Prosecutors decide not to charge officers over the death of Lei Yang

Beijing prosecutors announced on Friday that they decided not to file dereliction of duty charges against five police officers in connection with the death of a man during a police raid in May.

Lei Yang, 29, died during a raid on a foot massage parlor in Beijing’s Changping district. His death triggered public outcry and raised suspicions of police brutality and abuse of power.

According to a statement released by the People’s Procuratorate of Beijing Municipality on Friday, the Fengtai district procuratorate decided not to file the charge.

The decision was made in consideration of the fact that Lei disrupted law enforcement, the circumstance was minor and that officers admitted and regretted for their wrongdoing.

The police officers’ action to control the man who was trying to escape was part of the fulfillment of duty and did not directly cause Lei’s death, an official with the Fengtai procuratorate said at a press conference on Friday.

The official added that although the officers slapped Lei on his face, it doesn’t amount to abuse of power.

Judicial experts confirmed that Lei died from choking on his own vomit, but it cannot be ruled out that the choke was caused by use of force by the officers during the enforcement, which includes putting their arms around Lei’s neck and pressing his face and body to the ground, the statement added.

The Friday statement was the most elaborate among the 12 statement that the Beijing procuratorates announced on the case.

The Beijing Municipal Public Security Bureau expressed regret over Lei’s death on its Sina Weibo account on Friday.

It added that the bureau will handle the case involving the five police officers seriously and in

accordance with law.

Beijing prosecutors announced on Friday that no charges will be pressed on the five police officers in connection with the death of a Beijing resident, Lei Yang.

The prosecutors concluded that Lei had procured sexual services and fiercely resisted law enforcement. Lei died due to asphyxia caused by his own vomit. The police officers violated the law by slapping the man. Lei’s death is related to both police actions and his resistance. Police had failed to rescue Lei in time and their behavior was an act of negligence. The prosecutors said the police officers’ behavior constituted a dereliction of duty but the “circumstances are minor.”

The incident has triggered vehement public debate since it occurred in May and attracted much attention from the government. The prosecutors’ report is very detailed due to the case’s high publicity. The report’s authenticity is beyond doubt.

In fact, many people are no longer concerned about the compromise of evidence. Those who oppose the decision to not bring charges believe it is an issue of principles. For example, they believe that punishing police misdeeds is more important than preserving order and are unwilling to comprehend the legal significance of “misdemeanors.”

We have to admit that the social influence of a high-profile case like this outweighs its legal significance. However, the case must be dealt with in accordance with the law rather than public sentiment.

The prosecutors’ report is clear and should bring the case to an end. We believe most people trust the report. In China, the authority and reliability of an official report surpasses that of other interpretations.

However, the sensation involving Lei’s case is real and there is profound reason behind it. Some people are anxious about their per- sonal safety and their concerns were spurred by a specific case, which is why rumors such as police revenge on Lei or carrying out fishing expedition became widespread.

Lei’s case has consumed much social attention but will, at the same time, push police officers to carry out their duties strictly according to the law. The concept of rule of law will become more complete and clearer after the case.

With Lei’s case coming to an end, some extreme speculations have now been proved to be a far cry from the facts. Similar situations have occurred repeatedly in other events which stirred public opinion. It shows that China’s public opinion field is immature and the logic that “rumors can force out the truth” must not be sustained or trusted.

Lei’s case has touched upon too many social dimensions, and through this case people should recalibrate how to seek out the truth.