Previous 18 / 95 Next

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 覺有腐臭異味自公路下方傳出，並目視而見公路駁坎草叢有 1個綠色鐵桶，似有蒼蠅滋生，心生疑慮而報警處理，經警查獲該綠色鐵桶內裝有屍體等情，業經證人徐○○於警詢時、偵查中證稱在卷（見警卷二第33頁、相驗卷二第27頁正反面），並有查獲綠色鐵桶之現場照片（警卷二第34至39 頁、相驗卷二第12、13頁、第203、204頁）在卷可稽。㈡上開查獲之藍色鐵桶及綠色鐵桶內屍體，確分別為被害人賴 ○○、陳○○，且均係他殺： ⒈查獲之藍色鐵桶內被害人賴○○屍體部分： ①上開查獲之藍色鐵桶內之無名屍經臺灣臺中地方檢察署檢察官督同法醫師相驗並解剖屍體一節，有臺中市政府警察局第四分局處理相驗案件初步調查報告暨報驗書（見相驗卷一第 4至5頁）、臺灣臺中地方檢察署電話相驗報告簿（見相驗卷一第3頁）、104年9月27日勘（相）驗筆錄（見相驗卷一第9 頁）、104年9月29日解剖筆錄（見相驗卷一第15頁）、臺灣臺中地方檢察署相驗屍體證明書（見相驗卷一第22、36 頁）。且經死者家屬即被害人賴○○之媳丙○○警詢時、偵查中及子女辛○○、壬○○、庚○○於偵查中指認死者穿著及假牙特徵與賴○○相符等情（見相驗卷一第6頁正反面、第10至14頁）。復藍色鐵桶內之屍體，經鑑驗鎖骨之男性DN A-STR型別，與被害人賴○○家屬所提供賴○○生前使用刮鬍刀刀片微物DNA-STR型別相符，研判來自同一人，該15組型別在臺灣地區中國人口分布之機率為4.66乘以10的負18次方；該型別與關係人（即被害人賴○○之子女）辛○○、壬 ○○、庚○○15組體染色體DNA-STR型別檢測結果，均符合親子遺傳法則，不排除死者為辛○○、壬○○、庚○○之親生父賴○○一節，有內政部警政署刑事警察局104年10月22 日刑生字第1040081405號鑑定書可憑（見偵卷三第120至122 頁）。堪認查獲之藍色鐵桶內之無名屍確係被害人賴○○。 ②又被害人賴○○經依法醫毒物化學分析，胃內容物有檢出鎮靜安眠類藥物Zolpidem及Estazolam苯二氮平衍生物，及抗第十八頁

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Yang Hongru (楊鴻儒)

CASE BRIEF

Jurisdiction

Taiwan

Nationalities

Taiwanese

Case Title: Yang Hong-ru (Taiwan Supreme Court Criminal Judgment No. 1276 [114])

Age at Offence: 68

Age Group at Offence: Senior (60 and Above)

Gender: Male

Religious Group at Offence: Unknown

Vulnerable/ Marginalised Group

Person with Disabilities: Mental

Jurisdiction - Geolocation

Latitude: 23.6978

Longitude: 120.9605

Jurisdiction - Geolocation (linked CASE BRIEF): Taiwan

Contributing TRP Partner

Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty (Taiwan)

Latest Country's Death Penalty Status

Retentionist

Case Current Status: Closed: Commuted

Year when sentenced to Death Row: 2010s: 2016

Method of Execution: Not executed

Rights Allegedly Violated

Fair Trial and Due Process: Excessive and disproportionate punishment

Nature of Offences for Death Penalty

Murder: Multiple Victims

Expert Evidence

Forensic/Medical evidence: Autopsy/Post mortem
Forensic/Medical evidence: Blood pattern analysis
Forensic/Medical evidence: Chemistry/Toxicology/Drug analysis
Forensic/Medical evidence: Fingerprint/palmprint/footprint
Mitigation Specialist
Mental Health: Other
Mental Health: Psychiatrist
Mental Health: Psychologist

Case Background (300 words max): Yang Hong-ru was known to both victims, Chen and Lai. He may have harboured murderous intent towards the two men, possibly due to gambling debts or other motives.

Under the pretence of going on a trip or visiting friends, Yang drove away with the victim Chen on the morning of 27 June 2015, and with the victim Lai on the morning of 12 July that same year. On both occasions, during the journey, Yang laced the victims' food and drink with sleeping pills, rendering each of them unconscious. He then placed them head-first, feet-up, into sealed metal drums, where they suffocated to death within the confined spaces.

He transported the drums containing the victims' bodies to a location near the boundary between Nantou and Hualien on Provincial Highway No. 8—the first on the afternoon of 27 June 2015, and the second at midday on 12 July, where he disposed of them by pushing them into a ravine, thereby killing Chen and Lai in succession.

In the first, second, and third trials, as well as the first retrial, the defendant was sentenced to death. This was later commuted to life imprisonment in the second retrial, and that sentence was ultimately upheld by the Supreme Court.

In addition to the psychiatric assessment, a pre-sentencing social investigation was also conducted in this case. A multidisciplinary team was assembled for this purpose, comprising not only psychiatrists and psychologists, but also legal scholars and criminologists.

Defence Arguments (200 words max.)

This case falls under the provisions of the Fair and Speedy Criminal Trials Act, and accordingly, the sentence ought to be reduced to life imprisonment.
Pursuant to Taiwan's parole regulations, given that the defendant is of advanced age, life imprisonment would be sufficient, as the likelihood of the defendant reoffending upon release from prison is considered low.

Judgement with Headnotes (200 words max)

This case has been pending before the first-instance trial since December 2015. By the time the Supreme Court remanded it for retrial in September 2023, approximately seven years and nine months had elapsed. According to the terms of the remand order, certain matters remained to be subjected to forensic examination and witnesses to be questioned, requiring further investigation and clarification. Upon completion of the court's investigation and pronouncement of the judgment in the second retrial appeal, more than eight years would have passed. Accordingly, there exist grounds under Article 7 of the Fair and Speedy Criminal Trials warranting mitigation of punishment (where a death sentence is mitigated, the punishment shall be life imprisonment).
Consideration should be given to whether, even in the event that an elderly prisoner may become eligible for parole release following prolonged execution of sentence, the risk of reoffending diminishes due to advanced age.

Legal Representation Received

Second Appeal: Private
Remand: Private
Forth Appeal: Private
Trial: State Legal Aid
Appeal: State Legal Aid
Pre-trial: Unknown

Legislation Related to the Offence(s): Article 271(1) of the Criminal Code: A person who takes the life of another shall be sentenced to death or life imprisonment or imprisonment for not less than ten years.

Case Brief Entry Status: Complete

Language of Case Materials

Mandarin (Traditional)

Is the case brief featured?: Yes

Primary Documents

【楊鴻儒】最高法院114年度台上字第1276號刑事判決.pdf
Other
Download View
【楊鴻儒】臺灣高等法院臺中分院112年度上重更二字第4號刑事判決.pdf
Other
Download View

Death Penalty Defence - Asia

Select target paragraph3

Yang Hongru (楊鴻儒)

Primary Documents

Notifications