Very peculiar thing:

I looked into all the reports about this incident, and I estimate the general situation as follows:

This guy used technical advantages to exploit vulnerabilities in some gambling websites, then replaced their rebate addresses so that all the rebates went to him.

Over the years, he should have obtained a lot of Bitcoin; currently, 183 coins are seized, and they are held by two investigative agencies.

Overall, there are at least the following discussion points in this case:

✅ Jurisdiction and suspicion of duplicate prosecution;
✅ Legality of property disposal seriously disputed;
✅ Logical conflicts in charges and legal interests protection;
✅ Integrity issues of electronic evidence;

1️⃣ The two police jurisdictions "filed cases successively and repeatedly changed charges," which is highly abnormal and not in accordance with legal principles. A single event filed in one jurisdiction cannot be prosecuted again elsewhere. There have been two criminal filings, two criminal enforcement measures, and two large-scale property disposals.

This clearly conflicts with Article 21 of the "Procedures for Handling Criminal Cases by Public Security Organs":

"Criminal cases under the jurisdiction of multiple public security organs shall be handled by the initially accepting public security organ." This is a "risk of double prosecution" in criminal procedure.

2️⃣【Major doubts about property disposal】—Whether Bitcoin was disposed of prematurely or illegally monetized:

Criminal seizure ≠ direct liquidation. Before a court verdict, the assets still belong to the suspect; the suspect can still be acquitted. You are handling the assets prematurely. This likely violates the principles of "proportionality + property rights protection."

3️⃣ "Stealing funds from gambling websites"?

This point made me laugh. Gambling websites are illegal in China, but the accusation treats them as "victimized entities," asserting that their "legitimate property" was stolen. In criminal law theory, at least the following are controversial:
1) Does an illegal business entity automatically enjoy criminal law protection?
2) Do the "rebate funds" of gambling websites constitute legitimate property under criminal law?

4️⃣ Technical actions ≠ necessarily constitute theft

The accusation states: exploiting vulnerabilities, replacing rebate accounts, and obtaining funds.

But under criminal law, the following must be satisfied:
1) Intent to illegally possess
2) Secretly stealing others' lawful property
3) Exclusive control

And:

- Is there a "boundary of authorized agency rights"?
- Does it constitute "technical dispute / civil infringement / unjust enrichment"?
- Is there a complete chain of evidence proving "secrecy"?

These are open for discussion.

5️⃣ My opinion:

Based on my thorough reading of criminal law and experience with thousands of cases:

If we set aside "emotions" and the background of "profit-driven law enforcement," purely from the perspective of criminal law elements and evidence logic: this case is most similar not to theft, nor to setting up a casino,

but to: "Crime of illegally obtaining data from computer information systems (or its attempted / disputed forms)," and given the circumstances, the electronic evidence is not sealed or has traces of modification, indicating insufficient evidence chain, with the possibility that the case only reaches administrative violations or insufficient criminal evidence.

Finally, I want to say that I have experienced what he went through; it’s very helpless.

The confession mentioned that he obtained the information by "threatening to take measures against his pregnant wife," which is extremely inhumane. Speechless and choked with emotion!

Message from @PANews