Bao Qinrui died during the “designated residence” period, and the police said that the other people involved in the case “should not be held criminally responsible”. Now the Bao family has been arrested again. 1. The Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau’s “5·25 Special Case Team” committed torture, resulting in the death of Bao Qinrui. Several members of the special case team were held accountable as a result. The bureau has a direct interest in this case and cannot handle it fairly. 2. All public officials of the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau have a colleague relationship or a superior-subordinate relationship with the original “5·25 Special Case Team” investigators and should all be recused, which prevents the bureau from having jurisdiction over this case. 3. After being arrested this time, they are not even allowed to meet, on the grounds of “endangering national security”. 4. The Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau has already made a guilty presumption in this case, first determining it as a case involving organized crime, and then conducting the investigation. It cannot handle this case fairly. In order to quell public opinion and appease the people, this case should be moved out of Shijiazhuang and Hebei Province. @Shijiazhuang Public Security Network Spokesperson@Hebei Public Security Network Spokesperson@Ministry of Public Security News Media@Shijiazhuang Procuratorate@Hebei Procuratorate@Supreme People’s Procuratorate Detailed discussion: 1. The Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau’s “5·25 Special Case Team” committed torture, resulting in the death of Bao Qinrui. Several members of the special case team were held accountable as a result. The bureau has a direct interest in this case and cannot handle it fairly. On July 20, 2022, Bao Qinrui died due to deep vein thrombosis and detachment of the lower limbs, leading to pulmonary embolism and causing acute respiratory and circulatory failure, after suffering from long-term restricted body positions, repeated mechanical injuries, and electric shock injuries, etc. The other suspects also reported that they had been subjected to torture, among whom Bao Jitao had fractures of the sixth and seventh ribs on the left side, which was determined to be a minor injury of level two. According to the public trial of the case of the members of the special case team suspected of intentional injury and torture from February 13 to 14, 2025, Hu Wei, the deputy head of the Criminal Police Brigade of the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau, as the person in charge of supervising and guiding the handling of the “5·25” special case by the Shijiazhuang Municipal Bureau, gave instructions on torture to the special case team and guided the members of the special case team to conceal the relevant evidence of torture. It can be seen that the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau has a direct interest in this case: First, the death of Bao Qinrui was directly caused by the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau and its subordinate public officials. Bao Jiye and others, as Bao Qinrui’s blood relatives, have a natural antagonistic relationship with the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau, and even an adversarial relationship. Second, the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau and its subordinate public officials were held criminally responsible for intentional injury, torture, and obstruction of testimony due to illegal acts in the handling of this case. If the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau continues to handle this case, it will be difficult to avoid the suspicion of retaliating against the Bao family. Third, at present, the cases of three case handlers suspected of intentional injury and torture, and the case of Hu Wei, the deputy head of the Criminal Police Brigade of the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau, suspected of obstructing testimony, have not yet been tried, and the cases of eight case handlers who have already been tried and suspected of intentional injury and torture have not yet been decided. If the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau continues to have jurisdiction over this case, it is very likely to forcibly determine that Bao Jiye and others constitute a crime in order to protect the above-mentioned case handlers and reduce the guilt of the above-mentioned case handlers. Therefore, if the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau continues to have jurisdiction over this case, it is tantamount to letting the “defendant” investigate the “victim”, and letting the “torture implementer” investigate the “tortured”, and it will not be possible to obtain a fair result. All public officials of the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau should recuse themselves from this case, and the bureau cannot have jurisdiction over this case. 2. All public officials of the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau have a colleague relationship or a superior-subordinate relationship with the original “5·25 Special Case Team” investigators and should all be recused, which prevents the bureau from having jurisdiction over this case. All public officials of the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau have a colleague relationship with the members of the original “5·25 Special Case Team” and Hu Wei, the deputy head of the Criminal Police Brigade of the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau, or a superior-subordinate leadership relationship. Now, under the circumstances that Hu Wei, Zhang Xuguang and others’ actions have led to the death of Bao Qinrui and have already been prosecuted criminally for this case, it is obviously not convincing to have their former colleagues, superiors or subordinates investigate this case. Their colleagues, superiors, and subordinates can hardly get rid of the preconceived notions about this case and cannot handle this case fairly, and even have the suspicion of retaliating against this case for their former colleagues, superiors, and subordinates. Therefore, all public officials of the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau should recuse themselves from this case, which prevents the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau from having the right to have jurisdiction over this case. 3. The “5·25 Special Case Team” of the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau used torture and other illegal means to handle this case, indicating that it had already lost its impartial position. The “5·25 Special Case Team” under the command of the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau, when handling this case in 2022, attempted to forcibly turn this case into crimes such as “organizing, leading, and participating in a criminal organization”, which can be reflected in the various illegal means it adopted, including at least: 1. Large-scale, organized, and systematic torture. As mentioned earlier, the suspects in this case who were designated to be under residential surveillance in 2022 all reported that they had been subjected to torture, and the torturers involved 11 members of the special case team and the deputy head of the Criminal Police Brigade of the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau. According to the public trial, the means of torture involved hand-cranked telephones, electric batons, beatings with pickaxe handles and PVC pipes, whipping with belts, hanging in cages, and slapping and kicking, resulting in one death and one minor injury. 2. Illegal implementation of designated residential surveillance. Article 75, paragraph 1 of the “Criminal Procedure Law” stipulates: “Residential surveillance shall be carried out at the residence of the suspect or defendant; if there is no fixed residence, it may be carried out at a designated residence.” In this case, the “5·25 Special Case Team” of the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau, in order to carry out torture, illegally designated the suspects to be under residential surveillance in Xingle City, Shijiazhuang City, when the main suspects had fixed residences in Yu’hua District, Shijiazhuang City, and Gaoyi County. 3. Abuse of designated jurisdiction. Bao Jiye and others are all from Gaoyi County, Shijiazhuang City. The Yu’hua Branch of Shijiazhuang City and the Public Security Bureau of Xingle City are neither the place of the crime nor the residence of the suspects. In the case of a very clear statutory jurisdiction in this case, the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau illegally designated the Yu’hua Branch, the Public Security Bureau of Xingle City, and the Gaoyi County Public Security Bureau to jointly handle the case. According to the public trial, Zhang Xuguang of the Criminal Investigation Brigade of the Xingle City Public Security Bureau said in the interrogation record that in June 2022, Geng Chunyuan, the deputy captain of the Criminal Police Brigade of the Yu’hua District Public Security Bureau, told him that they were “operating” a case involving organized crime in Gaoyi County, which was almost done, but the main suspects had houses in Shijiazhuang (Yu’hua District) and could not handle the designated residence, and wanted to use the procedures of the Xingle City Public Security Bureau, and then they could share the results of the campaign to eliminate organized crime. 4. Failure to revoke the case in accordance with the law. In September 2022, more than a month after Bao Qinrui passed away, Bao Jiye and other suspects were successively released on bail; on June 19, 2023, the Xingle City Public Security Bureau lifted their bail, on the grounds that “it was found that criminal responsibility should not be pursued”. Article 163 of the “Criminal Procedure Law” stipulates: “During the investigation, if it is found that criminal responsibility should not be pursued against the suspect, the case shall be revoked;…” But the “5·25 Special Case Team” did not revoke the case in accordance with the law, but instead arrested the suspects in this case again with the same reason nearly two years later. All the facts show that the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau had already lost its position to handle this case fairly when it investigated this case in 2022. Now, the facts of torture have been exposed, and facing the possibility of further accountability, it is even more difficult for the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau to handle this case fairly. At the same time, due to its past large-scale, organized, and systematic torture, it is also possible to carry out torture again. 4. After the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau arrested the suspects this time, serious violations of law and dereliction of duty occurred again, which is enough to show that it cannot handle this case fairly. 1. Violation of the right to meet. On May 23 and 24, 2025, lawyer Jin Lei, the defense attorney for Bao Jiye, went to the Wuji County Detention Center several times to request to meet with Bao Jiye, but was obstructed by the detention center on the grounds of “interrogation by the case-handling agency” and “going out for physical examination”, which seriously violated the mandatory provisions of Article 39, paragraph 2 of the “Criminal Procedure Law” on “the detention center shall arrange meetings in a timely manner, and shall not exceed forty-eight hours at the latest”. On May 25, 2025, when the defense attorney finally met with Bao Jiye after repeated rights protection, he learned that Bao Jiye had not been arranged for a substantive interrogation. On May 28, 2025, when the defense attorney made another appointment for a meeting, the Action and Disposal Brigade of the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau issued a letter to the Wuji County Detention Center to suspend the lawyer’s meeting on the grounds that “the case involves endangering national security”. The defense attorney reasonably suspects that the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau deliberately obstructed the lawyer’s meeting on the pretext of “endangering national security”. Reason 1: According to Article 52 of the “Regulations on the Procedures for Handling Criminal Cases by Public Security Organs”, in criminal cases that endanger national security, the case-handling department shall notify the detention center in writing when sending the suspect to the detention center for custody, but the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau did not do so until the defense attorney requested to meet several times before refusing to meet on this ground. The defense attorney was able to meet normally three days ago, but three days later, he was suddenly unable to meet because the person involved was suspected of “endangering national security”. Reason 2: Even if it does involve a crime that endangers national security, if the case-handling agency does not allow the meeting, it should also make a decision of non-permission and notify the defense lawyer in writing and explain the reasons in writing. Article 52, paragraph 3 of the “Regulations on the Procedures for Handling Criminal Cases by Public Security Organs” stipulates: “For the application for a meeting filed by the defense lawyer, the case-handling department shall, within three days after receiving the application, report to the person in charge of the public security organ at or above the county level for approval, make a decision of permission or non-permission, notify the defense lawyer in writing, and promptly notify the detention center or the department that is implementing residential surveillance. Except for circumstances that hinder the investigation or may leak state secrets, a decision of permission shall be made.” 2. Arbitrary change of charges. On May 11, 2025, the suspects in this case were criminally detained on the grounds of “suspected of provoking trouble”; on May 24, Prosecutor He Yuekun of the Wuji County Procuratorate claimed that the Municipal Bureau had classified this case as a case involving organized crime; on May 28, the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau suddenly refused the lawyer’s meeting on the grounds of “suspected of endangering national security”. In just over ten days, three completely different charges appeared, which shows the arbitrariness of the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau’s handling of the case. 3. Failure to re-establish the case in accordance with the law. On June 19, 2023, nearly a year after Bao Qinrui’s death, Bao Jiye and other suspects were released on bail, on the grounds that “it was found that criminal responsibility should not be pursued”. Article 163 of the “Criminal Procedure Law” stipulates: “During the investigation, if it is found that criminal responsibility should not be pursued against the suspect, the case shall be revoked;…” Article 190 of the “Regulations on the Procedures for Handling Criminal Cases by Public Security Organs” stipulates: “If the public security organ discovers new facts or evidence after revoking the case, or discovers that the original facts were wrongly determined, and believes that there is a criminal fact that needs to be pursued for criminal responsibility, it shall re-establish the case for investigation.” Therefore, the “5·25 Special Case” should have been revoked in accordance with the law in 2023; even if it was not revoked, it also lost the basis for continued investigation because “it was found that criminal responsibility should not be pursued”; even if criminal responsibility was to be pursued again, the case should also be re-established. However, according to the media report of “Southern Weekend”: “On the morning of May 12, 2025, the person in charge of the Political Department of the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau told the reporter of Southern Weekend that the ‘5·25’ special case has never been revoked, but only ‘temporarily shelved’. He said that they had successively received reports against the Bao family, and it was a normal case-handling procedure to restart the special case.” It can be seen that the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau violated the law by failing to revoke the case and re-establish the case, and conducted a “reheated” investigation without re-establishing the case in accordance with the law, which fully reflects the chaotic case-handling procedures and the suspected retaliation. 5. The Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau has already made a guilty presumption in this case, first determining it as a case involving organized crime, and then conducting the investigation. It cannot handle this case fairly. On May 24, 2025, the defense attorney of Bao Jiye reflected to Prosecutor He Yuekun of the Wuji County Procuratorate of Shijiazhuang City that he was obstructed from meeting, and Prosecutor He Yuekun replied very clearly that the Municipal Bureau had classified this case as a case involving organized crime: “Organized crime is organized crime, this is determined by the Municipal Bureau” “100% is organized crime” “This is the nature of the Public Security Bureau, they determine it as organized crime, if you determine it, you can’t see it”. Article 6 of the “Criminal Procedure Law” stipulates: “The people’s courts, the people’s procuratorates, and the public security organs must rely on the masses and must take facts as the basis and law as the criterion” Article 12 stipulates: “No one shall be determined guilty without a judgment made in accordance with the law by the people’s court.” As a prosecutor, He Yuekun’s remarks have largely reflected that the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau has made a guilty presumption of “involving organized crime” in this case, first determining that this case involves organized crime, and then looking for evidence of organized crime, and even very likely illegally obtaining evidence of organized crime in order to forcibly handle it as a case involving organized crime. In this case, the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau has violated the principle of presumption of innocence and cannot “take facts as the basis and law as the criterion”, and it is impossible to handle the case fairly in accordance with the law. In summary, the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau has a direct interest in this case, has already presumed this case to be “involving organized crime”, and has many serious illegal acts, which has seriously affected the fair handling of this case. All investigators within the scope of Shijiazhuang City should recuse themselves from this case, and this case should not be continued to be handled by the public security organs within the scope of Shijiazhuang City. Article 29 of the “Criminal Procedure Law” stipulates: “If the trial personnel, procuratorial personnel, and investigation personnel have any of the following circumstances, they shall recuse themselves, and the parties and their legal representatives also have the right to request them to recuse themselves: (2) They or their close relatives have an interest in the case; (4) They have other relationships with the parties in the case that may affect the fair handling of the case.” Article 33 of the “Regulations on the Procedures for Handling Criminal Cases by Public Security Organs” stipulates: “The person in charge of the public security organ and the investigators shall not have the following acts: (4) Other improper acts that may affect the fair handling of the case. If the provisions of the preceding paragraph are violated, they shall be ordered to recuse themselves and be held legally responsible. The parties and their legal representatives have the right to request their recusal.” Now, Bao Qinrui was tortured to death, and several members of the special case team were held criminally responsible. If the Shijiazhuang Municipal Public Security Bureau continues to have jurisdiction over this case, it will be difficult to avoid the suspicion of retaliating against the Bao family, and it will be difficult for the Bao family, the defense attorney, and the social public who are concerned about this case to feel fairness and justice. In order for the case to be handled fairly, the best solution for this case should be that the Ministry of Public Security designates the public security organs outside Hebei Province to have jurisdiction, and secondly, the Hebei Provincial Public Security Department should designate the public security organs outside Shijiazhuang City to have jurisdiction.
2、石家庄市公安局的所有公职人员均与原“5·25专案组”侦查人员具有同事关系、上下级关系，均应当回避，导致该局无法管辖本案
3、这次被抓后，还不让会见，理由是“危害国家安全”。
4、石家庄市公安局已对本案作出有罪推定，系先定涉黑、再侦查，其无法公正办理本案
为了平息舆论、安抚民心，本案应移出石家庄市和河北省。
@石家庄公安网络发言人@河北公安网络发言人@公安部新闻传媒@石家庄检察@河北检察@最高人民检察院
详细论述：
一、石家庄市公安局“5·25专案组”实施刑讯逼供导致暴钦瑞死亡，多名专案组成员因此被追责，该局与本案存在直接利害关系，无法公正办理本案
2022年7月20日，暴钦瑞在遭受长期限制性体位、反复机械性损伤、电击损伤等刑讯逼供手段的情况下，下肢深静脉血栓形成并脱落，导致肺动脉血栓栓塞，引起急性呼吸循环功能衰竭而亡。其余犯罪嫌疑人也均反映自己遭受了刑讯逼供，其中暴纪涛左侧第六根、第七根肋骨骨折，被认定为轻伤二级。根据2025年2月13日至14日专案组成员涉嫌故意伤害、刑讯逼供案的公开庭审情况，石家庄市公安局刑警支队副支队长胡伟作为石家庄市局督办、指导“5·25”专案办理的负责人，向专案组提出过刑讯逼供的指示，并指导专案组成员隐匿刑讯逼供的相关证据。由此可见，石家庄市公安局与本案存在直接利害关系：
第一，暴钦瑞的死亡是由石家庄市公安局及其下属公职人员直接导致的，暴继业等人作为暴钦瑞的血脉至亲，与石家庄市公安局之间具有天然的对立关系，甚至存在敌对关系。
第二，石家庄市公安局及其下属公职人员因办理本案过程中的非法行为，被以故意伤害、刑讯逼供、妨害作证罪追究刑事责任，若石家庄市公安局继续办理本案，难以摆脱对暴家人进行打击报复的嫌疑。
第三，目前，3名办案人员涉嫌故意伤害、刑讯逼供罪的案件，以及石家庄市公安局刑警支队副支队长胡伟涉嫌妨害作证罪的案件尚未开庭审理，而8名已经开完庭的涉嫌故意伤害、刑讯逼供罪的办案人员的案件也尚未作出判决。若石家庄市公安局继续管辖本案，则极有可能为保护上述办案人员、减轻上述办案人员的罪责而强行认定暴继业等人构成犯罪。
因此，如果石家庄市公安局继续管辖本案，无异于让“被告方”侦查“被害方”，让“实施刑讯逼供一方”侦查“被刑讯逼供一方”，无法获得公正的结果。石家庄市公安局所有公职人员均应当回避本案，该局无法对本案进行管辖。
二、石家庄市公安局的所有公职人员均与原“5·25专案组”侦查人员具有同事关系、上下级关系，均应当回避，导致该局无法管辖本案
石家庄市公安局的所有公职人员都与原“5·25专案组”成员以及石家庄市公安局刑警支队副支队长胡伟具有同事关系，或者上下级的领导与被领导关系。如今，在胡伟、张旭光等人的行为导致暴钦瑞死亡、且已经因本案被刑事追诉的情况下，再由他们曾经的同事、领导或者下属对本案进行侦查，明显不能服众。他们的同事、领导、下属难以摆脱对本案先入为主的观念，无法公正处理本案，甚至有为自己的前同事、领导、下属而对本案进行打击报复之嫌。因此，石家庄市公安局的所有公职人员均应当回避本案，导致石家庄市公安局无权管辖本案。
三、石家庄市公安局“5·25专案组”曾利用刑讯逼供等多种非法手段办理本案，表明其早已丧失了公正立场
石家庄市公安局指挥下的“5·25专案组”在2022年办理本案时，就试图强行将本案办成“组织、领导、参加黑社会性质组织”等罪名，这在其采用的多种非法手段中均能反映，至少包括：
1.大规模、有组织、系统性地实施刑讯逼供。
如前所述，本案于2022年被指定居所监视居住的犯罪嫌疑人都反映自己遭受了刑讯逼供，实施刑讯逼供者涉及11名专案组成员及石家庄市公安局刑警支队副支队长。根据公开开庭的情况，刑讯逼供的手段涉及手摇电话机、电警棍电击，镐柄、PVC管击打，皮带抽打，吊笼子，扇耳光与拳打脚踢等，造成一人死亡、一人轻伤的结果。
2.非法实施指定居所监视居住。
《刑事诉讼法》第75条第1款规定：“监视居住应当在犯罪嫌疑人、被告人的住处执行；无固定住处的，可以在指定的居所执行。”本案中，石家庄市公安局“5·25专案组”在主要犯罪嫌疑人在石家庄市裕华区、高邑县有固定住处的情况下，为实施刑讯逼供，非法将其在石家庄市新乐市指定居所监视居住。
3.滥用指定管辖权。
暴继业等人均为石家庄市高邑县人，石家庄市裕华区分局、新乐市公安局既非犯罪地，也非犯罪嫌疑人居住地。在本案法定管辖权非常明确的情况下，石家庄市公安局非法指定裕华区分局、新乐市公安局、高邑县公安局联合办案。根据公开开庭审理的情况，新乐市公安局刑侦大队的张旭光在讯问笔录中称，2022年6月，裕华区公安分局刑警大队副大队长耿春远告诉他，他们“经营”着一个高邑县涉黑案，办得差不多了，但主要的犯罪嫌疑人在石家庄（裕华区）有房，没法办理指居，想用新乐市公安局的手续，到时可以分扫黑除恶的成绩。
4.未依法撤销案件。
2022年9月，在暴钦瑞过世一个多月后，暴继业等其余犯罪嫌疑人均相继被取保候审；2023年6月19日，新乐市公安局解除对他们的取保侯审，理由是“发现不应当追究刑事责任”。《刑事诉讼法》第163条规定：“在侦查过程中，发现不应对犯罪嫌疑人追究刑事责任的，应当撤销案件；……”但“5·25专案组”并未依法撤销案件，反而在时隔近2年之后再次以同一理由对本案犯罪嫌疑人进行抓捕。
种种事实表明，石家庄市公安局早在2022年侦查本案时，就已经不具备公正办理本案的立场。如今，刑讯逼供的事实曝光，面对潜在的进一步被追责的可能性，石家庄市公安局更难公正办理本案。同时，由于其曾经发生过大规模、有组织、系统性地刑讯逼供行为，现在也同样有可能再次进行刑讯逼供。
四、石家庄市公安局此次对嫌疑人抓捕后，再次出现严重违法和渎职行为，足以说明其无法公正办理本案
1.侵犯会见权。
2025年5月23日、24日，暴继业的辩护人金磊律师多次到无极县看守所要求会见暴继业，均被看守所以“办案机关提审”“外出体检”等理由进行阻挠，严重违反《刑事诉讼法》第39条第2款关于“看守所应当及时安排会见，至迟不得超过四十八小时”的强制性规定。2025年5月25日，当辩护人几经维权终于会见到暴继业后得知，暴继业并未被安排实质性的提审。2025年5月28日，当辩护人再次预约会见时，石家庄市公安局行动处置支队竟然以“该案涉嫌危害国家安全”为由向无极县看守所出具暂停律师会见函。辩护人合理怀疑石家庄市公安局是以“危害国家安全”为借口故意阻挠律师会见。
理由一，根据《公安机关办理刑事案件程序规定》第52条，危害国家安全的犯罪案件，办案部门应当在将犯罪嫌疑人送看守所羁押时书面通知看守所，但石家庄市公安局直到辩护人几次要求会见之后才以此理由拒绝会见。辩护人在3天前还能正常会见，在3天后突然就因当事人涉嫌“危害国家安全”而不能会见。
理由二，即便确实涉及危害国家安全犯罪，办案机关若不允许会见，也应该作出不许可的决定，并书面通知辩护律师、书面说明理由。《公安机关办理刑事案件程序规定》第52条第3款规定：“对辩护律师提出的会见申请，办案部门应当在收到申请后三日以内，报经县级以上公安机关负责人批准，作出许可或者不许可的决定，书面通知辩护律师，并及时通知看守所或者执行监视居住的部门。除有碍侦查或者可能泄露国家秘密的情形外，应当作出许可的决定。”
2.随意变更罪名。
2025年5月11日，本案犯罪嫌疑人被以“涉嫌寻衅滋事罪”为由刑事拘留；5月24日，无极县检察院何跃坤检察官声称市局已经将本案定性为黑社会；5月28日，石家庄市公安局突然以“涉嫌危害国家安全”为由不允许律师会见。前后短短十余天，竟然出现了3个性质完全不同的罪名，足见石家庄市公安局办案的随意性。
3.未依法重新立案。
2023年6月19日，在暴钦瑞死亡近1年之后，暴继业等其余犯罪嫌疑人被解除取保候审，理由是“发现不应当追究刑事责任”。《刑事诉讼法》第163条规定：“在侦查过程中，发现不应对犯罪嫌疑人追究刑事责任的，应当撤销案件；……”《公安机关办理刑事案件程序规定》第190条规定：“公安机关撤销案件以后又发现新的事实或者证据，或者发现原认定事实错误，认为有犯罪事实需要追究刑事责任的，应当重新立案侦查。”
因此，“5·25专案”在2023年就应当被依法撤销；即便没有撤销，也由于“发现不应当追究刑事责任”而丧失了继续侦查的基础；即便要重新追究刑事责任，也应当重新立案。然而，据“南方周末”媒体报道：“2025年5月12日上午，石家庄市公安局政治部负责人告诉南方周末记者，‘5·25’专案始终没有撤案，只是‘暂时搁置’。他称，此前陆续接到对暴家人的举报，专案重启是正常的办案程序。”由此可知，石家庄市公安局违反法律规定未撤销案件、未重新立案、在未依法重新立案的情况下进行“炒回锅肉”式侦查，充分反映出其办案程序混乱、涉嫌打击报复。
五、石家庄市公安局已对本案作出有罪推定，系先定涉黑、再侦查，其无法公正办理本案
2025年5月24日，暴继业的辩护人向石家庄市无极县检察院何跃坤检察官反映自己被阻碍会见的情形，何跃坤检察官非常明确地答复称，市局已经将本案定性为黑社会：“黑社会就是黑社会，这是市局定的”“100%的是黑社会”“这是公安局的定性，人家定性是定黑社会，你要定性了你就见不了”。
《刑事诉讼法》第6条规定：“人民法院、人民检察院和公安机关进行刑事诉讼，必须依靠群众，必须以事实为根据，以法律为准绳。”
第12条规定：“未经人民法院依法判决，对任何人都不得确定有罪。”
作为一名检察官，何跃坤的言论在很大程度上已经反映出石家庄市公安局对本案作出了“涉黑”的有罪推定，系先确定本案涉黑、再寻找涉黑证据，甚至极有可能为了强行办成涉黑案而非法取得涉黑证据。在这种情况下，石家庄市公安局已经违背了无罪推定原则，无法“以事实为依据，以法律为准绳”，已经不可能依法公正办案。
综上，石家庄市公安局与本案具有直接利害关系、已经对本案有罪推定为“涉黑”、存在诸多严重违法行为，已经严重影响本案的公正处理。石家庄市范围内的所有侦查人员均应当回避本案，本案不应由石家庄市范围内的公安机关继续管辖。
《刑事诉讼法》第29条规定：“审判人员、检察人员、侦查人员有下列情形之一的，应当自行回避，当事人及其法定代理人也有权要求他们回避：（二）本人或者他的近亲属和本案有利害关系的；（四）与本案当事人有其他关系，可能影响公正处理案件的。”
《公安机关办理刑事案件程序规定》第33条规定：“公安机关负责人、侦查人员不得有下列行为：（四）其他可能影响案件公正办理的不正当行为。违反前款规定的，应当责令其回避并依法追究法律责任。当事人及其法定代理人有权要求其回避。”
如今，暴钦瑞被刑讯逼供致死，多名专案组成员被追究刑事责任，石家庄市公安机关若继续管辖本案，将难以摆脱对暴家人进行打击报复的嫌疑，难以让暴家人、辩护人、诸多关注本案的社会公众感受到公平正义。为案件获得公正处理，本案最优解，应当由公安部指定河北省之外的公安机关管辖，次之应由河北省公安厅指定石家庄市之外的公安机关管辖。
Discover more from 自由档案馆
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.