Video footage shows that the suspect of the suicide bombing Zhao Dengyong appeared near the blast spot shortly before the blast took place. And police claims that Zhao was wearing a backpack possibly containing the explosive but many Chinese netizens refute this claim and think it was not a backpack but an old overcoat on his shoulder and back.
The official explanation that the May 10 suicide bombing in Qiaojia County in Yunnan was committed by Zhao Dengyong "taking revenge on society in general" is being questioned by Chinese netizens, who suspect that the explanation was fabricated by government authorities trying to cover up the truth.
May 15,2012, Kunming - The public security bureau cited QQ chatting records and QQ blog of Zhao Dengyong to testify that Zhao is the major suspect in the May 10 Qiaojia County suicide bombing. But Chinese netizens raise new doubt that the QQ chatting recorded in 2010 can not be used as testimony that Zhao committed the suicide bombing. Some even doubt the authenticity of the records while others are concerned about the privacy protection.
Last Thursday, a deadly blast went off at a local government building in Qiaojia county in southwest China's Yunnan Province, reportedly killing four people and injuring 16 others.
Xinhua, China's official press agency, initially quoted a report from a newspaper based in Kunming, the capital of Yunnan, that attributed the blast to a woman. Another local paper reported the next evening that the bomber was a woman surnamed Li, who was seen by witnesses carrying a baby and arguing with officials over the forced acquisition of her property by the government.
The original Xinhua article was later removed from the agency's website and replaced with a new report claiming that, based on footage provided by surveillance cameras and shot from the building, the bomber was not a woman but 26-year-old Zhao Dengyong. He was allegedly caught on camera carrying a black backpack shortly before the explosion.
Local officials said Zhao's registered living address was 140 kilometers from Qiaojia county; he therefore is highly unlikely to have been at the government office to complain about land expropriation. Reports said Zhao made his living as a motorcycle delivery man and did not have any business interests or family connections with the community he attacked. Police investigations were said to have revealed Zhao as a depressed and withdrawn individual whose motivation may have been to "take revenge on society in general."
China's whistleblowing internet community, however, has questioned the authenticity of the new official explanation. Netizens suggest that the government may be using Zhao as a scapegoat to cover up the more dramatic original reports involving a woman and child, which starkly highlight public outcry over compulsory land acquisition schemes. And according to comments made on Sina Weibo, China's version of Twitter, that the woman was there to pick up the ashes of her husband, who was beaten to death by local officials when he protested the forced demolition of their home. This kind of story, if confirmed true, would surely spark hatred against officials among Chinese netizens and jeopardize the state stability in the end.
Reports have begun surfacing on popular microblogs claiming that Zhao worked for a spring water company and was delivering water to the local government building on the day of the explosion. Another microblog post said that a woman who identified herself as Zhao's landlord had called him a good person who did not exhibit any unusual behavior.
Netizens have called for the Chinese government to reveal the truth of the bombing, asking for proper evidence of Zhao's motive and the release of the cited video footage.
QQ Space of Zhao reveals he has the tendency to resort to violence
On May 14, the public security bureau of Qiaojia County called in reporters to publicize investigation result of the May 10 suicide bombing. The police make public part of QQ chatting records and QQ bloggings of Zhao Dengyong. Police drew the conclusion through the words Zhao made that Zhao was insociable and eccentric and had strong tendency of resorting violence.
Following are the testimonial messages that Zhao left:
- The society does not show sympothy on those sacrificing self for others, on the contrary, they will be regarded as idiot. --- Zhao's first microblog on June 21, 2009
- The cruelty of the society more and more make me confused. I do not know how many people will die in my hand when I really can not make a living in the society. --- A QQ chatting message of Zhao
- I have lived for more than 20 years. It is not that I have not made efforts. I really have nothing except a healthy body. Don't you know your consequence if I can not live? --- Excerpt from his blogging titled Humans are different
- If I had entered a good university and left my village, I would not be looked down upon, on the contrary, I would be praised by the teachers. My life went wrong before, and I had psychological defects, sometimes I even thought of the extreme, and I had unhealthy ideas in the brain. Although there were guys that bullied me, I have got through the difficulties... ---Concerpt of Zhao's diary provided by police
But Chinese netizens strongly doubt the QQ chatting records can be used as testimony that Zhao committed suicide. "If this kind of emotional comments should indicate a person has violent tendency, then at least 200 million Chinese would not be mentally healthy", one Chinese netizen commented. Some Chinese even doubt the authenticity of the records while others are concerned about the privacy protection. "How can the police testify that it is Zhao Dengyong that wrote these words? The police can easily fabricate them." one netizen said on Weibo. "If the chatting records and blogging belong to Zhao, it means QQ is monitoring anyone who use it. I suppose I have to give up the habbit of using the tool of QQ. " another netizen commented.
"Most of important of all, the police should publicize the video footage that the Qiaojia County police claims to testify Zhao Dengyong committed the suicide bombing", commented a Chinese netizen.
The literary style "I, in the name of.., assure you on my future that..." gets popular among Chinese netizens
During the press conference, in response to question whether Zhao Dengyong was the real suspect, the chief police officer of Qiaojia County said:"This is a case involving blast. It is a special case due to the fact that the suspect died. It is also a complicated case, there are many difficulties and doubtful points. From the diary and QQ blogging of Zhao as well as the letters Zhao wrote to his wife, we can draw the conclusion that they do not get along well with each other. Here I, in the name of a chief police officer, I assure you on my future that Zhao is the suspect of this case. Whether other persons also participated, our public security office is investigating."
The remark of the chief police officer immediately draw nationwide criticism from experts as well as Chinese netizens. On May 15, the official Weibo account from Shaoxing People's Procuratorate wrote: "China is now a country ruled by law. We should list testimonies to convict a suspect. We would like to ask: Can name and future be used as testimony?"
Chinese netizens prefer to ridiculing the chief police officer by immitating the words of him. "I, in the name of a Chinese citizen, assure you on my future that the chief police officer is trustworthy", one netizen commented.
Zhao Dengyong‘s brother claims Zhao is wrongly suspected
On May 15, Zhao Dengxian, elder brother of Zhao Dengyong, is strongly suspicious of the official claims. He left messages on his QQ weibo account claiming his brother Zhao Dengyong is done wrong by the authority. Zhao Dengxian listed five points to oppose official account as below:
1. Zhao Dengyong does not understand blast and it is impossible for him to get explosives.
2. Zhao Dengyong is a cooly waiting for customers on streets. He is an outgoing and cheerful person.
3. On the day that the blast happened, somebody had bumped into him but did not see that he took any backpack.
4. His family had nothing to do with the land expropriation so what is his purpose of committing the crime?
5. I hope the police can find concrete testimonies.