Very peculiar situation:

I looked at all the reports on this matter, and I estimate the situation is as follows:

This guy took advantage of technical loopholes in some gambling websites, then replaced their rebate addresses, redirecting the rebates to himself.

Over the years, he should have accumulated a lot of Bitcoin, with 183 coins currently seized, and they are being held by two law enforcement agencies.

Overall, this case has at least the following discussion points:

✅ Jurisdiction and repeated case filing doubts;

✅ Serious disputes over the legality of property disposal;

✅ Conflicts between the logic of charges and the protection of legal interests;

✅ Issues with the integrity of electronic evidence;

1️⃣ The police in two locations "filed cases successively and repeatedly changed charges," which is highly abnormal and does not conform to legal foundations. A single event in one location cannot be re-prosecuted in another; there have been two criminal filings, two criminal coercive measures, and two large property disposals.

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

"For criminal cases that several public security organs have jurisdiction over, the jurisdiction belongs to the public security organ that initially accepted the case." This falls under the "risk of repeated prosecution" in criminal procedures.

2️⃣ [Major doubts about property disposal] — Were the Bitcoins disposed of in advance or illegally converted to cash?

Criminal seizure ≠ direct conversion to cash; before the court's ruling, the assets belong to the suspect, who can essentially still be acquitted. You can't just dispose of the assets. This likely violates the "principle of proportionality + principle of property rights protection."

3️⃣ "Theft of funds from gambling websites"?

This point made me laugh; gambling websites are considered illegal operations in China, yet in the accusations, they are treated as "victim units," with their "legal property" being stolen. In criminal law theory, there are at least disputes here:

1) Does an illegal operating entity automatically enjoy protection under criminal law?

2) Do the "rebate funds" from gambling websites qualify as legal property in the sense of criminal law?

4️⃣ Technical actions ≠ automatically constitute theft

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

However, in criminal law, the following must be satisfied:

1) Purpose of illegal possession

2) Secretly stealing another's legal property

3) Exclusive control

And:

Is there an "authorized agency authority boundary";

Does it constitute "technical disputes / civil torts / unjust enrichment";

Is the evidence chain complete enough to prove "secrecy"?

This remains to be discussed.

5️⃣ My viewpoint:

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

If we set aside "emotions" and the background of "profit-driven law enforcement," and look solely at the elements of criminal law and evidence logic: this incident resembles neither theft nor operating a casino,

but rather: "the crime of illegally obtaining data from a computer information system (or its attempted / disputed circumstances)," and according to his situation, the electronic evidence was not sealed and showed signs of modification, indicating insufficient evidence, with the possibility of only administrative violations or insufficient criminal evidence.

Lastly, regarding his experiences, I have likely gone through all of it; it’s quite helpless.

The confession mentioned obtaining it under the condition of "threatening measures against his pregnant wife," which is very inhumane and leaves one speechless!

The information comes from @PANews

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。