Has the "Hangzhou nanny arson case" been pronounced in court?

The trial of "Hangzhou nanny arson case" was exposed at the scene, and the case will be pronounced on an elective basis.

Today (1 February), Hangzhou Intermediate People's Court continued to hold a public hearing in the Second Court to hear the case of the defendant Mo Huanjing's arson and theft. Hangzhou People's Procuratorate sent personnel to appear in court to support public prosecution. Defendant Mo Huanjing, his defender, victim Lin Shengbin and his agent ad litem attended the proceedings. Relatives of the victims, NPC deputies, CPPCC members, media reporters and people from all walks of life attended the trial.

The Hangzhou Municipal People's Procuratorate accused the defendant Mo Huanjing of being heavily in debt because of his long-term gambling addiction.

From 2065438 to September 2006, Mo Huanjing was employed by an intermediary as a live-in nanny for the victims Zhu Xiaozhen and Lin Shengbin in Blue Qianjiang Apartment in Shangcheng District of Hangzhou.

2065438+From March to June, 2007, Mo Huanjing repeatedly stole valuables such as gold wares and watches from the victim Zhu Xiaozhen's home for pawn and mortgage, and obtained180,000 yuan. By the time of the incident, there were still items with an estimated value of 6.5438+0.9 million yuan that were not cashed. Mo Huanjing also borrowed 1 1.4 million yuan from Zhu Xiaozhen on false grounds such as buying a house. All the above money is used for gambling and profligacy.

On the evening of June 2 1, Mo Huanjing gambled online again with her mobile phone, and lost more than 60,000 yuan in the victim's house that night, including the money for pawning a watch. In order to continue to raise gambling money, Mo Huanjing decided to set fire and then put out the fire, so as to win the gratitude of the victims and borrow money again.

At 5 o'clock in the morning of June 22, Mo Huanjing searched for keyword information related to arson through her mobile phone in advance, and then lit a book with a lighter to ignite flammable items such as sofas and curtains in the living room. The fire spread rapidly, causing Zhu Xiaozhen and three children in the house to be trapped in the fire and die of inhaling carbon monoxide. The fire also caused damage to some facilities and adjacent houses in the room, with a loss value of more than 2.57 million yuan. After the fire broke out, Mo Huanjing fled indoors to the downstairs of the apartment and was later captured by the public security organs.

In addition, from July, 20 15 to February, 20 16, when Mo Huanjing was a nanny in Shaoxing and Shanghai, she committed theft in the homes of three employers, all of whom were discovered by the employers and dismissed after returning the relevant property.

The Hangzhou Municipal People's Procuratorate believes that the defendant Mo Huanjing's behavior violated the China? According to the provisions of the first paragraph of Article 115 and Article 264 of the Criminal Law of People's Republic of China (PRC), if the facts of the crime are clear and the evidence is true and sufficient, he should be investigated for criminal responsibility for arson and theft.

Prosecutor: They constitute arson and theft respectively.

During the court debate, the public prosecution agency held that the defendant Mo Huanjing set fire to the residential building, causing four deaths and heavy property losses; Stealing other people's property for many times, with a huge amount, has constituted arson and theft respectively. Mo Huanjing did not take any preparatory measures for how to control the fire in advance. Even if she is negligent in the serious consequences of this case, she should constitute arson and be responsible for all the consequences according to law.

Agent ad litem: The problems of property and fire protection cannot reduce Mo Huanjing's guilt.

The victim's litigation agent added that Mo Huanjing had an indirect intention to kill; Premeditated arson and clear thinking and normal mind when committing the crime; Mo Huanjing is a thief, a liar and a poor character. After being brought to justice, his confession was evasive and the excuse for arson was not credible. He had no regrets during the trial. In this case, there is no problem of multiple causes and one effect. Property and fire problems can't reduce Mo Huanjing's guilt. If there is no fire fighting and rescue property and fire fighting, the consequences will be more serious. The court was asked to immediately execute Mo Huanjing's death sentence and find out the whole process of the fire.

Defender: Mo Huanjing has no motive to set fire and does not want to cause fire, casualties and property losses.

Regarding the theft, the defender suggested that Mo Huanjing's stolen property from three employers' homes in Shaoxing and Shanghai has been returned, and he has the will to redeem and return the stolen property, which is relatively less subjective. Taking the initiative to confess before the judicial organ knows the fact of the theft constitutes surrender and requests a lighter or mitigated punishment. Regarding the crime of arson, it is believed that Mo Huanjing has no motive for arson and does not want to cause fire, casualties and property losses. Mo Huanjing actively put out the fire and saved people, not fled the scene. The main and key cause of the fire is Mo Huanjing's arson, but the imperfect property facilities and untimely fire rescue are also factors. Mo Huanjing waited at the scene when calling the police, knowing that others called the police, and truthfully confessed during interrogation, which met the constitutive requirements of confession; The court is requested to comprehensively consider the subjective malignancy of Mo Huanjing's arson, the active rescue behavior afterwards, the multiple factors that led to the tragedy, and the good attitude of confessing and repenting, and give Mo Huanjing a lighter punishment.

After the court debate, Mo Huanjing made a final statement to the court, saying that she didn't mean to hurt the victim, but she apologized to the victim's family because her behavior caused irreparable harm and had a bad impact on society. It has long been addicted to gambling? Bo, who committed an unforgivable crime, pleaded guilty and repented, hoping that the court would give matter of justice; It advises everyone to take a warning and not to gamble.

In view of the seriousness of the case, after deliberation, the collegial panel will submit it to the Judicial Committee of our hospital for discussion and decision, and the case will be publicly pronounced on another day.

At 20: 50, the presiding judge announced an adjournment.