The mother of the 'chicken delivery girl' cried in the middle of the trial, hoping the villain would tell the truth

Ms. Tran Thi Hien, mother of the unfortunate victim in the "chicken delivery girl" case, burst into tears in court, saying she was not someone who bought and sold banned substances with those who harmed her child for money.

This morning (April 22), the High People's Court (People's Court) in Hanoi opened an appeal hearing to re-trial the case of Tran Thi Hien (49 years old) on the charge of illegally buying and selling narcotics.

Defendant Hien is the mother of a chicken delivery student in Dien Bien who passed away during Tet 2019. In May 2022, the High People's Court in Hanoi opened an appeal trial.

After the trial, the appellate court said that many details in the case were contradictory, some details could not be clarified immediately at trial.

Therefore, the appellate court decided to cancel part of the first instance judgment related to defendant Tran Thi Hien for investigation and retrial.

Today, declaring her background in court, Ms. Hien burst into tears when mentioning her second daughter, born in 1997, the victim who was plotted to harm her by the group Cong, Toan, and Hung.

Due to her poor health, Ms. Hien asked her lawyers to restate the content of her petition. Accordingly, the police's determination that her case was reported by the same people who harmed her daughter is not objective and has the motive of slander and blame. 9 days after committing the crime, Toan, Cong, and Hung had not been arrested yet, so they had time to discuss, communicate with each other and identify Ms. Hien to "create a false statement". She affirmed that she was not a mother who "didn't save her child because of money". She affirmed that she did not owe money or trade banned substances with Toan, Cong or Hung, as these people testified.

When the lawyer finished reading, Ms. Hien confirmed and continued to cry, saying: "I now have no hatred towards Math, Hung, or Cong. The crimes they committed against my child, now they must bear the appropriate punishment. I only hope that the Please tell this person the truth so that I can be vindicated."

The jury then took a break for 45 minutes to allow defendant Hien to stabilize his mind.

The jury then asked Ms. Hien and her mother to be isolated and escorted defendant Luong Van Hung into the trial room.

In court, Hung said that during his detention, he felt sorry for Ms. Hien and female student Cao My Duyen, so in today's trial the defendant will testify "honestly".

Hung declared that during his detention related to the Cao My Duyen case, the defendant had no contact with defendant Bui Van Cong. The defendant also affirmed that he did not know Ms. Tran Thi Hien and her mother and did not transact the sale of banned substances with Ms. Hien.

Panel: Why did the defendant change the testimony he gave in 2019 and 2022?

- Lying in the detention center, the defendant thought a lot, he was not afraid of dying, the defendant knew nothing about the controlled substance case, and did not know what My Duyen looked like.

The defendant did not appeal but was not guilty. The other defendants forced me, but I was weak so I couldn't do anything, so I had to accept.

After that, Luong Van Hung declared that he knew the faces of Tran Thi Hien and her mother because someone showed them a photo in advance.

The defendant did not know about the process of Ms. Hien posting information about finding her child on social networks during Tet 2019 because she did not use a smartphone.

Regarding the initial testimony admitting that he and Bui Van Cong sold 2 bricks of heroin (H) to Ms. Tran Thi Hien, Hung said that this testimony was "forced to confess".

After that, the defendant continued to assert that he did not know who Ms. Hien and her mother were.

Case files show that in mid-May 2017, Bui Van Cong rode a motorbike to Ms. Hien's house to ask to buy chicken. Here, defendant Hien asked Cong "if he would sell H", if so, then buy 4 wheels. The two sides agreed on the purchase price of 160 million VND/cake.

After the negotiation, Cong went to Thu's house to order 4 H wheels for 150 million VND/wheel. A few days later, Hien asked Cong if he had H and the defendant replied "only 2 wheels". Hien agreed and told her to call and make an appointment to come to the cemetery area of Thanh Hung commune to deliver the goods when needed.

At the cemetery, Cong called Hien. Hien received the goods, put them in the lane hanging on the motorbike and then gave the blue bag containing 290 million VND to Cong, asking for a debt of 30 million VND.

The entire sale of 2 H wheels between Cong and Hien was witnessed by Luong Van Hung. After buying and selling banned substances, Hien turned the car towards the People's Committee of Thanh Hung commune. Cong and Hung brought 290 million VND to pay Vi Thi Thu, asking for a debt of 10 million VND.

The prosecution agency determined that Ms. Hien was the person who raised the issue and directly traded 2 H wheels with Cong. Thu was the one who bought 2 H cakes to sell to Cong. Because Van Toan (Thu's husband) actively helped.

During the first instance trial, Ms. Hien continuously complained, claiming that other defendants were blaming her. The defendant said that Cong and Hung conspired to harm their daughter and then blamed him, so their testimony was incomplete and inconsistent about the amount of money.