There are only two situations in which major criminal cases with extremely bad social impact are exempted from the death penalty. The first is the victim's fault. Most of these situations exist in fighting or justifiable defense. For example, in a melee, an unparalleled killer killed two or more enemy soldiers in one breath, and finally, the death penalty may not be executed immediately.
The other is the understanding of the victim's family. Before the Sichuan massacre, the old father-in-law stabbed his son-in-law, and the death penalty in the second instance was suspended. The reason is that the wife of the deceased, that is, the daughter of the suspect, issued a letter of understanding to the court, and the court of second instance found it a light sentence. To put it bluntly, my father killed my husband's family I forgive my father, not my in-laws. Although logically confusing, there is nothing wrong with it from a legal point of view. Unfortunately, now other close relatives of the deceased have filed a complaint and the case has entered the retrial procedure. Whether the letter of understanding issued by the daughter and wife is effective in the end depends on the result of retrial.
If the case of Ou Jinzhong is arrested according to normal procedures and then tried, the only possibility that the death penalty can be exempted from immediate execution is that there is a major fault in the neighbor's house, which is enough to compensate for two lives and three serious injuries, including the lifelong disability of a 9-year-old child.
Judging from the information that broke the news on the Internet at present, and the interviews with the village committee by Ou Jinzhong's nephew, the families of the victims and the villagers, this possibility is almost non-existent.
On the one hand, Ou Jinzhong advocated that his neighbors prevented him from building a house for many years, resulting in his family of five living in a tin shed. In addition, on the day of the incident, his neighbors insulted Ou Jinzhong, causing his emotions to get out of control.
Even if all the above circumstances are true, it cannot offset Ou Jin's crime of intentional homicide. Netizens can naturally see the neighbors' high-rise buildings and the tin shed of Oujin, and they are indignant at killing the landlords and bullies. But from the legal level, the conflict level of civil disputes can't rise to criminal exemption in any case. In particular, Ou Jin, a major criminal case with two deaths and three injuries, will basically not be considered from the perspective of whose family is worse, and it is even more impossible to reduce the sentence.
Neighborhood conflicts can avoid the immediate execution of the death penalty. They usually kill people with passion, but the intention to kill is not obvious. For example, when two people quarreled, one ran to the kitchen and stabbed the other, and then someone pulled him away, but the other died of excessive blood loss. This situation can be considered that the subjective malice is not big enough and the neighbors themselves are at fault, so the death penalty is exempted and executed immediately.
In Eugene's case, the old, weak, women and children were hacked to death, and the knife was aimed at the key. Two people were hacked to death on the spot, and the other three were permanently disabled. Although it is also a crime of passion, the passion is too great and the consequences are too serious. Even if netizens think that killing is not enough, it is impossible for the law to condone this operation. Just like Hu Daxia in Shanxi killed 14 people overnight, including children of several years old. After all kinds of media treatment and rendering, a group of fans still regarded him as the embodiment of justice, with all kinds of applause and support, but the court also stood firm and did not discuss it at all.
A case like Ou Jinzhong may have to be investigated for a long time after being arrested. For example, the old Rong Zhi was arrested on 20 19, and it was not until 202 1 that the verdict was pronounced in the first instance. The main reason is that after a lapse of 20 years, a lot of evidence has to be collected again, and when France and Britain were arrested, all the operations of old Rong Zhi were carried out on himself, and there was almost no confession against old Rong Zhi, so the investigation period was prolonged.
Although the case of Ou Jinzhong is not complicated and the killing process is clear at a glance, it is impossible to determine the focus of the contradiction because of its huge social influence and different rhetoric. Therefore, as a warning to the public, the judicial organs, while investigating homicide cases, will certainly conduct a thorough investigation of neighborhood contradictions and elaborate them as part of the judgment, so as to find out the facts and finally form a causal relationship for sentencing, which can play the best demonstration effect.
The investigation of this part of the facts will prolong the trial period. Maybe, just like old Rong Zhi, he was sentenced two years after his arrest, and then entered the appeal procedure, another half year, theoretically two months. If the case is complicated, he can extend it for another two months. If there are special circumstances, he can apply for an extension. To put it bluntly, it is the infinite superposition of buff. Then the Supreme Court reviews the death penalty, and there is no time limit directly. In case there is new evidence during this period, and it is an unlimited flow renewal package, some major cases will not be implemented for several years.
Of course, all this is a theoretical result. After Ou Jinzhong committed suicide, the case came to an end, and the rest was civil litigation and the aftermath of relevant departments.