"Grandfather" Le Tung Van stubbornly asked the court to declare his innocence and release the disciples who were still sentenced to death.

During the trial, in addition to the details in the case file, the defendants appealed but could not provide new documents and details, so there was no basis for acceptance. Therefore, it is proposed that the trial panel dismiss the appeal and uphold the first-instance judgment.

On the afternoon of November 2, the appellate session considered the complaint of Mr. Le Tung Van, 90 years old, and his accomplices for the crime of abusing democratic freedoms to infringe upon the interests of the State, the legitimate rights and interests of the State. organizations, individuals, continue with the debate. The representative of the Procuracy assessed that the first-instance level tried the right person, the right crime, and was not unjust.

The evidence in the case file is sufficient to determine that the accused committed an organized crime. "In which defendant Le Tung Van is the mastermind, the remaining defendants have the role of accomplices; they do not repent and deny the crime, so they need to be dealt with seriously," the representative of the Procuracy stated.

The Procuracy also said that when committing the crime Mr. Le Tung Van was over 70 years old, mitigating circumstances should be applied; the defendants have good character, raised many orphaned children... These extenuating circumstances have all been considered by the first instance level, so they cannot be further reduced. During the appellate trial, the defendants could not provide new evidence, so the Procuracy asked the court to reject the entire appeal of Mr. Van and his accomplices.

On the morning of November 3, the appellate trial trial of defendant Le Tung Van and his accomplices related to a criminal case abusing democratic freedoms to infringe upon the interests of the State, the legitimate rights and interests of organizations Organizations and individuals that happened at Tinh That Bong Lai continued the debate. At the trial, the defense lawyers for the defendants asked the panel to record all the statements made by the defendants at the trial, thereby determining that the case violated procedural law, which did not ensure the adjudication of the defendants. judge...

Because defendant Le Tung Van was absent, the defense lawyer repeated the appeals of defendant Le Tung Van. According to the appeal, defendant Le Tung Van said that he did not insult Vietnamese Buddhism in Long An province, did not offend the police of Duc Hoa district, on the contrary, he and some people in Thien am (Zen am on the edge of the universe) ) is a victim of abuse and slander for a very long time.

"I request the appellate court to correct the first-instance judgment of me and my disciples, to release my disciples. At the same time, to suspend the case," the lawyer re-quoted the appeal of the court. defendant Le Tung Van.

Having the last word, the defendants Le Thanh Hoan Nguyen, Le Thanh Nhat Nguyen, Le Thanh Trung Duong, and Le Thanh Nhi Nguyen did not show any remorse, but repeatedly complained and said that the whole first instance session, The appellate court did not give a fair trial. The defendants were wronged.

The defense lawyer said that the appeal of defendant Le Tung Van was also the proposal of the defendants in the defense, as well as the recommendation of the lawyers. The defense lawyer said that this case revealed injustices.

Therefore, the lawyer recommends that defendants Le Tung Van, Le Thanh Nhi Nguyen, Le Thanh Hoan Nguyen, Le Thanh Trung Duong, Cao Thi Cuc not commit crimes of abusing democratic freedoms to infringe upon the interests of the State. , the legitimate rights and interests of organizations and individuals and the release of the accused.

According to the representative of the Procuracy, from the evidence and documents, the defendants in Tinh That Bong Lai discussed, staged, and posted videos on social networks in order to distort, misrepresent the truth in order to smear and insult the reputation. attended Duc Hoa District Police and many organizations and individuals. "At the first instance level, the trial panel also considered mitigating circumstances for the defendants when assessing the punishment.

During the trial, in addition to the details in the case file, the defendants appealed but could not provide new documents and details, so there was no basis for acceptance. Therefore, it is proposed that the trial panel reject the appeal and uphold the first-instance judgment," the representative of the Procuracy stated.

According to the representative of the Procuracy, from the evidence and documents, the defendants in Tinh That Bong Lai discussed, staged, and posted videos on social networks in order to distort, misrepresent the truth in order to smear and insult the reputation. attended Duc Hoa District Police and many organizations and individuals.

"At the first instance level, the trial panel also considered mitigating circumstances for the defendants when assessing the punishment. In today's court session, in addition to the facts contained in the case file, the defendants appealed against but could not provide new documents and details, so there is no basis to accept. Therefore, it is proposed that the jury reject the appeal and declare the first-instance judgment," the representative of the Procuracy stated.

Finally, on the afternoon of November 3, after 2 days of trial, the People's Court of Long An province rejected the appeal and sentenced Mr. Le Tung Van to 5 years in prison for the crime of abusing democratic freedoms to infringe upon his interests. State interests, legitimate rights and interests of organizations and individuals. The remaining defendants were also sentenced to 3-4 years on the same charges.

Ông Lê Tùng Vân sắp hầu tòa phúc thẩm sau thời gian trì hoãn: Tung tích Diễm My vẫn là ẩn số Jennie10:19:28 01/11/2022Sau 2 tuần tạm hoãn, ngày 2/11, TAND tỉnh Long An dự kiến mở phiên phúc thẩm xem xét kháng cáo của ông Lê Tùng Vân và đồng phạm liên quan vụ án hình sự Lợi dụng các quyền tự do dân chủ xâm phạm lợi ích của Nhà nước