It is said that Jomo (33), a suspect in the Sillim-dong weapon riot, was reported to the police for a free ride just before the crime. It was found that he moved from his residence in Incheon to his grandmother’s house in Geumcheon-gu, Seoul, and then to the place of his crime by taxi.
According to the Kukmin Ilbo report on the 24th, Mr. Cho moved from his home in Incheon to his grandmother’s house in Geumcheon-gu, Seoul by taxi. However, he reportedly ran away without paying the taxi fare and the taxi driver reported him to the police. The Gwanak Police Station, which is investigating the case, plans to secure these statements about Cho’s movement on the day of the crime and investigate Mr. Cho on charges of fraud. Cho was arrested the day before and is being investigated for murder and attempted murder.
Cho reportedly said nothing of his grandmother. Cho’s grandmother is also said to have made a statement to the effect that “Jo did not act in a problem or said anything special” during the police investigation. However, since Cho’s grandmother is very old, the police plan to further verify the authenticity of the statement.
Mr. Cho also used a taxi to move to the place 먹튀검증of his crime. Unlike when he moved from Incheon to Seoul, he was known to be carrying a knife stolen from a mart near his grandmother’s house at the time. This is why the reasoning that Mr. Cho planned the crime in advance is weighted.
Even at this time, Mr. Cho got off without paying the taxi fare, but he said there was no related report. The police plan to investigate the second taxi driver to see if he saw the weapon in Mr. Cho’s hand and whether there was any problem behavior. A police official said, “When investigating the statement about the motive for the crime, it changes frequently every time you stand in front of reporters, so you have to keep checking the reliability of the statement.” With voices calling for the disclosure of Mr. Cho’s identity in the midst of the tragedy that took place in broad daylight, the Personal Disclosure Information Review Committee will be held on the 26th.
Mr. Cho has a history of being punished for committing assault in the Sillim Station area in the past. On January 25, 2010, around 2 am, Mr. Cho was handed over to trial on charges of assaulting another customer with a bottle of soju at a bar in Sillim-dong. He also swung a broken soju bottle at the employee who was stopping him, and assaulted another employee with a beer bottle. The court sentenced Cho to 1 year and 6 months in prison and 2 years probation. As Cho did not appeal, his judgment was confirmed. The bar where the incident occurred is currently closed, but it was in the same alley as the location of the crime.
Meanwhile, witnesses of the incident are still in shock and horror. The owner of a store near the scene of the incident complained of pain, saying, “My heart is still pounding.” Another shop owner said, “If I had been there, I wouldn’t have done anything. I feel so sorry for that child (the victim). I would have helped by throwing a chair here,” she cried in a trembling voice.
As the video of Mr. Cho’s crime is illegally distributed, indirect witnesses are also experiencing similar trauma. The Cyber Investigation Division of the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency has prosecuted and is investigating the person who first distributed the video containing the scene of Mr. Cho’s crime.
The police said, “The video itself is not only brutal, but it can be a secondary offense because it is at a level where the victim’s impression is recognizable.”