2021年7月19日，大午案开庭第5天，继昨日开庭到晚上11：42分之后，今天上午9：30继续开庭。大部分被告人羁押在保定市看守所，保定市看守所离高碑店市人民法院有近90公里的距离，每天来回往返路途距离有近180公里，这样连续高强度的审判，对孙大午及在案的多名被告人都是一个严峻的考验。有的被告人年龄比较大，有的被告人身体极度虚弱，法庭加速推进，被告人身体能否吃得消，值得关注。
今日开庭前，有律师问孙大午，能不能吃得消，怎么看上去有点精神不振。孙大午说，昨天只休息了4个小时。法庭上的孙大午，剃光了头发，新长出的头茬，已经全白，但是发言依然铿锵有力，掷地有声。孙大午说，通过开庭，你们也能发现，我是一个什么样的人。
今日开庭审理的是起诉书指控的第一起9·14寻衅滋事案。针对本起指控，孙大午本人予以否认，认为指控是颠倒黑白，是非不分。
1.事情的起因
孙大午称，起诉书指控的2015年9月14日当天，他不在家，而是和妻子一起外出看病。等到中午12点回到大午公司的路上，发现路被堵死了，想绕道郎五庄村，听到广播喊，让郎五庄村的村民去堵大午公司的路，从郎五庄村去大午公司的路也被堵死了。
一个叫王素霞的妇女因为摆摊占道卖泳衣把路堵了，大午温泉公司把她的摊位清理了，引起这么妇女不满，堵路。
而郎五庄村本来是孙大午所在的村子，为什么要堵大午公司的路呢？据孙大午称，是因为当时的村长放高利贷。而孙大午不允许大午公司的人把钱放给借高利贷的，他们从大午公司的人这里借不到钱，所以借其他人堵路之机，也去堵路。
本起指控，根本的起因就是因为王素霞堵路引发。起诉书指控孙大午及公司高管、员工处理堵路事件，构成寻衅滋事罪。
2.堵路堵了6个小时，长达3公里，损失160万
根据法庭向多位当事人调查，当时堵路从上午9点多开始，一直持续到下午4点才疏通，至少持续了6个小时，被堵的路长达3公里。堵路的王素霞，已经明显构成犯罪，而公安机关根本不管，不处理。
政府让大午公司上报损失，据称损失达160万。孙大午称，大午公司每天的客流量大约1万人，高峰每天2万人，最高时一年接待了450万人。交通堵死了，很多游客就回头走了。
3.摆摊占道经营，严重损害大午公司声誉，引发多起交通事故
王素霞摆摊的地方，是大午路的右侧，也就是从外地来大午温泉的路边。而来大午温泉的游客在路边买泳衣，必然造成交通中断，后续车辆拥堵。大午温泉并不限制村民卖泳衣，而且提供了专门的卖泳衣的场所和市场。王素霞为了宰客，把摊位设在了游客必经的路上，而且一件泳衣可以赚1000元。游客发现上当受骗后，要求退货也退不了，必然找大午公司投诉，损害大午公司声誉。
由于摆摊占道经营，造成道路拥堵混乱，导致多起交通事故，多人在此处丧生。
4．堵路的王素霞是村里有名的滚刀肉，在一年前就采用过类似的方法堵路
律师在孙大午2014年的博客中发现，有一张堵路的照片，王素霞躺在路中间，把路给堵上了。而这件事发生在2014年，也就是本案发生之前一年。王素霞并不是第一次堵路了。2014年的堵路事件发生后，孙大午在博客中记录了这件事，同时配有当时的照片，照片清晰显示王素霞堵路的情形。
5.王素霞不是普通人，区委书记都没办法解决
孙大午称，她们（王素霞）是个家族势力，她们现在还在开鱼塘钓鱼。国家是不允许的，我们现在一直在投诉。这个老太太在我们哪儿，被称为滚刀肉。我找过我们区委书记，区委书记说不好处理，这个人背后还有一些势力。因为这个事，政府怕她上访，给了她15万。张宝军要18万，政府不同意，他就到大午打砸东西，后来被法院判了8个月。
6.两个区委常委坐到了王素霞的床边
孙大午开庭称：王素霞的女儿李敏，这个人很不一般，当时我们和新希望合作，占股49%，新希望派来的总经理叫刘科常（音），刘科常雇佣了我们大午的李敏，李敏是个女孩子，很漂亮，给她什么任务呢？采购任务！这个运输资料采购，李敏家2个大车。我们公开招标，运输一吨是75-85，贵一点的85，她们家的车运输是120，我们一年几万吨，从通州拉过来，一车30吨，一年这两辆车的运输费就差上百万。李敏去了以后，她获得的人脉比我都多。处理这个事的时候，两个区委常委都到李敏家，坐到李敏母亲床边，两个常委到我这儿来跟我说的。猪场承包给其中一个领导的关系户，到我这包一个工程，200多万的工程，要我们支付600多万。发包、承包猪场的工程，不是我的事，刘科常后来处理了，公安拘留了，到要诉讼的时候，他们通过很多关系找到我，我出了谅解书，为这点小案子，我们不想纠缠。我和新希望达成协议，我们全部收购。不再扯这个了，公安已经处理了，给刘科常留点面子，给新希望留点面子。
7.大午公司为什么要组织9·24游行？
孙大午：因为没人处理堵路的事，村里用大喇叭喊，开推土机把路堵上了。其中就有村长，叫什么老四，后来被撤了。我找到了区委书记，他答应我要处理这个事，结果他不处理。后来他说很复杂，处理不了，据说还拍了桌子。按照道路交通管理法，已经投入使用的道路，就应当由交警进行管理。跟政府汇报过这个事，我们找了政府，找了多少次，但是人家不管。政府不管，我们不能不管。你要生存，你就得疏解交通。
8.我没有打王素霞，事情过去了这么多年，检察院已经结案了，现在又翻腾，法律是怎么了？
律师问孙大午：大午集团公司的员工在政府门前请愿，也没有造成任何损失，现在要给你们定聚众冲击国家机关罪。而李敏的母亲躺在路上6个小时，堵塞交通几公里，公安机关不管，起诉书这样的处理，你有没有意见？
孙大午回答：不仅是这一点，都是黑白颠倒！本来是她犯罪，堵塞交通，扰乱交通秩序，最后弄成我们犯罪？习主席说，人民就是江山，我们1万人的员工不是人民？你看你们弄的这个东西，为了这个300块钱、500块钱……哎！
2015年这个事检察院后来经过调查，是王素霞主动的推倒架子。检察院找我，我说我没有打王素霞，都有录像。这个检察院有结论，刘平给我看过。可以问问刘平，看我们的档案里能不能找得到。我记得检察院的结论里是说公安局在处理时有瑕疵。当时姚旺刑事拘留了，又释放了，我记得是当天就释放了。这都释放多少年了，又翻腾这个事，我不知道法律是怎么回事？
大午案法律团队
2021年7月19日
As the trial continues and the arguments get into the nitty-gritty details of various incidents, the daily briefings, written in what short time the defense lawyers have after long hours of court sessions, may not always be immediately clear in terms of who is who and what is what. We are doing our best to provide clarity. We ask for readers’ patience in staying with us, and them, through this valuable set of briefings on an important case. – The Editors
July 19, 2021, the fifth day of the Dawu trial began at 9:30 this morning, following yesterday’s hearing that concluded at 11:42 p.m. Most of the defendants were detained in the Baoding Municipal Detention Center, which is nearly 90 kilometers away from the Gaobeidian Municipal People’s Court, and the daily round-trip is thus nearly 180 kilometers. Such continuous, high-intensity days are a severe challenge for Sun Dawu (孙大午) and many defendants in the case. Some defendants are older, and some defendants’ physical constitutions are extremely frail. The pace of the trial is accelerating and unforgiving, and whether the defendants’ physical conditions will be able to withstand the toll is worthy of attention.
Before the court session began today, a defense lawyer asked Sun Dawu if he felt fit to continue and why he looked listless. Sun Dawu said that he had only four hours of sleep the night before. Having had his head shaved, Sun Dawu’s newly-grown stubble was completely white, but his speech was still sonorous and loud. Sun Dawu said, as the day’s trial began, “Through this trial, you will also discover what kind of person I really am”.
Today the court session centered on hearing the first incident for which Sun Dawu was indicted ––the crime of “picking quarrels and provoking trouble” (寻衅滋事)–– namely, the incident that occurred on September 14, 2015. In response, Sun Dawu himself denied the allegation, believing that the charge was a reversal of right and wrong.
1. The Cause of the incident
Sun Dawu said that on September 14, 2015, the date alleged in the indictment, he was not at home, but instead had gone out to see a doctor with his wife. When he turned to the road leading to Dawu Co. at 12 noon, he found it was blocked. He wanted to take a detour via Langwuzhuang Village. As he did so, he heard the radio calling Langwuzhuang villagers to block the road to Dawu Co. So the road from Langwuzhuang Village to Dawu was also blocked.
A woman named Wang Suxia (王素霞) set up stalls to sell swimsuits and caused a traffic jam. The Dawu Hot Spring Co. cleared her stalls. She became angry and blocked the road [by lying in the middle of the road for 6 hours].
Langwuzhuang is Sun Dawu’s home village, why did the villagers block the road to Dawu Co.? According to Sun Dawu, it was because the village head at that time gave out high-interest loans, and Sun Dawu did not allow Dawu employees to lend money to the loan sharks. They couldn’t borrow money from Dawu employees, so when others blocked the road, the loan sharks joined.
The primary cause of the accusation against Sun Dawu was the incident in which Wang Suxia blocked the road. The indictment alleges that the handling of the road- blocking incident by Sun Dawu, Dawu executives, and employees constitutes the crime of “picking quarrels and provoking trouble.”
2. The road was blocked for 6 hours for a length of 3 km, costing a loss of 1.6 million yuan.
According to the court’s investigation of several parties, the road block started at around 9 a.m. and lasted until 4 p.m. that day, when it was cleared. It lasted at least 6 hours. The blocked road was 3 kilometers long. Wang Suxia, who was blocking the road, had clearly committed a crime, but the public security organ simply ignored it, and did nothing about it.
The government asked the Dawu Co. to report its losses, which reportedly amounted to 1.6 million yuan. Sun Dawu said that the daily visitor flow of the Dawu Co. averages about 10,000, with a peak of 20,000 per day. And at its peak, the company received 4.5 million people a year. Many tourists turned around and left that day because the road was blocked.
3. Setting up stalls to occupy the road seriously damaged Dawu’s reputation and caused multiple traffic accidents.
The location where Wang Suxia set up her stalls was on the right side of Dawu Road, which is also the road leading to Dawu Hot Springs. When visitors to Dawu Hot Springs stopped to buy swimsuits on the roadside, they inevitably disrupted traffic, causing subsequent vehicle congestion. Dawu Hot Springs did not restrict villagers from selling swimsuits, and provided a special location and market for selling swimsuits. In order to cheat customers, however, Wang Suxia [did not set up her stall in the designated location] but set up her stalls on the road that tourists had to pass to reach the springs, profiting as much as 1,000 yuan for each swimsuit. Tourists found out later that they had been cheated but were unable to return the goods for a refund. They inevitably filed complaints with Dawu Co., which damaged the company’s reputation.
As a result of the villagers’ stalls occupying the road, the road was congested and chaotic, leading to multiple traffic accidents and deaths.
4. Wang Suxia, who blocked the road, is a notoriously unreasonable person in the village. She had also used a similar method to block the road the year before.
The defense lawyers found in Sun Dawu’s 2014 blog that there was a picture of Wang Suxia lying in the middle of the road, blocking the road. This occurred in 2014, which was a year before the 2015 incident. It was not the first time that Wang Suxia had blocked the road. Sun Dawu recorded the road blocking incident of 2014 on his blog, along with photos of the incident. The photos clearly show the situation of Wang Suxia blocking the road.
5. Wang Suxia is not an ordinary person, even the District Communist Party Secretary could not do anything about her.
Sun Dawu said that they (Wang Suxia) belonged to an influential family and they were still operating ponds for fishing. Sun said, “The country’s regulations did not allow it, and we have always lodged complaints. This old lady is called ‘gun dao rou’ [滚刀肉, an impossibly unreasonable person] where we are from. I have talked to the Secretary of our District Communist Party Committee, and he said that the issue would be difficult to deal with because she had some powerful backers. Because of this incident, the government was afraid that she would “shang fang” (上访), or lodge a petition with higher levels of government, and gave her 150,000 yuan to appease her. Zhang Baojun (张宝军, a Langwuzhuang villager) asked for 180,000 yuan. When the government rejected his demand, he went to Dawu and smashed things. Later, he was sentenced to 8 months in prison.”
6. Two District Party Standing Committee members visited Wang Suxia.
During the court session, Sun Dawu said: “Wang Suxia’s daughter Li Min (李敏) was a very unusual person. At that time, we [the Dawu Group] cooperated with New Hope Co. (新希望) and accounted for 49% of their shares. The general manager sent by New Hope was called Liu Kechang (刘科常, phonetic transcription). Liu Kechang hired Li Min, a Dawu employee. Li Min is a very pretty young woman. What task did he give her? Procurement! Procure transportation suppliers. Li Min’s family has two trucks. If we invited bids from the public, the transportation cost would be 75-85 yuan per ton, with the more expensive option being 85 yuan. But for Li Min’s family trucks, we paid 120 yuan per ton. We bring tens of thousands of tons a year from Tongzhou (通州). One truckload is 30 tons, and the cost of transportation between these two trucks was nearly a million a year. After Li Min was hired by Liu, she developed more contacts than I had ever had. Later on, when dealing with the road-blocking incident, two District Party Standing Committee members went to Li Min’s home and sat at the bedside of Li Min’s mother [Wang Suxia] to discuss the matter — that’s what the two members of the Standing Committee told me when they came to meet me afterwards. The pig farm was contracted to one of the households that had a relationship with one of the government leaders. Contracting a project from Dawu, a 2-million yuan project, they asked us to pay more than 6 million yuan. I was not the one who issued the contract for the pig farm. Liu Kechang dealt with it later and was detained by the police. When it came time to litigate the lawsuit, they found me through several of my contacts, and I issued a statement of understanding. We [the Dawu Co.] didn’t want to be entangled in this small case. I reached an agreement with the New Hope Co. and we purchased all the shares of the joint venture. I don’t want to talk about this anymore; the police have already dealt with it, and I want to save Liu Kechang’s face and the face of the New Hope Co.”
7. Why did Dawu Company organize the September 24 [2015] march?
Sun Dawu: “Loudspeakers in the village mobilized villagers and used a bulldozer to block the road, but no authorities were there dealing with the road blockage. Among the people who took part in blocking the road was the village chief, nicknamed Old Number Four, who was later removed. I went to see the Party Secretary of the District, and he promised to resolve this matter, but he did not. Later, he said the dispute was very complicated and he couldn’t handle it. I heard that he had even slammed his fists on the table. According to the Road Traffic Management Law (《交通管理法》), roads that are in use should be managed by traffic police. We reported this matter to the government; we went to the government many times, but they didn’t deal with it. If the government refused to deal with it, we would have to. If we wanted to survive, we had to get the traffic moving again.”
8. I didn’t assault Wang Suxia. Years have passed, the procuratorate has long since closed the case, and now you are digging it up again. What’s wrong with the law?
The defense lawyers asked Sun Dawu: “The employees of Dawu Group petitioned in front of the government building, and they did not cause any damage. Now you are charged with “gathering a crowd to assault state organs.” On the other hand, Li Min’s mother [Wang Suxia] lay on the road for 6 hours, blocking the traffic for several kilometers, but the public security authorities did not do anything about it. Do you have any comments on the way the indictment sets forth the issue?”
Sun Dawu replied: “Not only this! The whole thing is upside down! It was she who committed a crime by blocking the road and disrupting traffic; how in the end is it we who are incriminated? Chairman Xi said that the people are the country. Are Dawu’s 10,000 employees not the people? Look at the stuff you have come up with for a mere 300 yuan, 500 yuan… the shame!” [Given that there is no specific reference to 300 yuan and 500 yuan elsewhere in the briefing, the translator takes what Sun Dawu said to mean ‘for such trivial matters’.]
[Sun Dawu:] The procuratorate later investigated the 2015 incident, and concluded that it was Wang Suxia herself who toppled the stalls. Personnel from the procuratorate asked me questions too, and I said that I didn’t assault Wang Suxia and had video footage to prove it. The procuratorate reached its conclusion, which Liu Ping (刘平, General Manager of Dawu Group) showed to me. You can ask Liu Ping to see if it can be found in our archives. I remember that the procuratorate’s conclusion was that the Public Security Bureau had flaws in its handling of the case. Yao Wang (姚旺, a Dawu employee and a defendant) was criminally detained but released on the same day, as I remember. Years have passed since his release, and now you are digging it up again. I don’t know what’s wrong with the law.Dawu Legal Team
July 19, 2021