On April 22, at the headquarters of the People's Court of Dak Nong Province, the High Court of Ho Chi Minh City opened an appellate hearing to hear the case of “Violating the regulations on food safety” in the line mixed with coal battery dye. pepper to make a profit.
The defendants at the appellate trial
According to the content of the case, in mid-2015, Ms. Le Thi Hong Tho (SN 1975, Director of Tinh Tho Dak Nong One Member Company Limited) knew a buyer of pepper mixed with impurities (including coffee husks and colored gravel). black, about 2-3 mm in size) for sale. Poetry sampling this impurity for Ms. Phan Thi Dung (SN 1962, Director of Thao Dung Production and Trading Co., Ltd., Binh Phuoc province). Both of them agreed that Mrs. Tho would look for impurities to sell to Mrs. Dung to mix into pepper.
Afterwards, Ms. Tho contacted Ms. Nguyen Thi Thanh Loan (SN 1975, living in Dak Nong province) to order and hired Tran threshold (SN 1976, living in Dak Nong province) to transport.
After that, Ms. Loan and Mr. Nguyen Xuan Bao (SN 1985, living in the same province of Dak Nong) went to buy batteries and smashed them to get powdered coal powder into impurities, dried to achieve the color and size required by Ms. Dung.
Later, from Ms. Loan's production was discovered, the police found this line.
On December 28, 2018, the People's Court of Dak Nong province opened a first-instance trial and sentenced the defendants Dung, Poetry and Threshold each of 7 years in prison; defendant Bao was 8 years in prison; accused Loan 7 years and 6 months in prison. After that, the defendants Tho, Ngo, Bao and Loan appealed to the first instance verdict.
At the appellate court today, defendant Loan asked to reduce the penalty for not knowing that the coal-colored impurities were used to mix into pepper. “During the process, the defendant beat the battery and exposed it to the streets, the people all knew. The defendant did not know how to poison the battery, not know how to mix it into pepper” – accused Loan said.
Defendant Bao said that he was unjust because he was a salaried employee. The accused and Loan are not required to live together as husband and wife as the conclusion of an investigation results in a conclusion.
Defendant Bao and defendant Loan (in the middle of the top) said that there was no relationship, husband and wife
Defendant Tho also said that by the end of 2015, when she heard that Mrs. Loan made impurities to mix into pepper, she should help and she promised to pay VND 1,000 but in fact she had not paid any. The accused, in particular, complained that he only transported without knowing that it was coal impurity.
After the lawyer finished defending the defendants, the Panel unexpectedly postponed the trial because it said that Mr. Dung did not appeal the first instance judgment, was not present at the trial but deemed it necessary to be summoned for confrontation. clarify some issues. In addition, a number of defendants filed an appeal for mitigation of the punishment, but at the trial, they decided to postpone the trial for consideration.
Source link
