Previous 65 / 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 藥；又被害人騎乘前往被告住處之機車亦遭被告以相同方式棄置；在被害人賴○○家屬四處協尋，警方介入調查之際，被告速往南部山區躲藏、出售其載運鐵桶之休旅車、不再使用其行動電話，並交待賭債清償方式，急為逃匿滅證，並就個人財務善後之處理；被告為警拘提到案後，推託飾說，再三掩翳，視檢警掌握之證據多寡再行憑虛設詞，以為卸責，綜觀諸情，被告所為本案2件犯行，信而有徵，當非巧合所致。綜上，被告分別對被害人陳○○、賴○○或僅因微隙，而起兇心，又因其本即持有醫師所開立之Stilnox安眠藥劑（達3 0日份量，即30顆）均如前述，復參酌其有使用安眠藥劑使他人昏迷後強取財物之前科，益見其深知該等安眠藥物之藥性，遂各以邀約訪友、遊玩為由，使被害人陳○○、賴○○ 各於104年6月27日清晨及同年7月12日清晨，分別搭乘被告所駕駛之休旅車，自其上開位於○○巷住處外出，而在車行過程中，被告即將摻有Stilnox安眠藥物之不詳飲食，使毫無防備之被害人等服食，令被害人等於短時間內即在副駕駛座上陷入昏睡狀態，被告旋再驅車折返住處，並將上開休旅車停放在住家庭院空地，分別將事先備妥之綠色鐵桶（被害人陳○○部分）、藍色鐵桶（被害人賴○○部分），緊靠副駕駛座車門邊，將昏睡中之2名被害人均以頭下腳上之姿態拉栽塞入鐵桶內，並鎖緊頂蓋，繼而再請不知情之杜○○、甲○○協助將裝有被害人陳○○身軀之綠色鐵桶一同載往台 8線119.2公里處推落山谷，及請不知情之己○○協助將裝有被害人賴○○身軀之藍色鐵桶載往同路段附近即119公里推落山谷，使被害人陳○○、賴○○在被推落山谷前即因窒息而死亡（詳後述），更一致將被害人生前騎往其住處之機車，分別騎到烏日高鐵站附近放置以故佈疑陣，其所執各該辯解，均屬臨訟卸責之詞，委無可採，所為上開2次之殺人犯行，應堪認定，各應依法論科。關於辯護人聲請勘驗臺中市警察局第三分局偵查卷宗（即警第六十五頁

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