[Field murder] The defendant defended that the victim had misappropriated the use of the purchase and sale equipment.

Social News

Written by: Li Huina

2019-11-20 15:39

The field enthusiast Bosco was suspected of being murdered by the "comrades of war" two years ago (20th). One of the "comrades-in-arms" was also charged with impeding justice. The jury, after the judge's legal guidance, ruled that the crime was not established, but he still wanted to continue trial for murder, but he decided not to defend himself. Another "comrade-in-arms" involved in the case decided to appear in court and confessed that the owner was "sincere" when buying and selling equipment. He also said that the victim had used the money he had to transfer to him when he was dealing with the transaction.

The two defendants, Yan Yiheng and Zhou Zhengxian, denied the murder and other crimes in the High Court. (data picture)

The second defendant took the crime of obstructing justice

The case involved two defendants, Yan Yiheng (29 years old) and Zhou Zhengxian (23 years old). The two were accused of murdering Guo Yunuo (aka Bosco, 20 years old) on May 28, 2017 together with Huang Lang. Zhou was originally charged with Huang Yihao's actions to obstruct the justice of justice, that is, to remove or delete the information in Guo's mobile phone. However, the judge gave the jury legal guidance this morning, and the jury found that Zhou's obstruction of justice was not established.

Refers to the fact that the character is sometimes hot

The first defendant decided not to give evidence and did not call the defence witness; the second defendant chose to defend himself. The second defendant stated that he knew the victim in 2013 by playing the game (Wargame). From time to time, he would play games, field battles and talk about military information with the victim. He described the victim as "sometimes hot." He knows that the victim will buy and sell field equipment, but he is "sincere" when doing business, and members of the "Midnight Outing Group" have also engaged in equipment transactions with the victim, but members also believe that the victim is "sincere."

Refers to the owner’s withdrawal of self-purchased equipment

The defendant recalled that when he played Wargame with "05" Zhao Jiajin and the victim, "05" took a fancy to his belt. The second defendant agreed to sell it to "05" for 300 yuan, but the cash on "05" was insufficient. The second defendant handed the belt to the victim and found the owner of the transaction when there was cash in "05", but he never received any news about the belt. He called the victim and the victim claimed that he had handed the belt to "05". However, "05" had not paid the money. He felt that the situation was different. He contacted "05" directly. "05" said that he had paid the money to the victim.

The defendant pleaded with the victim about the matter, and the victim admitted that he had collected the money. However, because the "others in the wilderness, the old money was bought," the defendant continued to pursue the money with the victim, but the victim arrears under different pretexts, including "唔Have fun, "no bank nearby, etc."

[Field murder] comrades want to buy equipment asking price to revoke the victim to raise the price of the first defendant 4,000

[Field murder] Field comrades refer to the defendant’s request to buy sleeping pills.

[Field murder] The first defendant said that he wanted to fight the victim. The witness said that it was not a joke.

Selling night vision goggles and comrades

In addition, the second defendant claimed that the victim and his, the first defendant and the friend of the family "MT" Tan Jiawei had also been unhappy about buying and selling night vision goggles. The defendant recalled that "MT" had contacted the first defendant through him and found that the victim would night vision. At the price of the mirror, "MT" finally contacted the first defendant and purchased a night vision goggle from him. "MT" also found that the specifications of the night vision goggles were different from those described by the victim. After the incident, the defendant encountered the victim on the street. The victim further angered him and blamed him for giving the first defendant a call to "MT".

Case No.: HCCC149/2018

Murder court