Li Jin enters the case and concludes the defense. Prosecutor- Zhang Xiaoning is scheming and manipulative.

The jury trial of Zhang Xiaoning is nearing its conclusion, with both the prosecution and defense presenting their final evidence and arguments on the 19th. Inside the courtroom, where intense debates have unfolded, the defense argues that Zhang was driven by delusions and extreme emotional distress, influenced by her Emotional Distress Disorder (EDD). In contrast, the prosecution characterizes Zhang as a cunning and manipulative individual, labeling her “calculated” and “vindictive.” They assert that she held a grudge against a lawyer who had once assisted her and sought to evade responsibility for her actions. Following their statements, the jury began deliberating but was unable to reach a consensus, with further discussions planned for the 20th.

Both sides agree that Zhang suffers from a schizophrenia spectrum disorder. In the defense’s summary, they noted that both parties acknowledged her mental health challenges. They highlighted Zhang’s abnormal behavior in China, such as persistently calling her ex-boyfriend, and presented evidence suggestive of delusions, hallucinations, and auditory disturbances.

The defense attorney emphasized that during the time of the crime, Zhang was in the midst of a severe episode of her mental illness. She had faced considerable stress due to harassment linked to a previous photoshoot incident, which preceded her protests at the UN. They argued that her possession of a knife stemmed from her fear of being followed by Chinese agents. Her attempts to reach out to Li Jinjing for assistance were depicted as an effort to leverage his influence in the activist community to have the images removed. However, after her request was denied and she was labeled as mentally unstable, Zhang was left feeling exhausted, desperate, and out of control due to untreated symptoms.

The defense urged the jury to thoroughly consider Zhang’s psychological condition, acknowledging that her actions were horrific but arguing they were a result of extreme emotional turmoil, causing her to lose self-control due to her delusions and hallucinations.

Conversely, the prosecution dismissed the idea of delusions, contending that Zhang premeditated her actions. They highlighted the ongoing nature of the events on March 11 and March 14, asserting Zhang’s intent to harm Li Jinjing after he declined to represent her in her asylum case. The prosecutor revealed that Zhang had threatened Li, saying, “Life for a life,” and just three days later, she acted on that threat, illustrating her awareness of her actions.

The prosecution portrayed Zhang as someone who was irked by rejection, leading her to seek calculated revenge on March 14. They noted that before her attack, she closed the office door and specifically targeted Li’s neck, chest, and abdomen, demonstrating a level of control that contradicts the defense’s claims of despair.

While Zhang maintains that her actions were driven by delusions, the prosecution argued that these delusions do not justify taking another person’s life. They pointed out her motivations, which included anger over Li’s refusal to remove her photos and the misguided belief that he supported democracy activists. The prosecution stated that if her delusions had involved genuine self-defense, her argument might have held more weight.

Labeling Zhang as “smart,” the prosecution demonstrated how she consistently prioritized her self-interest above all else, even circumventing legal regulations. Evidence revealed her arrival in the U.S. on a student visa without ever attending school, fabricating stories to secure asylum, and evading questions during police interrogations regarding incriminating evidence.

Additionally, the prosecution highlighted Zhang’s evasiveness during direct questioning in court about the weapons involved in the crime. They recounted an instance when they asked Zhang if the knives were hers, to which she dismissed the question impatiently, reflecting her belief that she could dictate the rules in court.

In closing, the prosecution argued that Zhang’s actions indicated she was not out of control at the time of the crime but demonstrated a consistent pattern of behavior marked by her inability to accept rejection. They drew comparisons to her incessant calls to her boyfriend in China, showcasing her tendency to escalate situations and maintain control.

After both sides completed their summaries, the jury began deliberations but could not reach an agreement, resulting in a temporary recess. The jury will reconvene on the 20th as Zhang faces six charges, including second-degree murder, two counts of illegal weapon possession, third-degree threats, second-degree harassment, and criminal obstruction of breathing or blood circulation.