Recently, the tragic death of first-level judge Wang Jiajia in Luohe City, Henan Province has sparked continuous public attention. The authorities’ high praise for the deceased judge and the vilification of the perpetrator in their propaganda have caused controversy. Mainland China bloggers have comprehensively analyzed the incident, pointing out that the official narrative has been intentionally guiding public opinion. They have also delved into the reasons behind the murder of the Henan judge, revealing the strategic cooperation between judges and insurance companies.
According to a notification released by the Yancheng District Court of Luohe City in Henan Province, on the evening of August 7th, Wang Jiajia, deputy chief judge of the case filing division and a first-level judge, was killed by a certain Dang. Dang has since taken poison and is in a coma. The notification stated that Dang harbored hatred towards Wang Jiajia because he disagreed with the judgment she made regarding a traffic accident dispute.
Subsequently, the official state media People’s Daily published a commentary titled “The Female Judge Who Was Like a Spring Breeze Has Left”, highly praising this Communist Party judge.
However, the notification from the Yancheng District Court of Luohe City and the article from People’s Daily have stirred up considerable controversy.
Recently, a video was posted on a mainland Chinese video website by a YouTuber named “Xunge Is Busy,” who criticized the official misinformation and analyzed the reasons behind the murder of Judge Wang Jiajia in Henan, highlighting the financial ties between judges and insurance companies.
In the video, the YouTuber mentioned: “Why is there still ongoing attention to the murder of the female judge in Henan Province even after more than ten days have passed? By examining the entire incident, we can uncover how absurd it is.”
“Firstly, the so-called official notification came from the Yancheng District Court of Luohe City, where, according to relevant regulations, the court, as a related party to the case, should have avoided involvement,” he stated.
“Additionally, People’s Daily mentioned in the article that because of one case, Judge Wang Jiajia deleted the WeChat friend of her colleague, Kou Haohua. Is it believable that deleting a WeChat friend who is a colleague you see every day is not considered a conflict of interest? Can it be avoided?” he questioned.
The YouTuber known as “Xunge” believed that People’s Daily was playing word games, trying to portray the judge as a good person. He sarcastically remarked, “Can you prove someone is a good person just because they have many honors? Then, what about the honors given to property tycoon Xu Jiaying, Mao Qi, and Li Peixia?”
He also mentioned that the People’s Daily article documented how Wang Jiajia attended many meetings with insurance companies and had extensive communication with various insurance companies. “After that meeting, the settlement rate for similar cases in our court significantly increased, and the parties involved were able to quickly receive compensation, which left everyone quite satisfied,” he mocked. “I have to give People’s Daily full marks for this word game.”
“For this reason, I have researched that the strategic cooperation between most local courts and insurance companies dates back to 2018. To be blunt, it is simply an agreement between the court and insurance companies. The court is responsible for lowering compensation amounts, and the insurance companies are responsible for quick settlement. You adjudicate cases rapidly, I pay out quickly, you’re happy, and I’m happy, but the party involved loses 20,000 yuan,” he elaborated.
The blogger expressed, “You blatantly turn sacrificing the interests of the victims into a good thing, allowing the victims to quickly receive compensation. You news media are truly despicable. Everyone sees it, right? When ordinary people commit a crime, no one cares how hard their life is; they are only portrayed as merciless villains.”
“News reporting isn’t about saying someone is innocent just because you say they are a good person, nor is it about labeling someone as a bad person making them the most heinous criminal. In the eyes of Gao Qiu, everyone from Liangshan is a criminal and bandit. In the eyes of the heroes of Liangshan, the nobles are corrupt officials,” he concluded.
On the Zhihu platform, a netizen who claims to be a court official named “Jin Jin” said, “I feel a lot of sympathy for this plaintiff because, judging from the case, he saw the court’s judgment as his last hope. But at the same time, I feel sorrow for the deceased judge and my former colleagues, many grassroots judges like myself,” “In fact, the parties are simple people. They see the court as their last hope. As long as they receive a fair and timely judgment and effective communication, the vast majority of parties will accept it.”
Another netizen remarked, “Judiciary should be independent. Collusion between insurance companies and the judiciary, conspiring to deceive consumers, companies influencing the judiciary, bribing judges, interfering with judgments… these are all serious crimes. If this continues, the court is no different from a facade, selling dog meat while posing as a sheep.”