The media recently has been full of reports that the police have finally solved the mystery of who murdered of Wu Hsiao-hui (
Police were able to clear up the Wu case because criminal investigators collected adequate evidence, including one suspect's DNA samples and a palm print, at the crime scene. Since the evidence was well-preserved, police were able to arrest the suspects after matching the scientific evidence eight years later.
A big difference between the Wu case and many controversial cases in the past is that police were able to arrest the suspects and charge them simply based on scientific evidence, and that confessions from the suspects were absolutely unnecessary. Police in Taiwan have a bad habit of being preoccupied solely with getting suspects' confessions while ignoring scientific evidence at crime scenes. From Wu's case, however, we know that whether a suspect has confessed to his or her crime is not important.
This year, both the Judicial Yuan and the Judicial Reform Foundation have actively pushed for amendments to the rules of evidence detailed in the Criminal Procedure Law (刑事訴訟法) to have a defendant's confession to police or prosecutors rendered inadmissible. If they succeed, torture, threats or gimmicks should all be eliminated from the criminal investigation process. The reformers hope that the amendment will be passed by the Legislative Yuan this year.
Wu's case has highlighted another problem, as the public questions whether the police made a special effort to preserve the evidence because the victim was the daughter of a local police chief. There have been many cases in the past in which important pieces of evidence have been damaged or even lost. This is why the reform foundation has in recent years promoted a scientific approach to criminal investigations. But the police still use traditional investigative methods. Their scientific investigation skills are manifestly inadequate. Forensic examiners are employed solely at city and county police headquarters. Once a major crime occurs, local police are unable to undertake a thorough collection of evidence without the help of the Criminal Investigation Bureau (刑事警察局), under the Ministry of the Interior, or the Investigation Bureau (調查局), under the Ministry of Justice. Due to police's inadequate understanding of crime-scene preservation, however, many crime scenes are disturbed before forensic examiners arrive.
In addition, Wu's case has highlighted law-enforcement officers' lack of understanding of those who are mentally handicapped, as well as of disadvantaged groups. After the murder, in October 1994, police arrested a mentally handicapped man, treating him as the prime suspect on the basis of an alleged confession without considering his congenital weakness and ability to understand the case. Later, he was released because his palm print and DNA samples did not match those from the crime scene. There have been many similar cases, proving that police often clear up cases on the basis of confessions. This may easily lead to miscarriages of justice.
Law-enforcement officers can effectively maintain social order only if the government provides them with the necessary equipment to conduct criminal investigations and training for the handling of crime scenes.
Chan Shun-kuei is a lawyer at the Judicial Reform Foundation; Chen Hsiu-hsuan is a volunteer at the foundation.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS