Sichuan Teacher Embezzlement Case Second Trial: Key Witness Suspected of Having Observed First Trial

Sichuan Teacher Embezzlement Case Second Trial: Key Witness Suspected of Having Observed First Trial

The case was heard for the third time in the second trial by the Guangyuan Intermediate Court in Cangxi County Court on August 20; Luo Degeng, a physics teacher at Sichuan Cangxi Middle School, was accused of embezzling 3.24 million yuan during his 19 years as the head of the school's printing factory.

Luo Degeng, file photo

According to participants who observed the trial, the prosecution maintained its previous opinion, believing that the facts of the first trial were clear and that the original verdict should be upheld. Luo Degeng and his defense team, however, insisted that from 2008 to 2019, Luo Degeng had operated the school's printing factory through a contracting system, paying an annual contracting fee of 100,000 yuan, and that he had the right to dispose of any additional profits. They argued that his actions did not constitute embezzlement of public property.

On the day of the trial, after 5 pm, the presiding judge announced a recess, and the case will be scheduled for a verdict at a later date.

The Paper previously reported that Luo Degeng was appointed as the head of the school's printing factory for 19 years and was accused of embezzling over 3.24 million yuan in profits through shell companies. In November 2025, he was sentenced to 10 years in prison for corruption and bribery in the first trial. Luo Degeng argued that the printing factory was his personal contract, and after paying the management fee, the profits should belong to him, but this defense opinion was not accepted by the court.

Luo Degeng appealed against the first trial verdict. In July this year, his family and defense team pointed out that the court had rejected their request to access the trial recordings due to technical faults. Relevant personnel from the second trial court stated that the system had a problem and that the maintenance company was handling it.

Regarding whether a key witness in the first trial had observed the trial, the Guangyuan Intermediate Court also conducted an investigation during the recess.

On August 25, a person who participated in observing the case told The Paper that the Cangxi Court had repaired the technical issues and re-obtained the video recordings of Luo Degeng's first trial. The defense team found that a man in the audience was highly suspected to be a witness named Cao, who had testified in the first trial.

The court believed that current technical means could not confirm whether the man in red was indeed witness Cao, and the existing evidence could not rule out the possibility that witness Cao had observed the first trial. Based on the principle of "doubt benefits the defendant," the court decided not to accept the testimony of witness Cao and another witness in the second trial.

"On the day of the trial on August 20, Li, a member of the trial committee and president of the Cangxi Court, who had participated in the discussion of the case, was appointed by the Guangyuan Municipal People's Congress as the vice president and member of the trial committee of the Guangyuan Intermediate People's Court," said Luo Degeng's relatives. Luo Degeng and his defense team also applied for the recusal of Judge Li.

Luo Degeng's relatives explained that Li had participated in the discussion of the case and had an important impact on the guilt or innocence of Luo Degeng. The second trial court's decision on whether to send the case back for retrial was closely related to Li's interests. At the same time, according to the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Law, which prohibit trial personnel from participating in the trial of the same case in different procedures, Li should also be recused from the trial.

The Paper reporter Shi Ping

(This article is from The Paper, and more original news can be found by downloading The Paper APP)

Report/Feedback