With the growing number of dogs now, there is nothing to worry about more than being bitten by dogs, especially by walking dogs in small areas, and one who is not paying attention may be bitten by a neighbor's dog. But the fear still happened.
In September of this year, Ms. Henan Anyang's 80-year-old mother was bitten by two big dogs while walking around the block.
Henan Radio and Television's People's Channel, Leigh Help, published 10 stories about the incident, covering the entire period of two months, but the owner of the dog was a “scrambling cat”. In the end, senior journalists with 10 years of experience were forced to cry on the spot.
What the hell is going on? Who is this dog's owner, who is so hard to justify, even threatening to sue the old man's family, and why is the attitude of the local authorities in dealing with the problem so funny?
According to exposure surveillance, at the time of the incident the 78-year-old was walking around the district. There were two big dogs in front of them, but for some reason they suddenly started to bite the old man. It is clear that a thin old man is not an opponent of two big dogs, and the old man was bitten by his actions. And the dog owner was there, but apparently couldn't hold his dog.
After that, the elderly were slightly injured, with visible scratch marks on their backs.
It is logical that this should be the case, for example, for the dog owner ' s apology + economic loss. But what I didn't think was that the owner of the dog was starting to call it a lie, and it wasn't our dog that bit it, it was the old man who fell himself. She was also charged with defamation.
Faced with the wounds of the elderly, the dog owner denied that he believed in the surveillance video. Is there any way that surveillance could be faked?
The police officers on the ground contacted the city and the team recommended to find out if the dog had any proof. The dog owner refused, saying he had to go to work, saying he had to go to the elevator. The head of the city quickly kicked “pumpball” to the public security department, considering that the dog was theoretically under the management of the public security department, and that Ms. Wang had to follow up on the issuance of the certificate: the giant dog involved was not certified and the dog should be placed under the management of the public security department.
However, the public security authorities explained this:
1. The dog itself is under the control of the city.
2. Unless the owner of the dog carries out the murder, then the owner is in the hands of the public security.
The owner of the dog is known to be Wang Xingang (the husband of the dog walker in the video) and works in the Integrated Administrative Enforcement Unit of Anyang City Market Supervision.
Since the incident, Wang Xin has not only failed to apologize, but has also threatened other owners in the property community with a very aggressive attitude.
As a result, a group of women, accompanied by journalists, came to the office of the owner of the dog and reported under his real name. In the face of a complaint from Ms. Wang ' s family, the head of the service is not determined by her own decision or by her own decision. Wang Xin just indicated that, in order to avoid an escalation of the contradiction, he had commissioned a lawyer to deal with the matter.
While journalists were trying to explain to their supervisors that entrusting a lawyer would not solve the disciplinary problems that he himself had caused, a few strange men suddenly appeared, asking the journalist, “What does it mean to find Wang?” While speaking, these people have had physical clashes with their families. And the person in charge is smiling about the introduction: "You see people ready to fight now."
Subsequently, the presence of civilian police prevented the fermentation of the conflict. However, it was discovered that the men who had suddenly burst out of their pockets were carrying truncheons.
The Integrated Administrative Enforcement Unit of Anyang City Market Regulation, where Wang Xin just worked, refused to accept interviews with journalists but provided so-called dog certificates
Surprisingly, the issuing authority was the last time the programme team visited, indicating that the large dogs did not give certificates to the law enforcement squadron of the Anyang City Administration Enforcement Agency. Later, Ms. Wang's side and the programme team returned to Wang's unit, where staff indicated that they were urging him to settle the matter and that Wang had just been hospitalized for physical reasons. On the written material provided by the unit, it can be seen that Wang Xin has just admitted that his own dog had bitten the elderly neighbour.
When Wang Xingg became known, the local disciplinary commission intervened. As of 19 November 2021, Wang Xin, Inspector of Food and Drugs of the Integrated Administrative Enforcement Unit of the City of Anyang, was suspended from duty to cooperate with the organizational verification.
According to news reports, on the night of 19 November, after two long months of waiting, the injured elderly finally came to apologize. Mr. Wang, accompanied by journalists and the head of the unit, went to Mrs. Wang ' s house to apologize in person to the old lady, whose family accepted the apology but refused financial compensation. In response to this case, Xinhua journalists also visited the area and met with injured elderly people in the community of Jinhua, Anyang City, who had received too many vaccinations and were still weak and in need of family support.
According to counsel's analysis, the incident itself was very simple:
According to the surveillance video, it is sufficient to prove that the injury to the person seeking help is caused by a pet dog, so that the owner or manager of the animal who causes damage to the other person, in accordance with the rules of our Civil Code, is liable for damage to the other person.
The National Monitoring Board website of the Central Regulatory Commission has published " Today's critical evaluation of dog bites cannot stop apologizing " : one focus of public questioning is the status of Wang's public official. As party cadres and public officials, it is important not only to take the lead in respecting national laws and regulations, but also to observe public morals, promote virtues and be kind and humble in everyday social life and, in the event of civil disputes, to resolve them in a reasonable manner, in accordance with the law, without prejudice to the rights and interests of the population and to preserve its image. It is clear that Wang ' s earlier statements and actions in the media are not consistent with the image of party cadres and public officials. In the event that public officials act with impunity and disregard the public order, they will not only be condemned by public opinion and subjected to mass stabbings, but will also be dealt with and disciplined, as well as severely prosecuted. It was also a matter of public reflection that local authorities and cadres were exposed in the course of defending the rights of victims. In reality, when individual departments face legitimate demands from the masses, they do not try to solve problems, but try to avoid responsibility, “It is not our business, it is not our business, it is not our business, it is your business to go to court” ... It seems to have pushed out “problems” and, worse still, pushed away the party and the government from the crowd, stifling the crowd. Instead of taking the initiative to do things for the masses, there is still a lack of attitude and action to address the “graceful” when the crowd comes to us. These salient issues of style must be revisited and seriously overhauled. “Unbelievable” is the first feeling that many people have seen this thing. The matter is so simple, the responsibility is so clear, the authorities and the media are involved, and the victim's rights are in a dead end — no matter how hard the evidence is, the dog's owner can neither accept nor apologize. How dare a dog master do that? He's a scoundrel. For the moment, many people take the official status of the dog owner as an exit from these doubts, which clearly deserves to be confronted and answered by local authorities. There is no doubt that the bigger problem than “dog bites” in this matter is the delay in finding a reasonable solution. In this regard, what makes such a simple dispute-management process so unsimplistic that it requires a full and reasonable representation.
Netizen comment
Wingshaw 0708: Every episode has been read, and it's gone. 于: Why is it so hard to follow up on the results? Bean sauce 1374: It's impossible to deal with this area! The expensive one is a forbidden dog, and the dog's license can still be done, and he's in the office. What are the people? Little V Zhang Zhengchuan: It's been so long! The point is that the statements made by the head of the department in charge of the client's office are completely discredited! VH: Hypocrisy apologies are an insult to the victim, a pain in the ass, and can't stand public opinion trying to reconcile, huh. Flag: See, he's not only a rogue, he's a powerful rogue! The press can't stop him. It's useless to expose him! It's too hard for the hostess to be angry after all these times! Fortunately, there's a solution. It's a solution for those who harbour him!
According to the Jeenan Times-New Yellow River, with the fermentation of the dog bites, the event became a major case behind it!
Two familiar names — Wang Xingang and his wife Li Xiaobai — were seen in Du Qingda, Urumqi. He stated that, 10 years ago, Li Xiaobai had deceived him for $1 million to help with his work. In the event that the recovery of funds was unsuccessful on several occasions, he reported it to the Yandu police station of Anyang City.
Following the establishment of the investigation, Li Xiaobai was held in criminal custody in 2013 on suspicion of fraud, and the case was in the process of being reviewed for prosecution following the arrest of the local prosecution. In the meantime, the case was dismissed by the prosecution and filed with a complementary certificate from the Yandu Public Security Office, which was ultimately not brought to justice after the second supplementary investigation. Soon after, Li Xiaobai returned to “freedom”. Over the past eight years, Du Quinda has consistently reported to the higher prosecutor ' s office and to the Department of Letters and Visits, but has not been able to advance the case.
“The dog- holding woman was accused of fraud of millions and the case remained open for eight years”, which is to say that there was a wave of violence. It was thought that, as Wang Xin had just apologized to the injured elderly and the local authorities had intervened in the investigation, there would be a “big end” over time. No one expected another story when the question of a “dog certificate” in the “dog bite” incident was not resolved.
Although the current report is merely an ex parte version of Du Quinda and cannot be sure that it is true, it is still under investigation by the relevant authorities.
We all hope that this will be the end of the story, and we don't know what the end result will be. What do you think of things like this?