The pota court in Hebei Province was exposed to mass fraud: the judge was sentenced to 16 years' imprisonment by “false name” and the whistle-blower was convicted of falsely-sentenced offences

More than a decade ago, in a criminal case before the People ' s Court of the city of Tao, the capital of Hebei province, the then President, the presiding judge and the presiding judge, Wang Jin Ling, were allegedly involved in numerous major legal proceedings without the knowledge of the court, and suspected that he had been forged by several judges in the name of Wang King Ling, who had handed down a number of false commutations for criminal gangs that had already sentenced them to prison sentences, cumulatively reducing the sentences of several criminals by more than 16 years.

At the end of 2017, the “false reduction of sentence” of the Tatao Court was reported. The investigation was carried out by a special course set up by the Queen's Council in 2023 by the Queen's Chamber of the Queen's Republic of China, and confirmed by the return of the complainant's case to Wang King Ling by the relevant officials of the Qiang City Council.

“However, from the time the facts were established in 2023 to the end of 2025, when the Tattoo Court reported to its superiors, the Tattoo Court not only failed to pursue the `failure' of the mass fraudsters, but, on the contrary, in the report, the Tatai Court continued to fabricate its own opinion in the case, to inform the case, to refuse to participate in the panel and deliberately overstepping the trial, to refuse to transfer the case and to forge its own signature, to further conceal the collective forgery of several members of the Full Court and members of the Commission in order to escape responsibility”, Wang Kim-Lin said.

01. Wang Kim Ling sponsored the review of the case to form the outcome of the review, which was discussed by the First Committee and unanimously adopted

I'm not gonna be able to

In 2011, the Tatao Court tried a joint theft and sale of a gang, No. 5 of the first sentence of the court, one of which was sentenced to 12 years ' imprisonment. After the first instance judgement had entered into force, Zhang appealed to the court against the original judgement.

Since then, until April 2014, the Presidents of the Tatao Court, the Vice-President of the Division and the President of the Tribunal have taken decisions to uphold the sentence and not to re-examine it. In the meantime, on 25 January 2013, the Court issued notice of dismissal of complaint No. 2 of the Zhang Jie-in prison term, which upheld the original verdict in the case of Zhang. The notification was not signed for any reason.

According to the source, President An Qing, the President of the Zhang Tatai court, who took office in August 2013, insisted on initiating a review of the complaint in Zhang Jin ' s case, leaving the Vice-President, Wang, who had originally supported the non-retrial, and the then President of the Tribunal for his part. Since then, under the leadership of An Zhiqing, applications for a retrial in the case of Zhang Jin have been received.

In October 2013, Wang Jin Ling, aged 50, a member of the trial committee of the Tatao Court, which has been in the hands of a judge for 27 years, and President of the Trial Monitoring Chamber for 14 years, was appointed President of the Criminal Chamber.

Wang Kim Ling stated that, six months after his appointment as President of the Court, the Court had opened a new case against Zhang Xian, under the title of the Criminal Unit No. 1.

On 3 April 2014, the first panel was convened by the Tsang Tao Court in connection with Zhang ' s complaint. At the meeting, several members of the jury, including Lu, Han and Li, who held positions of court leadership, proposed that several criminals of Zhang's group of thieves be re-examined. The review of Judge Wang Kim Ling, invoking the rules of law, trial practice and so forth, submitted that only one person had complained in the case and should have followed the principle of non-reaction and who applied and tried, and that the principle of res judicata and correction of errors in accordance with the law should be upheld in the next instance only one person had been tried.

The proposal, based on the review findings, was endorsed by the members present with their unanimous consent and signature, resulting in a unanimous decision to reopen the case to only Zhang Jin. The decision in this case was reheared and served only to Zhang Yiren and his defence.

02. Host Judge Wang Jin Ling, uninformed, several judges of the Court collectively impersonated and reduced the sentence for Zhang Yien's criminal group

I'm not gonna be able to

In accordance with the Decision on Re-trial, Zhang Jin re-opened the case, under the title " Zhang Jin ", and the first sentence of the sentence " Zhang Jin ". After the case was opened, the court session was not met until the completion of the renovation of the prison, the completion of the court and the completion of the court ' s complement, and the provision of more than 10 police officers, as the prison where Zhang Xian was held did not have the necessary hardware to conduct public hearings online. As a result, Zhang Yae-in was re-heared and was able to sit on 9 April 2015, after repeated attempts to find and coordinate the case on An Qi.

The trial transcript shows that one of his friends, Zhang Zheng Zheng Zheng, was appointed by a lawyer to appear before the court. On the last page of the trial transcript, Wang Kim-Ling wrote “The presiding judge has read it”, and Zhang Zheng sent a lawyer to Qian's friend Zhang Zhang Zian's family handbook `Gao-Tai, 2015.4.9', all four criminals, including Zhang Zheng Zheng, signed and confirmed in the trial transcript.

Wang Kim Ling was not aware that, after the trial, the then President An Xian had asked him to reduce the sentences for the perpetrators of the case. Wang Kim Ling replied, “Let's go to the courtyard and learn about it.”

Wang Kim Ling stated that, following a review of the criminal complaint and the review of the criminal case, the case had been discussed and decided by the Commission on 3 April 2014 that only one person from Zhang Jin should be tried again. After a retrial, An Ziqing has proposed a reduction of sentence beyond the scope of the trial and the sentencing of all the criminals, which is the result of a total reversal of the decision of the first panel discussion on 3 April 2014, and the reversal of cases that have already been tried, which is clearly contrary to the law.

Following this dialogue, Wang Kim Ling was transferred from the Tribunal at 1700 hours on 19 August 2015.

One day later, on 21 August 2015, at 8 a.m., Wang Kim Ling arrived in court early that day to sort out the files to be handed over. It was found that, in the absence of any handover of work, the doors of the Tribunal ' s office were broken and the door was opened, Wang Kim Ling ' s office computer was left at the door of the office, and Zhao Chiu, then Chief of Staff, was sitting at the President ' s desk as his successor, leaving to Wang King Ling for the full seven files of Zhang Xiaojin to re-examine the case. Zhao Chiu signed the receipt of the seven files.

Upon receipt of the file, Zhao Jo immediately intervened in Zhang ' s case to reduce his sentence and re-examine the case.

Wang Kim Ling said that the court practice had been criticized by the county assembly and the organizational department of the county council for arranging for Zhao Chiu to be transferred from the three presidents, including Wang King Ling.

Wang Kim Ling claimed that, after holding a large volume of case material on several occasions before and after the completion of the proceedings and the trial judgement, he had made me sign the case, and I said that the material had been left for personal review, which was then taken from Zhao and was taken from the scene. The fact was that Zhang, as a member of the jury, the then President, the presiding judge and the sponsor of the case, had decided to sign the case, as a follow-up to the trial, the discussions of the Commission and the original of the judgement.

Later, Wang Kim Ling learned that the judge ' s name in the judgement in the case was himself, and even more surprising to Wang, Zhang was given a new sentence of imprisonment of 12 years to six years for one Zhang, and that the main perpetrator of the gang, the repeat offender, Joe Jo Yong, and others had been sentenced to more than 16 years.

03. Wang Jin Ling was marginalized by the principle and regulations and the legal decisions were tampered with and even brought to prison

I'm not gonna be able to

“I am the presiding judge and presiding judge of the Zhang El-in case, and the panel shall be convened by me in accordance with the law, and the panel shall be convened by me to be brought before the President, and the judgement shall be confirmed by my signature before being submitted to the President or Vice-President for signature before being issued; In this case, however, because of their adherence to the principle of legality, and their failure to cooperate with An Zixing, Zhao, Lu Zihai, Han Zhizhe and Li Zianmin, they have been shunned and attacked by them as dissidents.” Wang Kim Ling said that “the judgment they have handed down in this re-trial, in violation of various statutory procedures, is a typical abuse of power, a violation of the law, and a continuing false accusation against me to cover up my guilt”.

Wang Kim Ling was transferred from the Tribunal for non-cooperation and assumed the position of President of the Tribunal in November

1. In the subsequent work, An Ziqing intervened and made accusations in the case run by Wang Kim Ling and upheld by the entire court.

“On 24 July, at around 12 p.m., Anzheng, who was in the late stages of cancer, committed a crime against and criticized me in the middle court in the case that was upheld in the middle court in the middle court, publicly in the middle court and the Tatiya court, in which he made a number of minor verbal insults and accusations, and in the group he announced that he would be relieved of my duties as President of the Court of Appeal and deprived of my right to sit on the bench”, said Wang Kim-Lin.

Following complaints from Wang King Ling, Hebei Provincial High Court and the City Centre of Wu, he was legally reinstated to be eligible to run the case and corrected the absurdity of An Qing's decision to remove Wang King Ling's post as judge.

However, the normal trial of Wang King Ling has since been suspended.

In June 2017, Vice President Han Chiol-chul was again on the rise in the case of Private Loans (2017) sponsored by Wang King Ling, No. 560, No. 043 of the People. After the trial, the decision was unanimously passed by the Full Court, all members signed and confirmed that the judgement was to be prepared on the basis of the result of the joint proceedings and signed by Wang King Ling, pending the delivery of the seal and the conclusion of the case. But it is unexpected that, at the end of the report, Han was completely disconcerting from Wang Kim Ling and the full court proceedings and preparing a separate sentence. The case was later appealed to the Central Court of Han, which quickly quashed the false verdict of Han ' s Szetshu, citing serious procedural errors, and re-trialed it. The second instance court subsequently corrected the error in a timely manner.

It is worth mentioning that the personnel files of the Tatuan court were all faked and impersonated and the “false judge” of the university, Ko Joon-Ling (it is to be noted that the case of the academic degree and academic status acquired by the impersonating judge Go Joon-Lin was cancelled in June 2022 by the inspection team of the Hebei Provincial Council and was cancelled on 29 November 2017, when he drew up a print for himself in a private loan dispute, forged the names of Li Yahua and Wang, closed the case on that day, and signed the case (2017), and sealed the entire case file of case No. 04333, which was closed and closed. The property of a man named Li and a woman named Zihua (the two are relatives of Wang Jin Ling) is worth 6.7 million yuan. The victim also complained about this act by Ko Joon-Lin, who was also brought before the Provincial Council Inspectorate.

Wang Kim Ling also referred to a criminal case that he had initiated before and after 2014, when Vice-President Lu Yihai found Wang Kim Ling and asked him to sentence him to a suspended sentence of imprisonment for the first and second accused. As the amount involved was substantial, Wang Kim Ling indicated that if the first and second defendants were to be given a suspended sentence, the third and fourth defendants would be given a suspended sentence, which was not their own right and without precedent, because of the size and impact of the case. Lu, for his part, stated that the case had a greeting from the superiors and that Wang Kim Ling would be able to follow the instructions above.

In order to “relax” Wang Kim Ling, a “word note” to say hello was also issued to Wang Kim Ling as a “note”.

“The long-standing forgery by An Qing, Han Zhi-chul, “Fake Judge” Ko Joon-Ling and others, at no cost, led to the creation of a forgery by the courts, and to their own exclusion and repression because they were unwilling to join the gang”, Wang said Wang Kim-Ling.

Early in December 2017, the Hebei Provincial Council Visiting Group was present in Tatao. During this period, Wang, an incumbent of a department in Quantuan County, reported to the inspection team on 18 December 2017, without knowing the truth and without any knowledge, about the alleged bribery of An Qing, his superstition activities, false bidding and his “mitigation of the penalty under the false name” in his case.

Shortly thereafter, the Provincial Council Inspectorate sent the material to the Tutao County Board for verification and explicitly requested that the results of the investigation be reported to the Provincial Board for inspection in June of that year, with feedback to the whistleblower. However, as this was a matter of secrecy, An Qing and others suspected that Wang Kim Lin had committed the false conviction and that the false judge Ko Joon-Ling feared being dismissed from office, proceeded to search for material against Wang.

On 11 June 2018, Ang-Ching, a late cancer and chronically unavailable, hosted an expanded court group meeting. The meeting decided to establish three task forces to investigate Wang Jin Ling, which identified seven major issues and eight areas for a comprehensive investigation. After the rejection of the three task force leaders and nine members, An Qing was able to establish only one member, one of whom was a fake and impersonated student, who was directly attached to the “executive office” of An Qing, who was responsible for investigating the cases of Wang. To make the case prima facie compliant, Zhang was also drawn into the Executive Office.

It should be noted that Ang-Jing's investigation into Wang Kim Ling's behaviour was decided by the “Expanded Meeting of the Party of the county court of Tutao” to appear in the case file that set up Wang Kim Ling. However, this so-called “decision” was found to have been absent in the investigation team of the Qingling Wang Special Branch, which later formed the Quantuan District Commission, which said that the expanded meeting of the party group had not been held.

Even so, under the specific operation of An Xianqing, Go Joon-Ling, Wang Kim Ling was treated as a bribe, misappropriation of public funds and, in September 2021, three years after Wang Jin-Ling retired, was inspected in the rehabilitation district of Hebei province, where he was appointed after three years in the province of Hebei, after he had retired. The authorities have prosecuted the alleged bribery of 90,000 and the misappropriation of more than 70,000 public funds, and have been sentenced to 20 months in prison (see the previous judge ' s hearing for crying and crying: the fine for the case is refunded as bribe and the offence of misappropriation of public funds is not required).

04, Zhang Ai Jen re-trial, inspection by the Municipal and District Party Party Commissions, investigation team of special groups to verify multiple false proceedings

I'm not gonna be able to

In April 2022, Wang Kim Ling, who had served his sentence and had been released from prison, had been able to appeal to the authorities concerned for defence of his rights, after having begun a multi-purpose investigation into the evidence, in the light of his 33-year experience and intuition in the trial.

Wang Kim Ling stated that one person, Zhang Jin, had filed a complaint and several others had reduced their sentences by “false reduction” and had re-examined the case as a source of my own false claims and as a whole.

The judicial evidence indicates that Wang Kim Ling's name was used in Zhang's mitigating material and judgement, and that he was cut off by half after 12 years of imprisonment and that there were numerous tampering, apostasy and false signatures on the transcript of the Full Court, the Second Review Commission's transcript and the original judgement.

From the point of view of the series of forgery issues, Wang Kim Ling first brought the relevant information to the office of the Provincial and Municipal Councils ' Inspector, Inspectorate and Supervisory Board of the Zhong Jiu Jia College, and the Secretary of the Zhong Yi Shui County Court.

In July and September 2023, the Chinese Communist Party Council of the Province of Tao set up the “Chang Jin Ling Case Class” to investigate the matters reflected in it, confirming that Zhang was considering the “mitigation of the penalty by an impostor”.

On 10 and 11 January 2024, the inspection team of the City Council of Zhu, who had been in the premises for two days, verified Wang Kim Ling's response and informed him by mobile phone that it had been established that Zhang was “reducing a reduction in his sentence by false name”. Subsequently, the City Council ' s visitors informed Wang Jin Ling by telephone that they had informed the Tat court of their response to the questions and replies.

On 11 November 2024, at 1720 hours, the court of the Temple of Tatao was arranged for the Court to call Wang Jin Ling in a desk machine. (a) The 9 minutes and 39 seconds of audio recording of the conversation: Wang Kim Ling gave a false statement about the Full Court in Zhang ' s re-examination of the case, the 29 October 2015 trial court transcript was all false, and the original judgement was not signed by Wang King Ling, who did not attend the full court and the Commission ' s deliberations, and gave his accreditation; On the occasion of the cancellation of the academic qualifications, the “false judge” Ko Joon-Ling, who was still working in the Court's archives, was also admitted by the official, and did not dare to alter the case file of a certain person; At the same time, the question of the alleged "reconstruction" of the party group ' s expanded meeting convened by the Tattoo Court on 11 June 2018 was verified and confirmed on behalf of the answer to the question of "yes, yes" and so on.

The above-mentioned call was answered on behalf of one Qing to confirm, in the case file, that many of the false details of the case were present.

First, shortly after the trial started on 9 April 2015, the case file was transferred to Zhao, but in subsequent Full Court transcripts, the first trial committee (held on 3 April

1. decided to reopen the case against Zhang and to reverse it directly into a reduction of sentence for many members of the criminal gang in the case.

Secondly, in the case, the records of the second CRIC resolution of 29 October 2015 showed that there was no convenor, no moderator, no reporter, no recorder, no simultaneous audio and video recording and that the proceedings were completely false; It also shows that the case went from a complaint by Zhang ' s former one-person to a reduction of sentence for several criminal elements of the group; Among them, Zhang Yien was sentenced to 12 years ' imprisonment by the original trial to 6 years and 1 month ' s imprisonment, Zhang was reduced from 11 years to 5 years and 3 months ' imprisonment, and Jo was reduced from 14 years and 6 months to 13 years ' imprisonment, and several of the gang ' s perpetrators were reduced by a cumulative sentence of more than 16 years.

Thirdly, Zhang Ai Jen, presiding and presiding judge Wang Jin Ling, did not participate in the panel, did not participate in the deliberations of the CRIC, was not informed, was not informed and was not informed and signed; However, the presiding judge of judgement No. 1 of the initial sentence of the court in (2014) signed by Wang King Ling, and “imprisoned reduction of sentence” was thus found to be in good hands.

Fourth, in the Second Review Committee record, after the printer Wang Kim Ling, there is a handwritten writing of nine words, "out of the court, refusing to sign."

The signature was signed by Wang Kim Ling, who indicated that the handwriting was not written by herself and was forged under false names; However, Zhao's written material falsely claimed that Wang Kim Ling had been writing and that Wang Kim Ling had questioned the conformity of Zhao's words and writing habits; Jo further contends that it was written by another member of the Full Court of the case, Liu Ziqing, who denied it.

Wang Kim Ling and Zhao Xiao spoke on 18 and 19 November 2025, requesting a handwriting test and Zhao has been able to pay for it at his own expense, but has not yet acted and has refused to identify the handwriting and the handwriting.

Fifth, the first sentence of the sentence of the court of first instance, No. 1, was false, and many were committed with knowledge.

Wang Kim Ling said, “As a man who knows I am the presiding judge and presiding judge, he has not signed the transcript of the Full Court, he has not signed it on the Commission's transcript, and he has not signed the original judgement on which the stamp is based; Knowing that case No. 1 of the Criminal Investigation Unit (2013) exists, i.e., that Lu Xianhai, Zhao, Han Zi Truchian, Lee Zingmin and others knew that the decision of the First Commission would be repeated only for one person, that signing the Second Review Commission ' s notes would be overturned in their entirety, that the First Commission had decided to receive the entire file, that his successor Zhao and the self-appointed Vice-President of the Criminal Court, Lu Xianhai, at the earliest, and that all signatures of the presiding judge and the presiding judge had been confirmed, and that the signing of the false verdict had led to the collective forgery of more than 30 persons in Zhang Zhang Zhen ' s case, that the procedure was seriously unlawful and that the procedure was allegedly abusive The law is not fair.”

Sixthly, in the case of Wang, who reported the commutation of an impostor ' s sentence, his court clerical network failed to find out the sentence of Zhang Chi Jin, but found that the criminal decision of the Court of Chuo had again used the impostor to commute the sentence and that Zhang Chien would be released on parole from prison, again confirming the existence of the impostor ' s sentence, as evidenced by the request of the Court of Chui (2016) for a sentence of 0433 and a decision 207.

1. Covering up the case for forgery, multiple people from the Tatao Court provided false information for long periods of verification by their superiors

There is evidence available in the case that in the case of Zhang Yien and related matters, the then President of the Tsang Tao County Court, Mr. An Qing, then Vice-President, Mr. Lu Chihai, Mr. Han Zixuan, Mr. Li Zimin and the then judges Liu Ziqing, Mr. Zhang Ziqi and Judge Go Jun-Ling, may have engaged in a different degree of forgery or provided false information to the authorities concerned.

It should be noted that on 17 November 2025, after the fact of the mass participation of the Tatao court in the case of forgery was verified by the City Council of Zheng City and the Special District Commission, and in order to conceal the so-called facts, the court was repeatedly “modified” and handed over to the authorities a report on the handling of Wang King Ling's correspondence, which it suspected continued to make false statements to the superiors.

Wang Kim Ling stated that in the report he was deprived of the right to a trial and was discredited as “Wing Kim Ling, knowing that he was overstretched, tried on 9 April 2015”, whereas the fact was that the trial was postponed because Zhang Zheng Yien prison was not equipped to hold a court.

In that report, Wang Kim Ling left the court and Zhao took over. During the verification period, Zhao Jo provided an information note stating that some of the cases had been processed prior to their transfer, that the case had not been referred, and that the criminal case had been transferred to the competent Vice-President, Lu, after the case had been over-referred.

Wang Kim Ling claimed that Lu Chiang was one of the core personnel who had failed to transfer Zhang Jin ' s case file in time for his transfer after he had fabricated himself.

In fact, Wang Kim Ling provided a receipt that all the material in Zhang ' s case was transferred to Zhao Chiu on 21 August 2015, the day after Wang Kim Ling was removed. On that note, Zhao Chiu signed.

In fact, the report of the court of Quintao County on the handling of the letter from Wang Jin Ling was not transmitted to Wang Jin Ling until November 2025.

Having carefully read the report, Wang Jin Ling indicated that the above-mentioned persons of the Zhang Tatao Court, who had made a false statement in the case of Zhang Jin-jin, were well established and well documented, had allowed the court to set aside the collective abuse of the law, allowed successive presidents to ignore the demands of the People ' s Congress for supervision and inspection, for inspection and for correction, and the Law on Judges and the Rules of the Judicial Council, which were not only not to verify the case, but had encouraged the Zhang Tatai Court to continue to fabricate the false report of the facts into false accusations against Wang King King-Ling and to make false accusations against him in violation of the law. Its actions are of such a nature and the consequences are so serious that they are rare throughout the country.

Wang Kim stated that she would continue to report to the central, national and national oversight boards of the Central Disciplinary Commission, the Central Council of the Judiciary and the relevant departments of the two highs and the corresponding provinces and municipalities until the day when the truth was revealed, the truth was revealed and Quixue was innocent.

Introduction by Zhang Xiaoqiao, former journalist of the Chinese Business Times, and director of the Guangdong Press Station, currently the Managing Director and editor of the Macao Global News.

Review of prior periods

Two judges in Heilongjiang were in the dark, 250 million dollars worth of work were seized and were charged with the loss of life.

The evidence was disclosed by the official business collusion: the Deputy Director of Public Security joined the prosecutor to release the lawyer to enter the “zero dollar” equity contract signed by the prison

The president of the court, brother's firm, has a bad business, no real case, no direct judgment.

Who was the deputy director of the police station who beat up the journalist?

The corruption of the police chief, the "Red House" regular, and the trader's brother.

Henan's political and legal cadres were involved in illegal suspense, loan-financed cases, and they were up to 35 million.

Shanxi men were arrested across the province: gunpoints raised by an inch, public power should be exercised with good people ' s oversight