The controversial case of the Hsichih trio took a new turn recently when Su Chien-ho was granted leave by the Ministry of Justice to visit his dying father in the hospital. Su and two friends, Liu Bing-lang and Chuang Lin-hsun, have been in prison since 1991 for the murder of a couple in the Taipei suburb of Hsichih. Due to controversy surrounding their trial, the justice system has held off on carrying out their death sentences.
After the National Taiwan University Hospital issued a warning that Su Chuen-chang faced imminent death due to bronchial cancer, Su Chien-ho made an emergency application to be allowed out of Taipei Detention House to see his father. The Ministry of Justice approved Su's temporary release on humanitarian grounds, thus marking the first time ever that a person has been allowed out of death row in Taiwan to visit a relative.
Su, Liu, and Chuang were charged in 1991 for the murder of Wu Ming-han and his wife in Hsichih. Although they have been on death row since 1995, five successive Justice Ministers have declined to approve their execution orders due to the lack of any direct evidence linking the three to the crime. In the meantime, the Taiwan Association for Human Rights, the Judicial Reform Foundation, and a number of other NGOs have worked continuously for a reversal of their convictions.
Efforts on behalf of the three have focused on obtaining either a retrial or a presidential pardon. Three special appeals against the conviction have been filed, surprisingly enough, by none other than the State Public Prosecutor General's Office, The trio's lawyers have also applied numerous times for a retrial, and international human rights organizations such as Amnesty International have spoken many times in support of the three men and called for a presidential pardon. These efforts have thus far proven unsuccessful, but Taiwan's Supreme Court ruled on October 27 that the case should be retried by the Taiwan High Court.
The murder of Wu Han-min and his wife Ye Ying-lan occurred in the early morning hours at their home in the township of Hsichih on March 24, 1991. A soldier named Wang Wen-hsiao, who was arrested by the military police that year on August 13, confessed that he had murdered the couple after breaking into their apartment because he needed money for the video arcades. Wang admitted to military investigators during initial questioning that six months earlier, acting alone, he had lowered himself down from the rooftop into his neighbors' apartment looking for money. When Wu Ming-han heard noises and woke up, Wang panicked and hacked both Wu and his wife to death with a meat cleaver. Wang then stole NT$6,000 before returning to his own apartment.
In his second interrogation session with the police, Wang further confessed that his younger brother Wang Wen-chung had stood lookout while he and three accomplices killed the couple. He only identified the other three as Hsieh Ching-hui, Blackie, and Black Boy, names that he is suspected of making up on the spot. Wang Wen-chung was arrested in Kaohsiung on August 15, and while being transferred to Taipei named Su Chien-ho, Liu Bing-lang, and Chuang Lin-hsun as accomplices. Su and the others claim that the police failed to inform them of their right to a lawyer, and that during more than 20 hours of questioning the police beat them and forced them to sit on ice.
Wang Wen-hsiao was sentenced to death by a military court in January 1992, and his sentence was carried out soon thereafter. Before his execution, however, Wang claimed that he had only named the others as accomplices because he was tortured by police, and that Su and the others had not taken part in the murder. The three were given two death sentences apiece after the third and final review of their case in February 1995, while Wang Wen-chung was sentenced to two years and eight months in prison.
The entire case hinged on the initial confession of Wang Wen-hsiao. Su and the others never had an opportunity to confront him face to face, as Chinese law requires, and there was no corroborating evidence to support Wang's confession, which raised suspicions on the part of the trio's families as well as many legal experts. Among many doubts about the case, observers have been especially critical of the fact that the convictions of Su, Liu, and Chuang are based primarily on their own confessions. Former State Prosecutor-General Chen Han filed three extraordinary appeals to the Supreme Court to overturn their convictions, but none was upheld.
The Supreme Court did an about-face this past May, however, when it approved a retrial. The Hsichih trio and their families were just beginning to feel hopeful when the High Court prosecutors filed an appeal opposing a retrial for the three men. The appeal dragged on until October 27, when it was rejected by the Supreme Court.
The Hsichih trio's case marks the first time that the State Public Prosecutor General's Office has ever filed three extraordinary appeals against a death sentence. In the written statement explaining his reasons for filing the three extraordinary appeals, Chen Han listed 24 questionable points about the three men's convictions. Among other irregularities, Chen pointed out that the physical evidence submitted by the prosecution only linked Wang Wen-hsiao to the crime. When the police searched Chuang Lin-hsun's home, they took some coins worth a total of NT$24 (less than US$1) and claimed they were his share of the heist, yet the coins yielded no trace of blood, and could not be linked to the crime in any way. The confessions provided during questioning by Wang Wen-hsiao, Wang Wen-chung, Su Chien-ho, Liu Bing-lang, and Chuang Lin-hsun were riddled with inconsistencies, and no corroborating evidence was ever found.
After Su Chien-ho went to prison, Su Chuen-chang began a campaign to overturn his son's conviction, and eventually obtained the support of such groups as the Taiwan Association for Human Rights and the Humanistic Education Foundation. Several of these groups have held an ongoing vigil outside Chinan Church near the Legislative Yuan for over 200 days now, marching in silent support of the trio.
The case has elicited the concern of human rights groups around the world. The London headquarters of Amnesty International, which describes the convictions as "the judicial ruling of an uncivilized nation," has organized several support campaigns for the three men, and last May sent representatives to Taiwan, where they called a press conference and stated, "If Taiwan's government intends to make human rights a trump card of its foreign policy, it should first grant clemency to the Hsichih trio."
Critics have repeatedly pointed out that Su, Liu, and Chuang were convicted on the basis of their own confessions, and that their human rights were ignored in the process. Hsiao Yi-min, who has been a very active participant in the vigil outside Chinan Church, writes in A Diary of the Vigil in Support of the Hsichih Trio, "A person on trial must be presumed innocent until proven guilty, and no one can accuse him of guilt without providing evidence. In the case of the Hsichih trio, Su Chien-ho, Liu Bing-lang, and Chuang Lin-hsun are the only people alive who know the truth about their case. All the prosecution has to go on is the testimony of Wang Wen-hsiao, who has already been executed in connection with the same case. It has no other witnesses, and no physical evidence. It's ridiculous to think you can determine the truth with nothing more than that. We should be honest with ourselves and admit that we have no way of proving that they are guilty. And because we can't prove guilt, we must presume that they are not guilty. We mustn't get all puffed up about our experience or our supposedly keen nose for the truth, as if that alone were enough to be absolutely sure of what goes on in this smoke-and-mirror world we live in."
The three young men were charged with murder nearly a decade ago. One can't help asking: How many more decades do they have?
p.50
On the 196th day of the vigil in front of Chinan Church in support of the Hsichih trio, the Supreme Court gave protesters a ray of hope by ordering a retrial. (courtesy of the Taiwan Association for Human Rights)
@List.jpg?w=522&h=410&mode=crop&format=webp&quality=80)
