Liu Taiyi's Case and China News Weekly's Trial of Liu Taiyi

China's article "Trial of Dr. Liu" is a big joke.

On July 22, 2009, China reporter Yan Dongxue published a series of articles on "Trial of Dr. Liu", saying that "practicing fraud and concealing the truth" had a very bad social impact.

(1) The position is not objective.

At the beginning of the article "Trial of Dr. Liu", Yan Dongxue admitted that he criticized Dr. Liu in the series of articles "Crazy Health" in China Newsweek in 2007, calling him a liar. With such a conclusion in advance, how can the report respect the facts?

(2) fabricating major legal facts

(1) The article fabricates that "after being examined by the Tianjin Higher People's Court, the supplementary investigation by the public security department has recently ended". According to the Criminal Procedure Law of People's Republic of China (PRC), no court at any level, including the High Court, has the right to submit supplementary investigations to the public security, and only the procuratorate has this right.

In fact, the Tanggu District Procuratorate of Tianjin has fully investigated the case and the facts are clear. On May 20, 2009, both parties to the trial confirmed the evidence submitted to the court. The High Court did not propose any supplementary investigation points. The procuratorate has not asked the public security organs for supplementary investigation, and the so-called supplementary investigation by the public security departments has only recently ended.

The above facts can be verified by calling the hotline of Tianjin Higher People's Court.

(2) According to the law, if there is only one supplementary investigation, the court must pronounce a sentence within six months after accepting the case. In this case, "the judgment is in the foreseeable future" is even more a rumor.

According to Article 168 of the Criminal Procedure Law of People's Republic of China (PRC), when the people's court hears a case of public prosecution, it shall pronounce a sentence within one month after accepting it, but not more than one and a half months at the latest. Under any of the circumstances specified in Article 126 of this Law, it may be extended for another month with the approval or decision of the Higher People's Court of a province, autonomous region or municipality directly under the Central Government.

In other words, the court must pronounce a sentence no more than two and a half months after accepting the case. The law has stipulated that the court is a judicial organ and has no right to propose supplementary investigations. There is no question of supplementary investigation proposed by Tianjin Higher People's Court, and there is no legal ignorance to declare that the judgment in this case is "in the foreseeable future".

The above facts can be verified by calling the hotline of Tianjin Higher People's Court.

(3) The article fabricates facts, saying that the case of "Dr. Liu" is pending because of the pressure from fans of "Dr. Liu" and other aspects.

On the one hand, the article desperately shows that the evidence in this case is conclusive. In the case that "Dr. Liu" admitted the fact of fraud, the local court tried him for "illegal business operation". On the other hand, he said, "This case is very complicated." The fabrication of this case is pending because of the pressure from all sides, such as "fans of doctor too much".

In fact, Tianjin Tanggu Food and Drug Administration investigated for more than a year, Tianjin Tanggu Public Security Bureau investigated for more than a year, and Tianjin Tanggu Procuratorate investigated for six months. The facts of this case are very clear. The reason why this case was not pronounced quickly is entirely due to the lack of Chinese medicine management regulations.

After investigation, it was confirmed that "Liu Taiyi" did sell drugs, and the drug had no batch number of the Food and Drug Administration. However, the investigation by the procuratorate also found that the method of "Liu Taiyi" is a good way to save lives, and the medicine of "Liu Taiyi" is a truly effective Chinese medicine. A large number of cases all over the country are living facts! In this case, "fake drugs" cannot be established, let alone "manufacturing and selling fake and inferior products", which eventually leads to "illegal business"!

Ironically, at the court hearing on May 20, 2009, there was no evidence. 00 1 submitted by the prosecution is a receipt for Ms. Ren from Fujian to buy medicine. Many years ago, Ms. Ren, who was suffering from breast cancer, rushed to the test site to prove that the method and medicine of "Liu Taiyi" were effective!

Mr. Liu Hongzhang graduated from Beijing Medical College and was assigned to Gansu Provincial Government Hospital as a county health care doctor, and concurrently served as the vice president of Gansu Hydropower Engineering Bureau Hospital. His resume is very clear, not a reporter's fabrication that "education is the only truth". The identity of Mr. Liu Hongzhang, a doctor too much, is proved by his genealogy and the Ming Dynasty ancient book "The Complete Book of Houjing Family Studies in Xianning, Chenghua" left by Chun Liu. This book contains 20 precious medical ancient books, including one ancient book, Yuji and Weiyi, which was snatched from the home of Tanggu District, Tianjin, China by the people of Tanggu District Health Bureau of Tianjin on April 26th, 2004, and has not been returned yet.

Therefore, the question of this case is only due to the lack of regulations on the administration of traditional Chinese medicine, and the legal basis of the judgment is not clear. Under the background that the State Council issued Document No.22 to encourage the development of Chinese medicine, whether the really good Chinese medicine doctor "Dr. Liu" is innocent is the focus of court discussion.

The above facts can be verified by calling Tianjin Tanggu District Procuratorate and Tianjin Tanggu District People's Court.

(3) The article fabricated the victim of the case of Liu Taiyi.

Because the article can't find the victim of Dr. Liu, it even hides the truth and regards Chen Zujia as the only victim.

Chen Zujia's article "Dr. Liu killed my twin sister" has been published online. Self-proclaimed "shameless person" and "called on the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Public Security, the Administration for Industry and Commerce and the civil affairs departments to jointly eradicate" Liu Hongzhang. A few months ago, people all over the country submitted his original online text to the procuratorate, and prosecutors and lawyers also submitted his original online text to the court as evidence-false accusations rely on lies, and the truth needs the truth.

Chen Zujia's relatives did not die of cancer alone. His uncle Shenyang died of cancer in western medicine, and his brother-in-law's eldest brother had an operation for gastric cancer in August 2008, and died in the hospital less than two months later.

What he deliberately concealed in his letter was that Liu Hongzhang's method not only cured his sister-in-law, European academician Wang Yongcheng's diabetes, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, abnormal prostate cancer and other critical diseases, but also made his sister's blood pressure return to normal. In the two years that his sister-in-law drank pigskin soup and didn't drink any other medicine, his blood sugar and blood pressure never appeared abnormal. Liu Hongzhang's regimen is very effective, and most chronic diseases can be cured without drugs.

The truth concealed in his letter is that Liu Hongzhang was suddenly detained 20 days before his sister's death. At a critical juncture, patients and their families lost the guidance of saving lives-who killed his sister? Chen Zujia should sue the anti-Chinese medicine practitioner who framed Liu Hongzhang and was detained, and sue himself!

China News Weekly published Chen Zujia's article "Falsification and Concealing the Truth", can it cover up the fruitful trial evidence of thousands of cadres and masses across the country?

(d) The article is based on Fang's statement advocating the abolition of Chinese medicine, and it has sinister intentions.

Based on Fang's consistent criticism of TCM and his call for its abolition, the article openly opposes the policies of the CPC Central Committee and the State Council to encourage the development of TCM, with obvious intention to crack down on TCM.

abstract

China News Weekly published a series of articles, which made serious false reports on the nature and trial of the case, insulted the citizen's personality, undermined social harmony, and attempted to cover up the abundant evidence of "three-part governance and seven-part support" of large-scale people with a self-proclaimed "shameless person" and a promoter of the anti-Chinese medicine movement openly challenged the party and the government. This is an anti-government and anti-people article that confuses facts and reverses black and white.

Liu Hongzhang's case dealt with "illegal business", but found an effective way to keep fit. Both the prosecution and the defense have proved that, as stated in Liu Hongzhang's works, three-part treatment and seven-part care are indeed effective in preventing and treating various chronic diseases, including cancer and hepatitis B. The clinical practice of cadres and masses in various places has set a successful example for the national medical reform that is struggling forward. Facts have proved that compared with conventional treatment, Liu Hongzhang's regimen is safer, more effective, more convenient and cheaper, and its standardized operation mode can be popularized on a large scale, which is indeed a successful way to improve the overall health level of the Chinese nation.

The trial also proved that Liu's treatment methods and drugs were harmless, and their safety was difficult to achieve in any hospital at home and abroad after investigation with the Public Security Bureau in 27 provinces and regions of the country. Why did all the forces unite to encircle Liu Hongzhang? The reason is that Mr. Liu Hongzhang is the mainstay of Chinese medicine, and "three-point treatment and seven-point support" is the broad road for the development of Chinese medicine. Facts speak plainer than words. In fact, they can't beat Liu Hongzhang clinically and want to attack Chinese medicine by framing Liu Hongzhang. These anti-TCM people can only do whatever it takes.

As an authoritative media shouldering the heavy responsibility of social justice, we should clearly understand the situation and stand firm. Relevant party and government cadres should be guided by the spirit of the State Council Document No.22, which is people-oriented and governing for the people, and return the truth of Liu Hongzhang's case.

Liu Hongzhang's case is not a simple illegal business case, but a major case with social and political significance. News media reports should stand the test of the people. Pay attention to both legal and social effects; We should be responsible for both reality and history. I hope that the media will shoulder the lofty responsibility to the party, the government, the people and history-let us work together to promote the historical process of the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation!