Homicide at Guanyin Temple Street: Expert Testimony and Professionalization in 1920s China

On January 15th, 1924, a maidservant in Beijing was murdered at the home of her employer, a bank accountant named Shen Ruihong and his wife. The case became a protracted legal battle as judicial authorities pursued Mrs. Shen for the murder, suggesting that she had been having an affair with an unnamed man who killed the maidservant Liu. After rounds of appeal the case was retried by the Supreme Court, ultimately exonerating Shen. At the center of the case was disputed forensic evidence: blood stains, fingerprints and other physical traces at the crime scene suggested divergent narratives of the murder when interpreted in different ways by police, the prosecution, and the defense. Despite the involvement of fingerprint examiners and university medico-legal experts, the meaning of the forensics of the case remained contested and ambiguous. Many in Republican China viewed the involvement of outside experts in the law as a necessity for judicial reform and, barring this, an ominous reminder of the deficiency of China’s legal system. This reflected a new, widespread understanding that professional expertise was essential for a modern economy, society, and political system. As different groups asserted their expert authority in the law, the courtroom became a testing ground for new strategies of social authority and legitimacy that were changing Chinese society more broadly. Yet, expert testimony was always utilized in dialogue with competing voices – including that of the accused – and through trial procedures that maintained the authority of the law’s own professionals to interpret the “facts” of a case. By exploring the ways in which the broader valorization of expertise in Republican China was reconciled with the professional interests and practical realities of the law, this paper reveals the legal arena to be an important albeit complex stage on which professionalization was enacted.