall into the trap of pursuing wrongful convictions. Under this harsh accountability model, officials at all levels have to take certain measures to reduce the risk of being held accountable.
In order to verify the authenticity of the confession, Du Fengzhi led his masters and officers to bring Jiang Yahua, Jiang Yatuo, Jiang Longming, boatman Chen Shanji and others to the City God Temple and asked them to kneel before the City God God to confess. The boatman said that he did not dare to deceive the gods. It was indeed two people crossing the river in a small boat that day. Because it was still dark, they could not see their faces clearly, and the two did not speak on the boat. However, Jiang Yahua still confessed that it was only three people who crossed the river. Even though Du Fengzhi ordered him to hang on a bench and kneel before God to endure the interrogation, he did not change his confession. Du Fengzhi had no choice but to temporarily stop the torture and take Jiang Yahua and Jiang Yatuo into custody separately.
At this time, the truth of the case is unclear, and pressure from the outside is also coming. On the one hand, Mr. Jiang from Wuying actively traveled back and forth for his soldiers and inquired in many ways in order to exonerate Jiang Yatuo, so that many people felt that there was no money here, which aroused suspicion; on the other hand, Jiang Longming determined that Jiang Yatuo was an accomplice in killing his son, and there may have been instigators behind the scenes in order to profit from it. In order to find out the facts of the case as soon as possible, Du Fengzhi continued to interrogate Jiang Yahua and Jiang Yatuo the next day.
Since each of Jiang Yahua's confessions was different, inconsistent, and full of doubts, Du Fengzhi decided to interrogate Jiang Yahua alone. At first, Jiang Yahua still claimed that Jiang Yatuo was his accomplice, and that Jiang Kunhan was killed by Jiang Yatuo alone. When asked about the murder weapon, Jiang Yahua confessed that Jiang Yatuo had a knife but he did not have one.
Du Fengzhi asked back: "Then why did the previous interrogation confession include the plot of throwing the knife into the Nanmen River?"
Jiang Yahua hesitated for a moment, then changed his words: "Yato has Yatuo's knife, and the small one has the small one." "
Du Fengzhi ordered someone to take the scabbard and asked: "Is this your scabbard?"
Jiang Yahua admitted that it was his scabbard.
Du Fengzhi asked again: "Since you have the knife, where is it now?"
Jiang Yahua said that the knife had been thrown into the water.
Du Fengzhi took advantage of the situation and asked: "Why should you throw away such a good knife into the water? There must be blood on the knife for fear that others will see it and discard it and destroy the traces."
Jiang Yahua was at a loss and could only nod in recognition.
Du Fengzhi then said: "Since there is blood, Jiang Kunhan must have been killed by you alone."
Jiang Yahua was stunned for a moment, and then argued: "Xiao Yuan's theory is not without merit. Xiao slashed twice, and Yatuo slashed Two cuts were made."
Du Fengzhi asked where he had cut them.
Jiang Yahua offered: "One knife in the hand, one knife in the neck."
At this time, Du Fengzhi suddenly shouted angrily: "Yahua, you don't need to say anything, you killed Kunhan alone. You recognize the scabbard, and so does the knife." It's yours, you said Yatuo had the knife, and you have already confessed that he made two cuts, so there is no doubt that you were the one who made the four cuts." Then he ordered the execution.
Perhaps this situation was frightening. Before the execution was carried out, Jiang Yahua repeatedly begged for mercy and expressed his willingness to confess truthfully. According to Jiang Yahua's confession, Jiang Yahua lost all the money from selling piglets because of gambling with others. Suddenly he remembered that Jiang Kunhan owed him some money, so he asked for it, which led to a fight. Jiang Yahua took out a knife and struck Jiang Kunhan on his head, neck, and hands. The last knife struck him on the neck, causing his death. Afterwards, Jiang Yahua found the silver on Jiang Kunhan's body and fled back to the county in a hurry, leaving the scabbard beside the body. Because the knife was stained with blood, he threw the knife into the Nanmen River. As for falsely accusing Jiang Yatuo, he was trying to get away with it and had nothing to do with Jiang Yatuo. Du Fengzhi repeatedly confirmed the confession, and finally found it to be correct, and ordered him to draw a confession and take a palm print.
Later, Du Fengzhi called Jiang Longming to court and informed him that Jiang Yahua had confessed to being the murderer of Jiang Kunhan and had nothing to do with Jiang Yatuo, and asked Jiang Longming to inquire in person.After Jiang Longming confirmed Jiang Yahua's confession, Du Fengzhi called him to the custody room and said the following to him: "This case has been going on for a long time, and it is difficult to get into details. Now that Yahua has admitted it, I will handle it strictly for you on the spot." It will be put into the autumn trial, and it is uncertain whether he will die or not. Even if the situation is not lenient, Yi Jiu will live for a year; if he is not hooked, it is even more difficult to say. It will be an advantage for Yi, and he hates it so much that he wants to make him suffer all the time. He died slowly. You brought the body in a knot, and stated that Yahua's confession was conclusive, and that he had been hacked to death by one person, and that he would be punished immediately. Your injustice will be redressed, and you will be at peace." Obviously, Du Fengzhi still chose to fight with him. Jiang Longming, the father of the deceased, discussed how to deal with the prisoner. The plan he proposed was to severely punish the prisoner on the spot and make him die in pain, instead of reporting the crime to each level and waiting for the autumn trial in accordance with the regulations.
Jiang Longming did not respond directly to how the prisoner should be dealt with. He just said: "The people have no one to support them after their son dies. Even if they collect the body, they have no money. I ask the great master to make a decision and open a way for the people." Du Fengzhi heard. He couldn't help but laugh. These words just proved that Jiang Longming had always been obsessed with whether Jiang Yatuo was an accomplice, and his purpose was to take advantage of the opportunity to ask for money. Du Fengzhi asked Jiang Longming to complete the case first and take the body away, and they would discuss the money requested at that time.
On October 22nd, Du Fengzhi came to discuss with his master. He believed that although Jiang Yahua was a murderer and a robber, his family property should not be confiscated. Moreover, his family was poor, and all his property was valued at only two taels of silver. He also had a wife and daughter at home. Need to live. Therefore, Du Fengzhi discussed with General Jiang of Wuying and asked him to provide twenty taels of silver as Jiang Longming's pension money.
On October 23, Du Fengzhi interrogated Jiang Yahua for the last time, confirmed that his confession was correct, and summoned Jiang Longming to confront him. Jiang Longming still wanted to ask for money from Jiang Yatuo, so he blindly persuaded Jiang Yahua to involve Jiang Yatuo, claiming that his son must not have been killed by one person, and begged the elder to redress his injustice. Du Fengzhi was worried that if the case was not reported as required, Jiang Longming would be prosecuted in the future and he could not afford to be punished, so he planned to report the case in detail. Unexpectedly, the next day, when Wuying handed over the twenty taels of silver to the Yamen, Jiang Longming immediately expressed his willingness to complete the case and implement the plan proposed by Du Fengzhi. Immediately, Jiang Longming took the body of his son Jiang Kunhan to be buried, and specifically requested that the prisoner be punished on the spot rather than report the case in detail.
On October 26, Du Fengzhi was promoted to the lobby, and Jiang Yahua was escorted in. He was beaten with a cane 200 times and a small board 200 times. After that, he was thrown into a standing cage and placed at the north gate for public display. Du Fengzhi also gave Jiang Longming twenty taels of silver as a compensation as promised. The so-called standing cage is to fix the prisoner's body in a wooden cage. Only the head passes through the round hole on the top of the cage, covers the neck, and is exposed outside the cage. The prisoner's feet need to step on the stacked wooden boards or bricks. Once standing, If it is unstable or the bottom plate is removed, the prisoner will suffocate to death. Sure enough, the next day Jiang Yahua's hands and feet were swollen in the standing cage and he was gasping for breath. At the fourth watch on the third day, the local security guard came to report that Jiang Yahua was dead.
Deviation from the judicial concept of "equality between love and law"
In order to avoid transfer of cases and avoid the review of superior officials, state and county officials often try to eliminate the cases at the grassroots level during the trial of serious life theft cases, that is, at the grassroots level. When the parties and their families apply for exemption from examination or dismissal of the case, they no longer investigate the facts of the case in detail, or even if they know the truth of the case, they do not strictly follow the laws and regulations, but work hard to persuade the parties and their families to seek a judgment that everyone can accept. result. As Professor Deng Jianpeng pointed out: “Some state and county officials have concealed certain important circumstances in judicial trials and even closed serious life-stealing cases that should have been included in the trial transfer review system directly locally, bypassing the authority of superior officials. Supervision.” (Deng Jianpeng: “Departures from the System in the Judicial Practice of Prefectures and Counties in the Qing Dynasty”, “Qing History Research” Issue 2, 2022, p. 5) This will inevitably lead to a deviation from the judicial concept of “equality between love and law”. For example, in Du Fengzhi's treatment of the murderer in this case, after ascertaining the facts of the case, he did not report the case step by step in accordance with the transfer procedure, nor did he enter the prisoner into the autumn trial procedure in accordance with the regulations, nor did he impose the statutory death penalty on the prisoner , but after seeking the consent of the deceased's family, Jiang Yahua was executed by standing in a cage to close the case.
The more typical situation of non-compliance with the law is often seen in cases of suspected false accusations. For those who make false accusations, the punishments in the "Regulations of the Qing Dynasty" are very severe: "Anyone who falsely accuses someone and is beaten will be punished by the second level of the false accusation. For the crime of exile, disciple, and cane, the third level of the false accusation will be added. Each crime will be punished with a cane. "Hundred, three thousand miles." At the same time, it also stipulates: "If you accuse two or more things, accuse the truth of the minor matter, and accuse the false accusation of the serious matter; or if you accuse one matter of false accusation, the rest will be settled." If the crime is not resolved, the punishment will be punished by flogging or cane; if the punishment is punished by a hundred sticks, the remaining crimes will be punished." However, in practice, state and county officials mostly did not deal with false accusations, and at most they reprimanded and warned them. Or fines, canings and other minor penalties may be imposed, but the responsibility for false accusations is rarely strictly followed. For example, in a case heard by Du Fengzhi on December 9, the seventh year of Tongzhi, Luo Yilin accused Luo Wenlai of raping his wife Wang, but Luo Wen did not admit it, and the two sides argued. Du Fengzhi believed that Luo Wenlai might have coveted Wang's beauty and might have touched or teased her with words, but there was no concrete evidence of rape, so he ordered that Luo Wenlai be temporarily handed over to the custody of the arresting office and entrusted local gentry Luo Yuanhua and others to investigate. specific situation. A few days later, the arresting office reported to Du Fengzhi that after interrogating Luo Wenlai, it was found that he had become lustful because of Wang's young lady's beauty. Although he did not commit rape, he molested her twice. After Du Fengzhi learned about it, he did not pursue Luo Yilin's false accusation of rape. Instead, he ordered Luo Wenlai to be fined a thousand taels of silver and confiscated, and then released. Similarly, in another case, Zhong Xiyuan was accused of abducting Zhong Fangxing's granddaughter-in-law Huang, and taking her to Chen Qiyou's home for gang rape. However, after interrogation, Du Fengzhi discovered that the relevant circumstances of abduction, gang rape, etc. were indeed false accusations. Chen Qiyou only took in the lost Huang family and received six yuan of foreign silver as a thank you gift from the Zhong family. He did not do any other wrongdoing. In the end, Du Fengzhi ordered Chen Qiyou to return his capital and fined him 40 yuan in foreign silver and confiscated it on the grounds that he had admitted an ignorant woman without permission. As for Zhong Xiyuan, although there was no evidence to prove that he had committed rape and abduction, Du Fengzhi believed that the reason why he was accused was not groundless. He was afraid that he had misbehaved on weekdays, so he was beaten with forty boards and released. However, Du Fengzhi did not impose any punishment on the false accusers, and the two organizations closed the case.
From "the situation is equal to the law" to "avoiding responsibility": a helpless move under the principle of result attribution
From the results of the above-mentioned life theft case, it can be seen that state and county officials are not obsessed with seeking the truth of the case, and then strictly follow what has been Make judgments based on laws and regulations that set the standard of "equity between love and law". Some scholars have elaborated on the reasons for the deviation between system settings and judicial practice, pointing out that this deviation is related to factors such as the administrative responsibilities of state and county officials, the limited judicial resources, and the supervisory pressure of superior officials. (See Deng Jianpeng: "Departure of the Judicial Practice of Prefectures and Counties from the System in the Qing Dynasty", "Qing History Research" Issue 2, 2022, pp. 1-13) In fact, the goals demonstrated in judicial practice have deviated, whether it is Do officials let the case be closed at the grassroots level, thereby preventing the case from entering the trial transfer process and being known to superior officials? Or do officials use active means to embellish the circumstances of the case, achieve the effect of empathizing with the law, and create the effect of "equality between emotion and law". In the end, The purpose is to avoid falling into the dilemma of being held accountable.
The liability investigation system for wrongful convictions in the Qing Dynasty embodies the basic model that is oriented to the results of wrongful convictions, which is expressed as the "results accountability principle". Specifically, from the perspective of the construction of legal norms in the Qing Dynasty, although there are some exemptions or reduced penalties, they generally show a trend of accountability for wrong cases, that is, as long as the cases accepted or transferred by officials are objectively If there is an error, you need to bear corresponding responsibility. Under the influence of this principle, the accountability for wrongful cases has become overly stringent. Although the trial officials strive to make judgments that balance the circumstances and the law, it is sometimes difficult to escape from greater liability risks. Therefore, local officials at all levels have tried to take measures to confront and circumvent the accountability system for wrongful convictions to a certain extent.
The legal norms of liability for wrongful convictions in the Qing Dynasty presented a results-oriented accountability model. The relevant legal texts in the "Laws of the Qing Dynasty" clearly reflect the characteristics of responsibility for results.For example, the "Crimes of Entering and Entering Persons in Litigation" stipulates that for those who intentionally enter or exit persons, their liability will be determined based on the degree to which they convict or convict the criminal. That is, if the innocent person is found guilty or guilty, If the person is found not guilty, the relevant person shall be sentenced to the same penalty as the wrongly convicted penalty; if the penalty is only increased or reduced, the penalty shall be offset according to the degree of increase or decrease. Officials who negligently cause miscarriages of justice will also be dealt with according to the above principles, but the penalty will be reduced for those who intentionally cause wrongful convictions. The "Legal Order for Judgment of Crimes" stipulates that the emperor's special decree for temporary convictions cannot be used as a law. If officials make mixed comparisons, resulting in discrepancies in crimes, they must be convicted and sentenced according to the punishment standard of "criminal offenses in lawsuits" . It is also based on the result of wrongful conviction as the criterion for accountability. The liability provisions for wrongful convictions in the "Regulations on the Punishment of Officials" also reflect the result-oriented tendency of accountability. It also distinguishes between intentionality and negligence. However, no matter what the circumstances, as long as there is a discrepancy in the crime, the regulations will It will be included in the consideration of liability for wrongful convictions, and the intensity of the punishment will be determined based on the seriousness of the error. Although there are some provisions concerning the specific behaviors of officials in judicial activities, such as altering confessions, hastily drafting, etc., the Qing court did not use the behavior itself as the standard for accountability, but used it as the basis for judging the subjective aspects of officials, that is, through These behaviors infer that the officials were intentional and thus increase the punishment. Therefore, the focus of these provisions is still on the specific consequences such as "inconsistency" and "criminal conviction" caused by the alteration of confessions and hasty drafting. (See Volume 123 of "Instances of the Qing Dynasty Huidian, Ministry of Personnel, Disciplinary Examples" (Guangxu Dynasty), "Officials' Improper Prison Sentences", revised edition in the 25th year of Guangxu's reign)
It can be seen from the regulations of the Qing court , Under normal circumstances, as long as there is a deviation between the proposed crime result and the final judgment result, it constitutes a wrongful conviction, and the accountability system will be launched immediately. Subjective factors related to intentionality or negligence are only considerations for the degree of punishment after the wrongful case accountability begins. Even the provisions involving official behavior are only intended to examine the degree of subjective fault in order to increase or decrease corresponding sanctions. From this point of view, the liability system for wrongful convictions in the Qing Dynasty reflected the principle of result attribution at the normative level. This result-oriented imputation model does not use the subjective intentions and specific behaviors of officials as the criteria for initiating accountability, but focuses on the result of whether the intended crime is inconsistent. It places excessive demands on the trial officials. Even if they try their best to pursue a verdict that balances the situation and the law, if there is a slight discrepancy, they will fall into the trap of pursuing wrongful convictions. Under this harsh accountability model, officials at all levels have to take certain measures to reduce the risk of being held accountable.
