In June 2024, Li Haohua, father of the party Li Chengru, spoke out about a tragic incident that occurred three years ago in Xinye County, Henan Province, involving the drowning of teenagers while playing in the water. Li Chengru, who was 15 years old at the time, along with another companion, tried to rescue the victim but ultimately failed. Instead of being praised for their efforts, Li Chengru and his companion were charged with intentional harm and sentenced to 11 years in prison, along with civil compensation. Li’s father expressed his desperate situation as they come from a humble background and had nowhere to turn for help.
Recently, Li Haohua sought help from Da Ji Yuan, stating that in July 2021, Li Chengru and three companions were playing in the water when one of them accidentally drowned. Li Chengru noticed the situation, tried to help along with another companion, but due to his inability to swim, he had to seek assistance from adults on the shore, who then called the emergency services. He further assisted in the rescue operation by boarding a lifeboat to aid in the efforts. Li Haohua emphasized that his son did not realize he had committed any wrongdoing during the entire incident, much less a crime.
According to the family, the case went through investigation, prosecution, and two court trials, but no objective evidence was provided by the judicial authorities. Li Chengru was convicted of intentional harm solely based on the conflicting testimony of a 12-year-old cousin of the drowning victim, without substantial proof. Despite Li Chengru’s denial of the accusations, refusing to plead guilty for a reduced sentence, he was sentenced to 11 years in prison, devastating his youth and marking him as a criminal for life for a crime he claims he did not commit.
On July 11, 2021, Li Chengru, along with Li Chaoyang, Chen Daosheng, and Li Jianiu, went to play by the river in Baihe. Chaoyang accidentally fell into the water, prompting Chengru and Daosheng to attempt a rescue. However, due to his lack of swimming skills, Chengru was unable to save the victim and had to call for help using the victim’s phone. Despite initial statements describing the incident as an accident, later testimonies from witnesses led to serious accusations against Chengru.
As the case proceeded, Li Haohua tirelessly sought to present his son’s version of events to the court, only to be consistently ignored. Li Chengru’s detailed nine-page account of the incident was disregarded by the prosecution during the trial. The court ultimately sentenced him to 11 years in prison for intentional harm, adding a substantial civil compensation totaling 6 million yuan, based on the testimony of a 12-year-old witness with conflicting statements.
The detailed accounts provided by Li Chengru and disputes raised concerning the circumstances in which the drowning occurred were dismissed by the court. The court found Li Chengru guilty of intentionally causing harm and contributing to the tragic deaths of the victims, despite his continuous claims of innocence. Li Haohua argued that the accusation of intentional harm was unfounded, considering the normalcy of boys playing and roughhousing in the water.
Furthermore, the family faced continuous harassment and violence from the deceased’s relatives, who accused Li Chengru of negligence and profiteering from the incident. Li Chengru sought protection from the authorities but was instead locked up in a detention center under the guise of safeguarding him.
The investigation and subsequent legal proceedings appeared to lack solid evidence linking Li Chengru to the alleged crime. Despite the absence of conclusive proof, the prosecution pressed charges and recommended an 8-year sentence for intentional harm. The victim’s family demanded a heavier penalty, designating the incident as intentional homicide and pushing for a significant civil compensation claim.
Legal experts and the defense team contested the legal basis for charging Li Chengru, arguing his innocence. However, the court upheld the initial verdict, sentencing Li Chengru to 11 years in prison for intentional harm, with additional civil compensation. The family appealed the decision, highlighting the absence of concrete evidence and the questionable testimonies on which the case was built.
Li Haohua condemned the lack of objective evidence and the reliance on unreliable witness statements to convict his son. He criticized the authorities for conducting exhaustive interrogations of a 12-year-old witness, contravening legal procedures, which resulted in coerced testimonies. The family raised concerns over the treatment of witnesses and the lack of transparency in the investigation process, leading to a biased judgment against Li Chengru.
Despite Li Chengru’s family’s cooperation with the court’s asset disclosure requirements, the authorities chose to enforce a brief detention for alleged refusal to comply with the court’s ruling. The family submitted a formal appeal to the court, urging a review of the case based on the substantial doubts surrounding the conviction and the plea for justice and exoneration for Li Chengru.