(Minghui.org) Falun Gong practitioners Ms. Pu Meie (浦梅娥) and Mr. Gao Zemeng (高泽孟) were tried in Xuanwei City Court in Yunnan Province on November 26, 2014. Their lawyers pleaded not guilty on their behalf, and both defendants told the judge how they had benefited from practicing Falun Gong.
Ms. Pu Meie is 45 years old and owns a sewing business. She told the judge that she began to practice Falun Gong during her previous detention. She was jailed in 2000 for a crime that she committed.
When she met a Falun Gong practitioner, she was initially fearful, because she believed the Communist regime's hate propaganda used to support of its persecution campaign against Falun Gong. Over time, she observed that this practitioner was always cheerful despite her circumstances. She would not get angry no matter how she was mistreated. Ms. Pu decided to get to know her and began to practice Falun Gong herself.
Ms. Pu reported becoming fit and healthy by practicing Falun Gong. She said she also turned into a kind person. When she began to share her personal experience with others, she was arrested. She told everyone in the courtroom how she was tortured with electric shocks, the “tiger bench,” and solitary confinement.
Mr. Gao Zemeng, 38, works as a hotel security guard. He told the judge how he came to practice Falun Gong. In 2009, he saw a copy of Zhuan Falun at a bookstore and bought it out of curiosity. He thought it was an excellent practice and began to follow the teachings. He experienced great benefits and wanted to share it with others. He was arrested when he did.
The lawyers defending Ms. Pu and Mr. Gao pointed out during the hearing that the police had no evidence to prove that the practitioners had committed any crime. When the prosecutors claimed that Falun Gong was a cult, the lawyers noted that there was no law to that effect.
The lawyers also argued that the police did not follow legal procedures, that they carried out the arrest before there was evidence of a crime. When their case was transferred to the Procuratorate, the officers refused to let the lawyers visit the practitioners, claiming the case was political in nature. When the case went to court, the officers told the lawyers they needed permission from the 610 Office in order to see their clients.
The lawyers asserted that their clients had not done anything illegal and asked the judge to abide by the law and clear the practitioners' charges.