On the morning of September 19th, Liu Wenjie, the director of the Finance Department of Hunan Province, along with two others, fell to their deaths. The official report released on the following day (September 20th) implicated two suspects in the case. However, the wife of one of the suspected perpetrators took to social media to proclaim his innocence, while official sources refrained from disclosing the background of the other suspect. A former lawyer from mainland China suggested that there might be dark forces at play behind this incident, possibly involving power struggles within the government.
According to reports, on September 19th, Liu Wenjie, the director of the Finance Department of Hunan Province, tragically fell to his death at his residence, accompanied by two young males. Speculations and rumors were quickly spread online, sparking various theories.
On September 20th, the Finance Department of Hunan Province issued a statement announcing the passing of Liu Wenjie, a representative of the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party, a delegate of the 14th National People’s Congress, and the Director of the Hunan Finance Department, who was tragically killed at 9:12 a.m. in Changsha, Hunan, at the age of 58.
Also on September 20th, the Tianxin Branch of the Changsha Public Security Bureau reported that three individuals fell to their deaths at 9:31 a.m. on the 13th floor of Building 2, No.1 Chengnan West Road. Initial investigation identified the suspects as Jiang Mouhui, male, 31 years old, and Jiang Mou, male, 35 years old, both from Wukou Town, Pingjiang County, Hunan Province.
The report detailed that on the afternoon of September 18th, the suspects surveyed the residential area where the victim, Liu Wenjie, resided. In the early hours of September 19th, they spent the night on the rooftop staircase of a hotel across the street from the residential building. At around 7 a.m., the suspects entered Building 2 of No.1 Chengnan West Road and ambushed Liu Wenjie as he left his home. The confrontation led to Liu Wenjie and one of the suspects falling to their deaths from the balcony at 9:12 a.m., with signs of struggle evident. The other suspect also fell to his death while trying to escape at 9:17 a.m.
Further investigations found that significant disturbance occurred in Liu Wenjie’s residence, with personal belongings rummaged through. Two black backpacks left behind at the staircase of the 13th floor contained various tools used in the crime, including a colored nylon rope with a hook, rubber gloves, and pliers.
The report mentioned that Jiang Mouhui had incurred debts of over 12 million yuan from multiple trips to Macau for gambling between 2019 and 2022. It also stated that there was no prior connection known between Liu Wenjie and the two suspects.
The disclosure of Jiang Mouhui being a shareholder and legal representative of several companies, including Tianhao Industrial Co., Ltd. in Pingjiang County, confirmed previous speculation that he was a businessman and member of the County Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference.
However, on September 20th, a Douyin account under the name “Xinhui Wooden Furniture” posted a video advocating for the innocence of the suspects. Screenshots circulating online showed the wife of Jiang Mouhui, the deceased suspect, expressing disbelief over the sudden news of his death and vowing to seek justice for her husband.
She contended that her husband was a decent businessman who was out for business negotiations, questioning the circumstances surrounding his alleged involvement in the crime. This raised doubts about the official narrative of the events leading to the tragic incident.
Renowned human rights lawyer Wu Shaoping, who practiced law in mainland China for years, expressed skepticism about the official account of Liu Wenjie’s death. He highlighted suspicions regarding the young age and wealth of the suspects, questioning their motive to commit such a crime and the viability of the scenario painted by the authorities.
The lawyer suggested that the case might involve corruption within the government, possibly reaching higher-ranking officials. He implied that the incident could be a cover-up orchestrated to divert attention from more significant issues within the political realm, as the Communist Party would likely withhold the truth from the public.
There were online rumors speculating about the possible involvement of Li Weiwei, the former Chairman of the Hunan Provincial Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, in connection to Liu Wenjie’s murder, suggesting internal power struggles within the bureaucracy.
Some netizens raised doubts about the emphasis placed on Jiang Mouhui’s gambling debts in the police report. They questioned the logic of linking his gambling activities to the violent incident at the finance department’s dormitory and pointed out inconsistencies in the official narrative.
Regarding the tragic killing of Liu Wenjie, critics highlighted numerous anomalies in the official report, including the questionable actions of the perpetrators, the plausibility of a physical confrontation involving a middle-aged woman against two armed men, and the escape route chosen by the surviving suspect.
However, the official report omitted details about the occupation and background of the other suspect, Jiang Mou.
Following Liu Wenjie’s murder on September 19th, the Chinese authorities censored media coverage of the incident and arrested a 60-year-old man named Liu Mou for allegedly spreading false information. He was accused of fabricating stories to attract attention and creating a negative impact. The man was subjected to a 10-day administrative detention.
Amidst growing public demands for transparency, questions arose about the nature of the information deemed as false and the necessity of revealing the truth behind the tragic event. Skepticism lingered regarding the government’s handling of the situation and the motivations behind the alleged fabrications.
This complex and tragic incident involving the death of a government official and the subsequent developments have ignited a wave of speculation and doubt surrounding the circumstances and individuals involved, prompting calls for accountability and clarity from the authorities.