作者：鲁慧文 责任编辑：罗志飞

2025年6月13日湖南卫健委、长沙公安局与中南大学组成调查组，认定罗帅宇系自杀，无刑事案件，至此罗帅宇案件在全国上下的一片哗然中画上终止符。

调查组结果公布前的一个月左右时间里罗帅宇案件在中国内地各大主流媒体与自媒体一度形成热议，多日霸屏微博热搜榜，罗父罗母及海内外关注罗帅宇事件的人们一度对罗帅宇案件得以受理抱有较大期待。

实习医生罗帅宇坠楼事件回顾：

罗帅宇，1996年出生，系湖南长沙中南大学湘雅二医院从事肾移植方向的实习医师，他于2024年5月8日在学校宿舍楼坠亡，时年28岁。案发时长沙警方及医院联动调查认定其为“跳楼自杀”，排除了他杀嫌疑，这直接爆发疑点并引起社会舆论。

家属和网民提出多个疑点，认为该案可能涉及他杀或被“灭口”：

1. 坠楼环境异常：罗帅宇坠落点位于离宿舍墙7米外的一个仅80厘米宽的狭窄通道，跨护栏难度极大，引发“自杀不合逻辑”质疑。

2. 现场疑似打斗迹象：宿舍内床单凌乱、眼镜碎裂、抽屉被翻，存在血迹，家属称现场不符典型自杀场景。

3. 其未提前留言准备跳楼：其家属表示，他曾在直播中强调“不会自杀”，其言辞与刑侦报告有严重偏差。

4. 举报转账及资料删除说法：家属称医院曾以“劳务报酬”为名向其账户转账超40万元，并在其死亡后快速收回电脑并删除资料。

5. 媒体与官媒对比：自由媒体及家属坚称这些线索极可能与其举报医院涉及非法器官移植有关，相信其死亡另有内情。反之，官方称其死亡与举报活动无关。

2025年6月13日最新官方发布回应与调查结论：

1、综合调查结果：湖南卫健委、长沙公安局与中南大学组成调查组，认定罗帅宇系自杀，无刑事案件，且未发现器官移植相关违法行为。

2、数据核查结果：家庭存疑的50例器官捐赠资料，经查均可追溯至中国人体器官分配系统，属合法范畴。

3、关键否认：警方认为其死亡前曾发短信告知同事“把电脑文件交纪委”未真实发送，电脑资料未被清空，家属或出现误解。

罗帅宇事件最新官方回应的发布是罗帅宇案件的彻底终结，也是中国独裁体制下司法不公的深度体现，同时罗帅宇“自杀”事件也标志着中共独裁统治维稳战略系统的重大升级。罗帅宇案从案发到此次最新官方回应发布的一年多时间里都是各大官方媒体、民间媒体的禁忌话题，一直被以封口、删帖、限流等方式压制，最新官方回应发布前的一段时间里官方对于罗帅宇话题处于完全开放讨论状态，主流媒体和个人媒体争相报道，并一度以多个话题霸屏微博热搜榜数日，造成一种冤案得以昭雪正义终将到来的假象，并且以很高位的官方介入姿势调查，并给出一个令人唏嘘的结论。

中国政府维稳手段升级，从之前的掩盖真相压制言论转而为告诉你有此事的存在，大家讨论的事是真实的，最终高调介入并告诉你事情是正常的，不再掩盖真相，而是重新定义黑与白。

Hunan Health Commission, Changsha Public Security Bureau, and Central South University Conclude: Lou Shuaiyu Died by Suicide

By Lu Huiwen Edited by Luo Zhifei Translator: Lu Huiwen

On June 13, 2025, a joint investigation team composed of the Hunan Provincial Health Commission, Changsha Public Security Bureau, and Central South University officially concluded that Lou Shuaiyu died by suicide and that no criminal case was involved. With this announcement, the highly publicized Lou Shuaiyu case was brought to an abrupt close amid widespread national controversy.

In the month leading up to the release of the report, Lou’s case had become a major point of debate across mainstream and independent media in mainland China, dominating trending topics on Weibo for several days. Lou’s parents, as well as concerned supporters at home and abroad, had high hopes that the case would receive fair and transparent handling.

Background: The Death of Medical Intern Lou Shuaiyu

Lou Shuaiyu, born in 1996, was a 28-year-old medical intern specializing in kidney transplants at the Xiangya Second Hospital affiliated with Central South University in Changsha, Hunan. On May 8, 2024, he fell to his death from a campus dormitory building. Authorities from the local police and hospital quickly declared the cause to be suicide and ruled out foul play—an assessment that triggered widespread public skepticism and scrutiny.

Key Doubts Raised by Family and the Public

Many questioned the suicide ruling and suspected foul play or silencing efforts:

1. Suspicious Fall Site: Lou’s body was found in a narrow passageway only 80 cm wide, located 7 meters from the dorm wall. The distance made the idea of a voluntary jump seem implausible.

2. Signs of a Struggle: Inside the dorm, his bed was in disarray, his glasses were shattered, drawers were rummaged through, and blood was found—elements inconsistent with a typical suicide scene, according to his family.

3. No Prior Indication of Suicide: Lou had reportedly stated during a livestream, “I will never kill myself,” a statement that stood in stark contrast to official findings.

4. Large Transfers and Data Deletion: The family claimed the hospital had transferred over 400,000 yuan to Lou’s account under the label of “labor compensation,” and that after his death, his computer was swiftly retrieved and its contents deleted.

5. Discrepancy Between State and Independent Media: While family members and independent outlets believed Lou’s death might be linked to his whistleblowing on illegal organ transplant practices, state media firmly denied any connection, asserting the cause of death was unrelated.

The Official Conclusions Released on June 13, 2025

1. General Findings: The joint investigation concluded Lou died by suicide, found no criminal elements, and detected no illegal organ transplant activities.

2. Verification of Organ Data: The 50 questionable transplant cases raised by the family were verified and deemed traceable within China’s official organ allocation system, thus considered legal.

3. Rebuttal of Key Claims: Authorities stated that Lou’s alleged final message—telling a colleague to submit his computer files to disciplinary authorities—was never actually sent. They also claimed that his computer had not been wiped, suggesting the family may have misunderstood.

Commentary: A Case Closed, A System Exposed.

The government’s final statement not only closed the Lou Shuaiyu case but also exposed the deeper systemic flaws of justice under authoritarian rule in China. It revealed a sophisticated evolution in the Chinese Communist Party’s propaganda and “stability maintenance” apparatus.

From the time of Lou’s death to the release of the official report over a year later, discussion of the case remained taboo across state and private media. Posts were deleted, accounts censored, and discussion throttled. Yet in the weeks leading up to the June 13 announcement, the topic was unexpectedly opened to broad public discourse.

Major media outlets and influencers began reporting freely, and Lou’s name once again dominated trending lists—creating an illusion of justice in motion and resolution on the horizon.

Then came the official conclusion—a high-profile government investigation that ultimately declared nothing abnormal.

This marks a new strategy in state control: no longer merely burying the truth, but acknowledging the facts—only to redefine them.

The state now tells you: Yes, this did happen. Yes, you are allowed to talk about it. But in the end, we will tell you what it means.

Black is white.

Wrong is right.

And justice, once again, becomes a tool of control rather than truth.

作者 胡丽莉   编辑：罗志飞    责任编辑：鲁慧文

2025年5月，《新黄河》记者刘成伟报道了刘东林“指居”监视居住死亡案，揭开了长达数年的隐秘黑幕。刘东林因早前涉及的一起案件被石家庄公安实施“指定居所监视居住”，在2019年10月8日在监视居住处死亡，后未经尸检便火化遗体。家属多年来四处控告，始终无人接应。直到媒体曝光最高检才启动核查，但办案权仍交由地方检察院，未能摆脱地方保护主义的操控，调查迟缓。而几乎在同一时间，石家庄公安迅速成立“5·11专案组”，对案件代理律师、关注记者以及协助家属的正义市民展开报复性调查、监听、传唤，甚至以“寻衅滋事”“妨害作证”等罪名打击。这起报道及相关网络讨论很快被全网删除，舆论场迅速被清空封禁。

行唐县公安局对刘东林的指定居所监视通知书   （图片来源 新黄河）

刘东林指定居所监视居住的银河宾馆原址，如今招牌已摘掉（图片来源 搜狐网）

2025年6月17日400公里外更加令人发指的暴家案在等待939天后终于迎来庭审，相关报道刚刚发布就被“和谐”。2022年7月受害人暴继业在拒绝签署伪造口供后与家人一起被带到指定居所，此后连续十多天持续遭受非人虐待，十余名警察用PVC管和木棍抽打脚底、碾压手背直致昏厥，被反复扇耳光至口鼻流血。其儿子暴韶瑞更是被用手摇电话电击生殖器，施暴者威胁“电废你”。另一个儿子，33岁的退伍水兵暴钦瑞，在“指定居所监视居住”的第13天突然猝死，尸检显示身体多处电击及限制性体位导致的严重损伤。

多年前在海军某部服役的暴钦瑞 （图片来源  财新网）

2023年9月14日，新乐宾馆一楼，部分房间的四壁均为软包墙。暴继业称，他们曾在这里被监视居住。（图片来源 南方周末）

“5·25”专案期间，侦查人员对犯罪嫌疑人进行电击时使用的手摇电话机（图片来源 南方周末）

令人愤怒的是，参与刑讯的耿春远等警察如此对待暴家众人并非为了还原事实、伸张正义，而是为了讨好上级、掩盖自身非法办案行为，迅速结案以“完成任务”。主导刑讯的任力鹏在供述中坦承：暴继业“若不认，就没法交差”。这说明刑讯逼供根本不是为了查明真相，而是为了做案子、做成绩，可见刑讯逼供完全是为私利服务，而牺牲的是无辜生命与法律尊严。

2025年2月13日至14日，8名“5·25”专案办案人员在保定市中级人民法院法警训练基地受审（图片来源 南方周末）

两起案件如出一辙：暴力、伪案、保护主义、对揭露者的打压。这绝不是偶发事件，而是制度性病灶的集中体现——地方公安对权力的无限滥用，司法机关与之沆瀣一气，缺乏监督和制衡，使得酷刑逼供、非法监视居住、迫害正义力量成了“默认配置”。

刘东林案尽管已上达最高检，但最终仍被交回地方检察机关处理，而当地的司法机关恰恰就是想把命案“掩埋”在本地；暴家案中，公开曝光更高强度的刑讯细节后，地方公安不是追责施暴者，而是街头抓证人、封口打压。这种上下呼应的沉默与压制，不仅是对法治的侮辱，更是对道德底线的践踏。

“指定居所监视居住”本身就游走在法律与黑狱之间，而地牢、刑椅、电击生殖器等酷刑手段，更彻底击穿了“依法治国”的底线。检察机关对公安系统失去制衡能力，反而沦为他们的保护伞，监督机制早已形同虚设。最终真正被打击的，不是犯罪者，而是伸张正义的人。

在国际场合高举“人权”“法治”旗帜的中国政府，在本国却默许甚至操控着对公民的非人待遇。从身体的伤害，到信息的封锁，从记者、律师被监听传唤，到家属四处申冤无门，基本人权被系统性剥夺，公民沦为国家机器下毫无保障的“执法对象”。

一个正常国家的治理，绝不能建立在恐惧、暴力和谎言的基础上。而今天的中国，正在以极快的速度背离现代法治、人权与民主的基本共识。

这些案件提醒我们：今日中国，不是法治崩坏，而是专制统治下对法治的有意识毁灭；不是偶发悲剧，而是制度性暴力的必然产物。那些凌驾于法律之上的暴力机器，那些把生命当作维稳代价的权力者，正是制造一切恐惧、谎言与苦难的根源。

我们必须直面这个事实：中国的执政党，正是这一切罪行的始作俑者与庇护者。只有当权力受到真正的制约，只有当人民敢于集体发声、拒绝沉默，正义才不再遥远。

不要再对暴政抱有幻想，不要再为体制粉饰和平。愤怒不是煽动，控诉不是犯罪。让我们以公民的名义，向不义之政发出最清晰的回响：

你们的谎言，我们不信；你们的暴力，我们不怕；你们的统治，终将被历史审判。

Rule-of-Law Governance Has Become a Farce: The Dead Are Voiceless, the Living Are Gagged

By Hu Lili   Editor: Luo Zhifei   Final Editor: Lu Huiwen   Translator: Lu Huiwen

In May 2025, New Yellow River reporter Liu Chengwei exposed the death of Liu Donglin while under residential surveillance at a designated location (RSDL). Liu, implicated in an earlier case, died on 8 October 2019 inside the RSDL site in Shijiazhuang. His body was cremated without an autopsy. For years his family petitioned in vain. Only after the media spotlight did the Supreme People’s Procuratorate order a review—yet jurisdiction was handed back to the local procuratorate, leaving the investigation mired in local protectionism. 

RSDL notice issued by Xingtang County Public Security Bureau for Liu Donglin

Former site of the Galaxy Hotel, where Liu was held under RSDL—its sign has now been removed

Almost simultaneously, Shijiazhuang police created a “5·11 Task Force” to retaliate: they investigated, wire-tapped, and subpoenaed the victim’s lawyers, the reporter, and citizens who assisted the family, charging them with “picking quarrels” and “obstructing testimony.” The report and all online discussion were swiftly scrubbed from the internet.

Four hundred kilometres away, another atrocity finally reached trial on 17 June, after 939 days of delay—only for the news to be “harmonised” within hours. In July 2022, Bao Jiye refused to sign a fabricated confession and was taken—together with his family—into RSDL. For more than ten days they were tortured: police beat the soles of their feet with PVC pipes, crushed their hands with wooden rods, and slapped them until blood streamed from their noses and mouths. His son Bao Shaorui was shocked on the genitals with a hand-crank telephone; officers threatened to “fry” him. Another son, Bao Qinrui, a 33-year-old navy veteran, died suddenly on the 13th day of detention; the autopsy revealed multiple electric burns and positional asphyxia injuries.

Bao Qinrui during his navy service (photo: Caixin)

Room with padded walls at Xinle Hotel, where the Baos were held (photo: Southern Weekly)

Hand-crank telephone used to torture suspects during the “5·25 Task Force” (photo: Southern Weekly)

Lead interrogator Ren Lipeng later confessed that the goal was not truth but performance: “If Bao Jiye wouldn’t confess, we couldn’t close the case.” Torture was merely a shortcut to meet quotas—human life and legal dignity be damned.

On 13–14 February 2025, eight members of the “5·25 Task Force” stood trial at the Bailiff Training Base of Baoding Intermediate Court (photo: Southern Weekly)

The two cases are strikingly similar: violence, fabricated charges, local cover-ups, and reprisals against whistle-blowers. They are not accidents but symptoms of a systemic rot—unchecked police power, collusion within judicial bodies, and the collapse of oversight.

Even after reaching the Supreme Procuratorate, Liu Donglin’s case was kicked back to the very county that tried to bury it. In the Bao case, detailed revelations of torture were met not with punishment of the perpetrators but with gag orders and arrests of witnesses.

RSDL itself straddles the line between legality and a black jail; torture devices—dungeons, restraint chairs, electric shocks to genitals—obliterate any pretense of “rule by law.” Procurators who should restrain the police have become their shield. Ultimately, the ones punished are not criminals but those who seek justice.

While Beijing waves the banners of “human rights” and “rule of law” abroad, it tacitly condones, even orchestrates, inhuman treatment of citizens at home: physical abuse, information blackout, surveillance of reporters and lawyers, petitioning families left unheard. Basic rights are systematically stripped away; citizens reduced to mere “targets” of enforcement.

A functioning state cannot be built on fear, violence, and lies. Yet today’s China is hurtling away from modern ideals of law, rights, and democracy.

These cases remind us: the problem is not a breakdown of law, but its deliberate destruction under authoritarian rule; not random tragedy, but the inevitable product of systemic violence.

The Chinese Communist Party is both architect and guardian of this cruelty. Justice will remain distant until power is truly checked and citizens speak together in defiance of silence.

Do not cling to illusions about benign autocracy. Anger is not sedition; accusation is not a crime. In the name of citizenship, let us answer tyranny with the clearest echo:

We refuse your lies.

We fear not your violence.

Your rule will stand trial before history.