Previous 4 / 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 鐵桶（該藍色鐵桶係戊○○於同年6月間，向不知情之康○ ○所經營，址設0段0巷00000號之「吉星油桶行」，以新臺幣【下同】300餘元購買）緊靠副駕駛座之車門邊，戊○○ 則站立在藍色鐵桶外側，徒手將意識不清昏坐在副駕駛座之賴○○，以頭下腳上之方式拉栽塞入鐵桶內並蓋上頂蓋。戊 ○○再於同日上午10時6分許，頭戴安全帽並穿戴手套（無證據證明扣案手套即為其作案所穿戴），騎乘賴○○所騎乘之上開車牌號碼000-000號機車前往新烏日火車站與高鐵東路口停放，亦由不知情之蕭○○騎乘前述機車前往上址接戊 ○○，並改由戊○○騎乘蕭○○之機車搭載蕭○○於上午10 時19分許返回其○○巷之住處，蕭○○隨即離去。嗣戊○○ 持扳手（無證據證明扣案扳手確為其作案所用）將鐵桶上方頂蓋之桶箍螺帽拴緊，因鐵桶上方之桶箍螺帽未能拴緊，遂於上午10時53分許要求家中負責看護其母之不知情印尼籍勞工Karsiti前來幫忙將該鐵桶頂蓋下壓，戊○○則雙手分持2 支扳手，1支用以固定一側之桶箍，以另支扳手將螺帽拴緊，又因螺帽拴緊過程致鐵桶頂蓋因��壓而向上蹦出突起一角，然戊○○為避免事跡敗露，當場拒絕印尼籍勞工Karsit i提出開啟上蓋再重新拴緊螺帽之建議，並要求Karsiti合力將裝有賴○○身軀之鐵桶搬運至上開休旅車後行李廂處橫擺置放，戊○○另在鐵桶及後行李廂間隙處，塞放磚頭或石塊防止鐵桶滾動，並在鐵桶上方鋪蓋棉被。戊○○嗣又聯繫不知情之己○○於上午11時20分前來，並於上午11時27分許搭載不知情之己○○沿前次殺害陳○○之同一路線，將裝有賴 ○○身軀之藍色鐵桶載運至花蓮縣○○鄉台8線公路119公里處，致賴○○因此在鐵桶内窒息死亡，戊○○在花蓮縣○○ 鄉台8線公路119公里處將休旅車停放路旁後，即將藍色鐵桶推落公路下方之山谷，而以此方式遺棄賴○○之屍體。二、查獲經過：㈠因賴○○於104年7月12日清晨離家後即音訊全無，賴○○之媳婦丙○○乃於7月14日上午12時57分許，向臺中市政府警第四頁

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