The Silent Reforms of Eldridge Chapter 42

In addition, Duan Rongen, the magistrate of Jianwei County, Li Xiye, the magistrate of Jintang County, and Zhao Xuchu, the magistrate of Nanchuan County, have all falsely accused Liang Liang of being a thief. In any case, I dare not sacrifice people's lives just because I want to accommodate these subordinates. The so-called "life-saving rather than life-saving" statement is the heresy of those teachers who have no talent or virtue. It is the easiest way to cause injustice. It will only lead to the murderer slipping through the net and the dead being wronged. I think that the so-called fighting and killing each other is just a matter of momentary anger. They fight each other and don't know who will live or die. It can be excused during the interrogation period, which is justified by emotion and law. As for the murderer who deliberately murders, what is there to deserve mercy? When you bend the law to show mercy, don't you think of the grievances of those who died?

There is no difference this year in the autumn trial. I went through the autumn trial for three consecutive years. There were seven to eight hundred cases each time, and more than a hundred cases were immediately executed if the evidence was conclusive - a number that is not found in other provinces.

When handling a robbery case, you must be even-keeled. These criminals will not be spared by the law. However, case files often record the following situation: only two or three people broke into the house to search for stolen goods, but there were seven or eight people who took the stolen goods --- How could such a thing happen? In other files, it is written that he was a lookout, but the robber himself confessed that he was the one who broke into the house to search for stolen goods. After the trial, I found out that the county deliberately exonerated him - it was not that the thieves were cunning; they also designated the dead thieves as the chief offenders, and the captured prisoners as lookouts, while those who were not captured were The criminal was determined to be a burglary, and there were too many weird places in between. Officials in prefectures and counties do this to avoid punishment and only take into account the success of the exam; but thieves are involved in the chaos of the country. I have issued an order to all the states and counties under my command to handle robbery cases in the future, and the number of people outside on lookout must not exceed the number of people who enter the house to collect stolen goods. I asked the robbers several times, and they all said: "We are fighting for our lives, how can we tolerate those who are watching outside to share the stolen goods?" So in fact there are almost no criminals who do not break into the house.

There are even more policemen who are driven by officials and often torture and torture thieves to force them to admit that they are the leaders of the thieves, or bribe beggars and use beggars as traps to receive stolen goods. During the court hearing, the presiding officer will kill innocent people indiscriminately if he is not careful. If a captor has evil intentions, he is no different from a thief; if state and county officials have the heart to do this, can they still ask about their intentions?

As for the trial of a murder case, the confession obtained from the first interrogation is the most critical. When criminals cause death, they think they must pay for their lives by murdering others, so they often confess everything without any hesitation. However, once they are imprisoned, they will be instigated and colluded by the cell boss and jailer to confess, but the true situation will not be found out, and the case will become increasingly difficult to handle. Therefore, after experienced local officials returned to the Yamen after inspecting the scene, they immediately interrogated the culprit, interrogated him about the motive and process of committing the crime, and obtained the general circumstances of the case. As for the severity of the injuries on the corpse, it is related to whether the sentence will be pronounced or suspended during the autumn trial. Once written, it will never be changed. Often when the report was submitted for the first time, the injuries written on the corpse were different from those filled in during the excavation, so they ordered a re-verification, saying that it was a clerical error. Little did they know that the corpse was filled in with ink pen, so how could the scribe be allowed to use ink pen? ? Some people will argue: "It was noisy when people were present, and it was difficult to make clear the report of the drink, etc." Could it be that the examiner did not personally inspect the injuries on the corpse and only made the report of the drink based on the corpse? This kind of behavior of covering up with lies is often warned by me. The darkness and chaos in the writings of state and county officials and secretaries can be seen.