Translation:People v Zhou Shaoqing (2020)
Tianjin, PR China
Prosecution Authority: the People’s Procuratorate of Hedong District of Tianjin (the ‘Prosecution’).
The Defendant, Zhou Shaoqing, formerly ‘Zhou Shaoqing’,[1] male, born on 6 July 1989 in Heilongjiang, Han Chinese, master’s degree, unemployed, resides at Room 101, Entrance 1, Building 14, Yingdong Hot Spring Garden, Hedong District, Tianjin, with household registration location at Room 1103, Entrance 1, Jingyue Commonhold, Dongxing Road, Hedong District, Tianjin. In 2018, the Defendant was sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of six (6) months, suspended for one (1) year, for committing the crime of assault. On suspicion of committing the crime of picking quarrels and provoking trouble, the Defendant was placed under bail pending trial on 29 February 2020, criminally detained on 13 March 2020, formally arrested on 17 August 2020, and is now detained in Tianjin Hedong Detention Centre.
Designated defence counsel: Sun Sheng, a lawyer with Tianjin Xiaozhang Law Firm.
On 27 October 2020, the Prosecution filed the present case with this Court by the Indictment [2020] Jin Dong Jian Erbu Xingsu No 133 against the Defendant for committing the crime of picking quarrels and provoking trouble. This Court then formed a collegial panel in compliance with the law and held a public hearing of this case. Assigned by the Prosecution, Prosecutor Chen Dong appeared in court on behalf of the People to present the case. The Defendant and his designated defence counsel appeared before the court and attended the proceedings. The trial of the case has now been concluded.
The Prosecution alleges that, between February 2018 and February 2020, the Defendant, while residing at locations like his home of Room 101, Entrance 1, Building 14, Yingdong Hot Spring Garden, Hedong District of this city and such, used the information network, posted or reposted many times on the social platform Twitter using the account registered via his mobile phone of one hundred and twenty (120) tweets in total of untrue remarks and images that disparaged the state leader and the political system of the state, defamed the prevention and control measures of the state in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic, causing others to repost and leave negative comments. Upon the assessment of the Forensic Psychiatric Evaluation Committee of Tianjin, the mental state of the evaluatee, Zhou Shaoqing, is diagnosed as suffering from schizophrenia during the time of the present case; however, during such time, the evaluatee had the ability to recognise and control at the time of his commission of the crime in this case, and thereby he bears full criminal responsibility.
Upon investigation, the Defendant was captured by the public security organ at his residence on 28 February 2020.
In response to the aforesaid charges, the Prosecution proclaimed and presented evidence in court as ‘Search Warrant’, ‘Search Record’, ‘Decision on the Distrainment of Articles’, ‘Record of the Distrainment of Articles’, ‘List of Distrained Articles and Their Photos’, ‘Screenshots of Twitter Contents’, ‘Statement of Circumstances’, testimony of witnesses from Zhu Heran, Cao Zhongyun, and Li Zhixia, ‘Forensic Evaluative Opinions’, ‘Work Log of Electronic Evidence Examination’, ‘Source of the Case and the Course of Apprehension’, ‘Household Registration Materials’, ‘Criminal Record Materials’, ‘Medical Record Materials’, ‘Statement of Remorse’, and such. The Prosecution holds that the Defendant used the information network for repeated verbal abuse of others and the dissemination of untrue information, undermining social order; the circumstances were serious; his acts thus have constituted the crime of picking quarrels and provoking trouble and shall be held criminally responsible according to law. The Prosecution, therefore, pleads with this Court that punishment be given to the Defendant in accordance with the provisions under Items 2 and 4 of Article 293 of The Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China.
During the court hearing, the Defendant and his designated defence counsel held no objection to both the facts and the name of the offence charged by the Prosecution.
The Court, upon trial of this case, ascertains that, between February 2018 and February 2020, the Defendant, while residing at locations like his home of Room 101, Entrance 1, Building 14, Yingdong Hot Spring Garden, Hedong District of this city and such, used the information network, posted or reposted many times on the social platform Twitter using the account registered via his mobile phone of one hundred and twenty (120) tweets in total of untrue remarks and images that disparaged the state leader and the political system of the state, defamed the prevention and control measures of the state in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic, causing others to repost and leave negative comments. Upon the assessment of the Forensic Psychiatric Evaluation Committee of Tianjin, the mental state of the evaluatee, Zhou Shaoqing, is diagnosed as suffering from schizophrenia during the time of the present case; however, during such time, the evaluatee had the ability to recognise and control at the time of his commission of the crime in this case, and thereby he bears full criminal responsibility.
Upon investigation, the Defendant was captured by the public security organ at his residence on 28 February 2020.
The aforesaid facts are substantiated by the evidence that has been subjected to cross-examination in court as follows:
1. The ‘Search Warrant’, ‘Search Record’, ‘Decision on the Distrainment of Articles’, ‘Record of the Distrainment of Articles’, and ‘List of Distrained Articles and Their Photos’ confirm a search was conducted at Room 101, Entrance 1, Building 14, Yingdong Hot Spring Garden, Hedong District, Tianjin, where the Defendant resides, with pertinent tablet computer(s), laptop computer(s), and mobile phone(s) being distrained and photographed.
2. The ‘Screenshots of Twitter Contents’ confirms by screenshots of the contents of part of the tweets posted by the Defendant.
3. The ‘Statement of Circumstances’ confirms upon investigation of the times the Defendant posted tweets, and the numbers of comments, reposts, and likes of both the original tweets and retweets of the Defendant.
4. The ‘Witness Testimony of Zhu Heran’ confirms that he, the witness, had once posted some tweets on Twitter of anti-China, leader-insulting remarks, as well as internet rumours relating to the COVID-19 pandemic and vicious information of such. On 16 February 2020, he left comments under some anti-CCP posts along with ‘Poyiweichen Chudaqian’. He then followed the said account, and later they interacted and gave likes to each other.
5. The ‘Witness Testimony of Cao Zhongyun’ confirms that he, the witness, had worked with the Defendant; he thought the Defendant was quite normal, and had not heard the Defendant releasing reactionary remarks.
6. The ‘Witness Testimony of Li Zhixia’ confirms that she, the witness, is the ex-wife of the Defendant. She lived with the Defendant before he was taken away by the police, but in separate bedrooms, and she ordinarily did not use the mobile phone of the Defendant.
7. The ‘Forensic Evaluative Opinions’ confirms that upon the assessment, the mental state of the evaluatee, Zhou Shaoqing, is diagnosed as suffering from schizophrenia during the time of the present case; however, during such time, the evaluatee had the ability to recognise and control at the time of his commission of the crime in this case, and thereby he bears full criminal responsibility.
8. The ‘Work Log of Electronic Evidence Examination’ confirms the examination of the pertinent electronic evidence.
9. The ‘Source of the Case and the Course of Apprehension’ confirms that the local police officers discovered the release of reactionary remarks from the Defendant, and they then went to his home and captured him.
10. The ‘Household Registration Materials’ confirms the identities of the people involved in this case.
11. The ‘Criminal Record Materials’ confirms the criminal record of the Defendant prior to this case.
12. The ‘Medical Record Materials’ confirms that the Defendant had sought medical treatment in 2004.
13. The ‘Statement of Remorse’ is a handwritten statement from the Defendant to express his remorse.
The aforesaid evidence was obtained through lawful procedures and is objective and related, and therefore, shall be used as a basis for concluding the case.
This Court holds that the Defendant neglected the laws of the state and used the information network repeatedly to verbally abuse others and disseminate untrue information, for which he has undermined social order and the circumstances were serious; his acts thus have constituted the crime of picking quarrels and provoking trouble, and therefore, he shall be punished according to law. The charges filed by the Prosecution are established and are thereby confirmed by this Court. Given that the Defendant voluntarily pleaded guilty and is willing to accept punishments, truthfully confessed to his crime, and consents with the sentencing recommendation of the Prosecution, a lighter punishment can be given according to law. On sentencing, this Court has comprehensively considered the societal harm of the criminal conduct of the Defendant, his criminal record, and other circumstances of such. In conclusion, in accordance with Items 2 and 4 of Paragraph 1 of Article 293 and Paragraph 3 of Article 67 of The Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China, the Court hereby rules that:
The Defendant committed the crime of picking quarrels and provoking trouble and is sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of nine (9) months.
(The term of imprisonment shall be counted from the date of execution of the judgement; where the Defendant is detained on remand prior to the execution of the judgement, one day of such detention shall be credited as one day of the sentence, that is, the term of imprisonment begins on 13 March 2020 and ends on 11 December 2020.)
If the Defendant refuses to accept the present judgement as final and binding, a petition for appeal may be submitted through this Court or directly to the Tianjin No 2 Intermediate People’s Court within ten (10) days commencing on the day following the day of receipt of this judgement. In case of a written appeal, one (1) original copy and two (2) duplicated copies of the petition shall be submitted.
| This copy is verified to be identical to the original document. |
| Print serial: 20201117-163643-9F5AA75574AEFE05 |
| Presiding Judge: | Feng Zhongting |
| Judge: | Wang Jun |
| People’s Juror: | Cao Jun |
 Decided on 18 November 2020
| |
| Court Clerk: | Wang Shuangyue |
Note[edit]
1 The current name and former name of the defendant have the exact same pronunciation; they only differ by Chinese characters. The defendant’s current name is ‘周绍卿’ (pinyin: Zhōu Shàoqīng), while his former name was ‘周绍清’ (pinyin: Zhōu Shàoqīng, the exact same).
This work is a translation and has a separate copyright status to the applicable copyright protections of the original content.
| Original: |
This work is in the public domain because it is exempted by Article 5 of Chinese copyright law. This exempts all Chinese government and judicial documents, and their official translations, from copyright. It also exempts simple factual information, and calendars, numerical tables, and other forms of general use and formulas.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse |
|---|---|
| Translation: |
I, Boreas Sawada, the copyright holder of this work, hereby release it into the public domain. This applies worldwide. In case this is not legally possible: I grant anyone the right to use this work for any purpose, without any conditions, unless such conditions are required by law.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse |
