Recently, the Beijing Lawyers' Law Research Association, the Renmin University of China Institute of Legal Practice, the South China University of Technology Center for Complex Cases Research, the China University of Political Science and Law Center for Environmental and Resource Law Research, the Renmin University of China Law School Center for Commercial Crime Research, and the Renmin University of China Law School Center for False Litigation Research jointly launched the “China Lawyers' Review Cup” Annual Legal Service Case Selection Activity. Since its inception, the initiative has garnered widespread attention from legal professionals and received numerous case submissions.
For the 2024 Top Ten Acquittal Defense Cases selection, exemplary cases were screened from a broad collection and presented for online voting on digital platforms. Public participation was exceptionally enthusiastic, with over 10,000 votes cast within just seven days from January 1 to January 7, 2026.
Combining the online voting results with expert opinions, the judging panel ultimately determined the Top Ten Acquittal Defense Cases of 2024 based on the cases' impact, complexity, defense difficulty, and social significance. The case of Hu Mou and Liao Mou, represented by attorneys Jin Jie, Yang Wen, and Zhang Dianlong of King&Capital Law Firm, where the defendants were acquitted on retrial for rape charges, ranked first.
Hu and Liao Rape Case: Retrial Acquittal
Case Overview
This 34-year-long criminal miscarriage of justice culminated in a Supreme People's Procuratorate appeal leading to a retrial acquittal. It set records in Chinese judicial history for the longest duration of appeals and the largest number of judicial documents overturned in a single instance, demonstrating judicial authorities' resolve to correct historical miscarriages of justice. On the evening of May 5, 1990, the victim reported being raped by two men—one tall, one short—while selling steamed buns near Jingdezhen Railway Station. On the evening of May 6, 1990, Hu and Liao were detained for questioning at the Municipal Public Security Bureau due to their matching physical descriptions (tall and short). They were released after failing to secure victim identification. On May 11, investigators searched the two men's residences and placed them under criminal detention without any evidence. Their arrest was approved on May 19.
The trial process was exceptionally convoluted, with the case being returned for supplementary investigation three times after each indictment. On January 12, 1991, the first-instance court sentenced Hu to 11 years in prison for rape and embezzlement, and sentenced Liao to 9 years in prison for rape. After multiple appeals and petitions, the case underwent nine trials, two requests for prosecutorial oversight, and countless visits to petition authorities in Beijing. However, all appeals and petitions were dismissed prior to the overturned verdict.
After accepting the case on March 8, 2017, the defense attorneys adopted a comprehensive strategy. First, they focused on objective evidence to prove the petitioner's lack of connection to the crime. By analyzing issues such as the absence of biological traces, non-exclusive blood type identification, and illegal procedures in collecting the alleged murder weapon, they completely dismantled the original evidence structure.
Second, the lawyers gathered crucial alibi evidence and proof of the illegal formation of the incriminating confession. By locating key witnesses, they confirmed that Hu was watching television on the night of the incident, eliminating his opportunity to commit the crime. Simultaneously, they identified witnesses who shared a prison cell with Hu at the time, verifying the illegal formation of the incriminating confession. These new discoveries significantly strengthened the appeal and provided essential grounds for retrial.
Third, the lawyers identified patterns and contradictions in the confessions, completely undermining their probative value. By analyzing the consistent pattern of confessions being extracted at night and retractions occurring during daylight hours, they demonstrated the illegal nature and unreliability of the confessions.
On January 12, 2022, the Supreme People's Procuratorate filed a protest with the Supreme People's Court, arguing that existing evidence failed to prove Hu and Liao committed rape. On December 25, 2024, the retrial court publicly rendered its final judgment, overturning all three original rulings and acquitting Hu and Liao.
Significance
This case marks a milestone in China's criminal justice history. Its inclusion in the Supreme People's Procuratorate's 2024 work report and its announcement at the second plenary session of the 14th National People's Congress underscore its strong cautionary, exemplary, and guiding significance. Firstly, it set judicial records for the longest duration of appeals and the largest number of final judicial documents overturned in a single instance, demonstrating the courage of judicial organs to rectify historical miscarriages of justice. The achievement of judicial justice after 34 years of relentless efforts reflects the self-improvement capacity of China's judicial system.
Second, this case has advanced the refinement and development of criminal evidentiary rules. By rigorously applying evidentiary standards and proof requirements, it established crucial principles such as the priority of objective evidence and the exclusion of illegally obtained evidence, exerting a profound influence on promoting judicial fairness.
Third, this case has contributed to the improvement of the appeal mechanism. The protracted appeal process exposed inefficiencies and procedural formalism within the system, providing vital practical insights for enhancing the appeal system.
