Chung Hsing Female Student Murder Case Takes a Turn? Woman Killed After Tutoring Job Interview; Lü Jin-kai, Once Sentenced to Death, Acquitted Then Case Reversed Again

The case of baker Lü Jin-kai, accused in the notorious 1993 murder of a female university student in Taiwan, has taken another dramatic turn. Lü was originally sentenced to 20 years in prison for rape and murder, serving nearly 19 years. After a retrial was granted, Taiwan’s High Court recently ruled that the prosecution’s evidence was insufficient to prove his involvement and acquitted him—though the verdict was not final. Today (9th), the Supreme Court found that the High Court’s retrial judgment lacked sufficient investigation and reasoning on certain evidence, overturned the acquittal, and remanded the case for further review. This sends the decades-long, repeatedly overturned case back into the judicial process.

Who killed the Chung Hsing University female student? Lü Jin-kai was sentenced to death in both first and second trials.

Looking back at the case, in December 1993, a female student from National Chung Hsing University traveled to a residence in Zhonghe City, Taipei County (now Zhonghe District, New Taipei City), to interview for a tutoring job. Tragically, she was sexually assaulted and strangled to death—an incident that shocked Taiwanese society. Police later arrested Chen Xi-qing, who had a prior sex offense record, and baker Lü Jin-kai. Prosecutors alleged both committed forcible sexual assault and murder together, charging them under the 'Punishment of Banditry Act' and relevant criminal laws at the time. Key evidence in the initial trials included Lü’s police interrogation confession, Chen’s testimony, and early DNA analysis results. Both were sentenced to death in the first and second trials.

Chung Hsing female student murder case shocked Taiwan. Illustration, unrelated to the actual case. (Photo by Lu Yi-feng)

Why was Lü Jin-kai’s sentence reduced? Released on parole after nearly 19 years in prison.

However, the case was repeatedly overturned and remanded by Taiwan’s Supreme Court. During the sixth retrial, the court found flaws in the police interrogation process, ruling that Lü’s confession was not made voluntarily and thus excluded it from evidence. Nevertheless, the court still accepted parts of Chen’s testimony, early DNA results, and other circumstantial evidence, concluding Lü and Chen were co-perpetrators and reduced Lü’s sentence to 20 years’ imprisonment. Considering his aging parents and wishing to avoid endless litigation, Lü waived his right to appeal in 2006, finalizing the conviction. He was released on parole in 2012 after nearly 19 years in prison.

Why was Lü’s case reopened for retrial? STR DNA testing became the key.

The case took a major turn due to advances in forensic technology. While Chen’s case continued, the High Court commissioned the Criminal Investigation Bureau to conduct STR DNA retesting. The results confirmed that the DNA profile from semen collected from the victim matched only Chen Xi-qing, excluding Lü Jin-kai from involvement in the sexual assault—contradicting earlier findings. Additionally, courts reviewing past testimonies found Chen’s statements inconsistent, and with Lü’s confession already excluded, the foundation of the original conviction weakened. Taiwan’s Control Yuan also released an investigative report, raising concerns about limitations in early DNA technology, interrogation confessions, and evidence evaluation, recommending judicial authorities re-examine the case. Ultimately, the court granted a retrial.

Was Lü not involved in the sexual assault? Why did the Supreme Court overturn the acquittal?

The High Court’s retrial judgment stated that, after excluding Lü’s police confession, the prosecution’s remaining evidence failed to form a complete chain of proof. Combined with the new STR DNA results excluding Lü from the sexual assault, and Chen’s inconsistent testimony lacking corroboration, the court applied the principle of 'benefit of the doubt to the defendant' and acquitted Lü. Prosecutors appealed the verdict.

The Supreme Court ruled that the High Court’s retrial judgment lacked sufficient investigation, reasoning, and justification regarding certain circumstantial evidence, requiring further clarification. It overturned the acquittal and remanded the case for retrial. Notably, the Supreme Court did not directly rule Lü guilty, but instead instructed the lower court to re-examine and reassess all evidence before issuing a new judgment.