搜索此博客

2026年6月4日星期四

 早年起因:叶永龙违建、私植毛竹侵权

  • 叶永龙在2010年前后在自家院落北侧违规搭建七八十平米楼房,同时破坏小区原有绿化私自大面积栽种毛竹,毛竹逐年疯长,不断侵入我院落,长期遮挡房屋采光通风。我方多次沟通、委托物业依规修剪,均被叶永龙及其家人无故阻拦,相邻侵权持续存在。



  • 2023 年 10 月 29 日:迫于持续侵权,我对侵入地界毛竹做处置
    因长期维权无果,在毛竹持续妨害居住的情况下,我对越界毛竹做药剂处理,随后叶永龙一方以我使用危险药剂报警。
  • 2023 年 10 月 31 日:三方达成书面调解协议

  • 由明华居委会李永强书记牵头,新桥民警、物业、双方共同在场签订调解协议,协议明确约定:叶永龙自愿放弃追究用药相关责任、配合公安机关撤案。


  • 2023 年 11 月 11 日:公安出具鉴定结论
    松江分局出具沪公松 (新桥) 行鉴通字〔2023〕00187 号鉴定文书,确认我使用的环嗪酮不属于危险物质,不存在违法用药情形。至此,用药一事在法律层面彻底了结。


  • 2024 年 7 月 31 日:居民小组现场协调,叶永龙口头承诺移栽毛竹
    经居民小组组织调解,叶永龙当场承诺将侵权毛竹移栽、院落北侧不再种竹,但事后拒不履约。


  • 2024 年 8 月 8 日:叶永龙妻子杨颖在业主群明确表示无需我方赔偿
  • 杨颖在小区微信群公开发言,明确放弃索要任何赔偿。但事后其违背承诺,暗中唆使公安机关向我索要赔偿。


  • 2024 年 1 月 8 日:受叶永龙唆使,派出所对我违法强制传唤
    在鉴定结论已出、调解协议约定撤案、对方已放弃追责的前提下,叶永龙夫妇在知晓我身患癌症晚期后,恶意唆使新桥派出所出警。当日 7 时,三名民警持沪公松(新桥)传唤字〔2024〕00018 号文书上门,违规使用警械,将我带回派出所限制人身自由 8 小时。


  • 事后办案寿警官明确证实:本次传唤系叶永龙夫妻主动要求。


  • 2024 年 1 月 14 日:再次签署治安文书,重申药剂不属于危险品
    派出所组织签订相关手续,再次书面确认我所用药物不在危险物质范畴,却仍受叶永龙授意要求我承担赔偿,明显违背此前调解约定。

  • 2024 年 10 月 14 日派出所调解:叶永龙当庭虚假否认此前移栽承诺
    新桥派出所吴指导员、张警长组织双方调解,叶永龙刻意隐瞒 7 月 31 日移栽承诺、当庭说谎,居委会在场未予以纠正,毛竹侵权状态持续至今。
  • 控告 上海市松江公安分局新桥派出所非法插手民事纠纷,滥用公权,非法拘禁

     


    上海市松江区人民检察院;


    特别声明:

    本人身患癌症晚期,身体持续恶化,随时存在病重无法继续理性维权风险,为
    杜绝非理性维权行为发生,恳请贵检察院落实件件有回音、事事有着落工作要求,
    优先加急受理核查,尽快在 7日内书面答复受理情况,依法查处涉案民警违纪3 / 3
    违法行为。如逾期未依规处置,本人将走访上海市委办公厅,呈请陈吉宁书记
    责令督办并逐级向上海市纪委监委、上级政法机关继续信访维权。


    一,控告人:

    石朝生,恶性肿瘤终末期;住址:上海松江区新桥镇xx小区xxx号;

     

    二、被控告人

    1. 上海松江公安新桥派出所办案民警及审批负责人:涉嫌滥用职权罪、非法拘禁罪(《刑法》238、397条),办案人员详细信息已申请政府信息公开,待补全。

    2. 叶永龙(xxx号业主):涉嫌诬告陷害罪、教唆滥用职权罪;


    案情原由

     

    三、四项控告诉求

     

    1. 立案侦查:追究叶永龙教唆民警、诬告陷害刑责;追究新桥派出所民警违法强制传唤、非法拘禁8小时、滥用职权刑事责任 ;


    2. 检察院依职权调取:2024.1.8传唤卷宗、审批手续、出警笔录、2024.10.14全案调解案卷;


    3. 查处叶永龙调解会虚假陈述、隐瞒此前整改承诺的伪证违法;


    4. 按检察信访规定7日内程序性回复受理意见、按期书面告知审查/立案进展;因本人重病生存期有限,申请绿色通道加急优先办理。

     

    四、核心事实

     

    1. 基础纠纷已全部民事了结,无任何治安违法事实

     

    邻里采光纠纷经2023.10.31三方调解撤案、2023.11.11公安鉴定:本人所用药剂非危险品、排除违法;2024.7.31居民小组约定叶永龙移栽侵权毛竹、11.19再次签订整改协议,叶永龙持续违约拒不整改,纯属民事违约。

     

    2. 叶永龙恶意教唆警方动用公权力报复

     

    叶永龙夫妻前期在业主群明确放弃索赔,事后恶意反悔、唆使民警上门传唤;办案寿警官录音证实:2024.1.8传唤系叶永龙夫妇主动要求启动,借公安公权力打击报复重病老兵。

     

    3. 新桥派出所民警无事实违法办案、非法拘禁

     

    2024.1.8在无违法事实前提下,3名警员持传唤证上门,对癌症晚期优抚老人违规强制传唤、使用警械,在派出所无合法留置手续限制人身自由8小时;审批人违规审批传唤文书,违规插手民间邻里民事纠纷,符合渎职侵权立案标准 。

     

    五、法律依据

     

    1.《刑法》29条:教唆犯罪追责;238条:公职人员非法拘禁追责;397条:滥用职权追责;

    2.《人民警察法》:严禁民警违规限制人身自由、插手民间民事纠纷;

    3.最高检渎职立案标准:拘禁重病优抚对象、造成人身损害应予刑事立案。


    控告人:石朝生


    2026-6-3

    联系方式: charlesshi88@outlook.com

    2026年4月8日星期三

    Shanghai Judge Intentionally Miscarry justice

     



    Complaint Letter

     

    To: Supervision Office of Shanghai Higher People's Court

     

    Complainer: Shi Chaosheng, Male, born on xx, 1959, Han nationality, ID Number: xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Address: xx, xxxx, xx Town, Songjiang District, Shanghai, Contact Phone: xxxx.

     

    Complained Persons:

     

    1.  Lu Wangshu(陆望舒), Judge of Chedun People's Court of Songjiang District People's Court of Shanghai, presiding judge of the case of marital property division (Case No.: (2025) Hu 0117 Min Chu No. 19666);


    2. Cai Jun(蔡珺), Judge of Songjiang District People's Court of Shanghai, presiding judge of the divorce case (Case No.: (2024) Hu 0117 Min Chu No. 25967);

    3. Chen Chang(陈昌), Secretary and President of Songjiang District People's Court of Shanghai;

    4. Zhuang Qian(庄倩), President of Chedun People's Court of Songjiang District People's Court of Shanghai.

     

    Core Grounds for Complaint

     

    The complainer is a patient with advanced lung cancer and the plaintiff in Case No. (2025) Hu 0117 Min Chu No. 19666. During the trial, Judge Lu Wangshu, the presiding judge of the case, intentionally violated legal procedures, improperly determined the basic facts of the case, illegally refused to investigate key evidence, erroneously identified 1,585,017.54 yuan, which should be community property of the couple, as the defendant's pre-marital property, and illegally deprived the complainer of a huge amount of medical expenses for cancer treatment. Judge Cai Jun neglected her duties and refused to investigate the defendant's act of concealing property in the preliminary divorce case, laying a hidden danger for the subsequent improper judgment. As superior leaders, Chen Chang and Zhuang Qian ignored the complainer's urgent appeal as a patient with advanced cancer, failed to effectively supervise and condoned the disciplinary and illegal acts of the judges under their jurisdiction. Now, I complain in accordance with the law, requesting a thorough investigation into the disciplinary, illegal and improper judgment acts of the complained persons, pursue their corresponding disciplinary and legal responsibilities, and legally initiate retrial proceedings to protect the complainer's legitimate rights to life, health and property.

     

    Basic Facts and Background of the Case

     

    The complainer and the defendant Ren xx registered their marriage on November 9, 1992. Due to the impact of an external case, they divorced by agreement on August 29, 2019. At the time of divorce, about 1 million yuan of community cash property of the couple under Ren xx's name was not divided. They remarried on May 11, 2021, and there Ire no other marital connections during their marriage. The complainer contributed more than 90% of the family property. His income before and during the marriage was handed over to Ren xx for disposal and financial management, and his salary card was also kept by her.

     

    On May 15, 2021, the complainer was diagnosed with malignant tumor of the right middle lobe of the lung - adenocarcinoma of the right middle lobe, Stage IVA (advanced stage). Subsequent treatment requires high medical expenses, and the condition continues to deteriorate. After targeted drug resistance, it is necessary to continuously change treatment plans and use high-priced self-funded drugs.

     

    In October 2024, Ren xx sued for divorce from the complainer (Case No.: (2024) Hu 0117 Min Chu No. 25967), and the court ruled against divorce. However, as the actual controller of the community property of the couple, Ren xx repeatedly refused to pay medical expenses to the complainer. Due to lack of money for treatment, the complainer had to apply for a loan from the town government and participate in a phase I clinical drug trial with extremely high risks, and her act has been suspected of illegal abandonment.

     

    In July 2025, to ensure the demand for treatment in the advanced stage of cancer, the complainer filed a lawsuit for division of marital property during the marriage (Case No.: (2025) Hu 0117 Min Chu No. 19666), requesting the division of the community property of the couple concealed under Ren xx's name. After the trial of the case, Judge Lu Wangshu only ordered Ren xx to pay the complainer xxxxxxx yuan as property compensation, erroneously identified 1,585,017.54 yuan, which should be community property of the couple, as Ren xx's pre-marital property, and illegally ordered the complainer, as the victim, to bear most of the case acceptance fees, seriously infringing on the legitimate rights and interests of the complainer.

     

    Specific Disciplinary, Illegal and Improper Judgment Acts of the Complained Persons

     

    1. Judge Lu Wangshu: Intentionally made improper judgment, violated legal procedures, and subjectively and maliciously deprived the complainer with advanced cancer of medical expenses

    Concealed major facts of the case and ignored the key circumstance of undivided property

     

    The civil judgment of Case No. (2025) Hu 0117 Min Chu No. 19666 clearly states that when the complainer and Ren xx divorced by agreement in 2019, about 1 million yuan of community cash property of the couple under her name was not divided, which is the core dispute of the case. However, Judge Lu Wangshu intentionally concealed this major fact during the judgment, did not conduct any review or identification on the subsequent whereabouts of the undivided cash and the converted financial management funds, which directly led to the wrong determination of the basic facts of the case and laid a core hidden danger for the subsequent improper division of property.

    Illegally refused the legal application for investigation and evidence collection, and deliberately evaded the fact that the defendant concealed property.

     

    On July 31, 2025, the complainer's lawyer legally submitted an application for an investigation order to the court, requesting an investigation into Ren xx's bank fund flow since May 1, 2013, to verify the community property of the couple concealed by her at the time of divorce in 2019 and the source of subsequent financial management funds. Judge Lu Wangshu only allowed the investigation of the flow since 2023, and unreasonably refused the key flow from 2013 to 2023.

     

    The complainer submitted written objections to Lu Wangshu three times on August 14 and August 24, 2025, and submitted certificates of financial products of Ren xx in Bank of China, Industrial and Commercial Bank of China and Bank of Communications from 2012 to 2018 (with a total principal of more than 1.33 million yuan + 40,000 US dollars, all of which are community property of the couple), clearly informing that the restriction on the scope of investigation would mislead the judgment result; on September 26, 2025, the complainer raised objections again through the 12368 litigation service hotline, but Judge Lu Wangshu insisted on his own way and continued to illegally refuse the legal investigation request, resulting in the fact that Ren xx concealed a huge amount of community property of the couple could not be fixed through judicial investigation.

    Violated legal cross-examination procedures and erroneously determined the nature of property without evidence support

     

    Without any effective evidence support, Judge Lu Wangshu violated the legal procedures for evidence cross-examination stipulated in the Civil Procedure Law, failed to organize both parties to cross-examine the source of 1,585,017.54 yuan of financial management funds under Ren xx's name in Shanghai Pufa Bank (969,119.96 yuan), Bank of Communications (465,897.58 yuan) and Bank of China (150,000 yuan), and subjectively and intentionally identified the above funds as Ren xx's "pre-marital property", and rejected the complainer's claim on the ground that "Shi Chaosheng failed to prove that the financial management was purchased with his capital contribution".

     

    In fact, Ren xx retired in 2019, with a monthly pension of only about xxxx yuan and no other sources of income. It was impossible for her to suddenly have a huge amount of funds for financial management after the divorce. The above funds Ire all converted from the undivided community property of the couple in 2019. The complainer has submitted preliminary evidence such as income certificates, financial product certificates and bank transfer records to complete the burden of proof. The determination of Judge Lu Wangshu is a typical improper judgment without evidence support.

     

    Illegally divided the case acceptance fees, favored the erring party, and caused serious judicial injustice

     

    In this case, Ren xx had obvious faults: first, she concealed the community property of the couple, gave false testimony in the trial of the divorce case, falsely claimed that she only had 100,000 yuan in cash but submitted evidence of 1.45 million yuan in financial management in Shanghai Pufa Bank in court; second, she refused to pay medical expenses to her spouse with advanced cancer, which is suspected of the crime of abandonment. According to legal provisions, Ren xx should have borne all the case acceptance fees, but Judge Lu Wangshu engaged in irregularities for personal gain, ordered the complainer to bear 7,614 yuan out of 8,891 yuan of acceptance fees, and only ordered Ren xx to bear 1,277 yuan, which seriously violated the principle of fairness and caused serious consequences of judicial injustice.

     

    Intentionally delayed the case handling process and missed the best treatment opportunity for the complainer with advanced cancer

     

    The complainer is a patient with advanced lung cancer. During the trial of the case, his condition continued to deteriorate, with symptoms of brain metastasis and bone metastasis. He repeatedly applied to the court for expedited trial and requested supervision by the president, hoping to obtain property division funds in a timely manner to purchase high-priced mature self-funded drugs. However, Judge Lu Wangshu ignored this, intentionally delayed the case handling process, deliberately evaded the core property dispute, resulting in the complainer being unable to obtain treatment funds in a timely manner and having to be forced to participate in a phase I clinical drug trial with extremely high risks and strong side effects, missing the best treatment opportunity, with obvious subjective malice.

     

    Retaliated against the complainer's petition and abused judicial power

    Due to the above series of illegal acts of Judge Lu Wangshu in the case trial, the complainer legally carried out petition for rights protection. Although there were emotional expressions during the period, they Ire all reasonable demands to protect his own legitimate rights to life and health. Dissatisfied with the petition, Judge Lu Wangshu abused his public power and directly retaliated against the complainer by refusing to investigate evidence, improperly determining facts, and erroneously ruling on property division funds, which directly led to significant and irreversible damage to the complainer's legitimate rights and interests.

     

    Judge Cai Jun: Negligence of duty, dereliction of duty and inaction, refusal to investigate the fact that the defendant concealed property

     

    In the divorce case (Case No.: (2024) Hu 0117 Min Chu No. 25967), as the presiding judge, Judge Cai Jun found in the trial that Ren xx gave false testimony in court (falsely claiming that she only had 100,000 yuan in cash, but submitted evidence of more than 1 million yuan + 450,000 yuan in financial management in Shanghai Pufa Bank). The complainer legally applied to investigate Ren xx's bank flow since January 1, 2016 to verify the concealed property, but Judge Cai Jun neglected his duties and directly refused the legal investigation application, failing to perform his legal duty of investigation and verification, resulting in the fact that Ren xx concealed property was not identified in the case, laying a direct hidden danger for the subsequent improper judgment of Judge Lu Wangshu, and his act has constituted dereliction of duty.

     

     Chen Chang and Zhuang Qian: Inadequate supervision, connivance, and indifference to the sufferings of the masses with advanced cancer

    As the Secretary and President of Songjiang District People's Court and the President of Chedun People's Court respectively, Chen Chang and Zhuang Qian are the direct superior leaders of Judges Lu Wangshu and Cai Jun. When the complainer repeatedly reflected the illegal problems in the case trial through petition and clearly informed that he was a patient with advanced lung cancer in urgent need of judicial relief, the two ignored the sufferings of the masses' life and health and the complainer's reasonable and legal demands, failed to correct any of the disciplinary, illegal and improper judgment acts of Judges Lu Wangshu and Cai Jun, but instead condoned and even endorsed them, with serious absence of supervision responsibilities, leading to the continuous occurrence of judicial injustice and causing bad judicial and social impacts.

     

    Legitimate Requests of the Complainer

     

    1. Based on the above facts, the acts of the Complained person Lu Wangshu have violated the provisions of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China, the Judges Law, the Regulations on Disciplinary Actions of the Communist Party of China, etc., and are suspected of the crime of improper judgment as stipulated in Article 399, Paragraph 2 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China; Judge Cai Jun constitutes negligence of duty and dereliction of duty; Chen Chang and Zhuang Qian, as superior leaders, have inadequate supervision and connivance. To protect the legitimate rights and interests of the complainer and defend judicial justice, I hereby put forward the following requests in accordance with the law:

    Legally initiate retrial proceedings: Request to immediately initiate retrial of the effective civil judgment of Case No. (2025) Hu 0117 Min Chu No. 19666 ex officio by designating the Shanghai No. 1 Intermediate People's Court, the superior court of the original trial, in accordance with the provisions of Article 205 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China.

    2. Legally re-divide the community property of the couple: Request to order the defendant Ren xx to pay the complainer 1,585,017 yuan as compensation for the community property of the couple in the retrial in accordance with the provisions of Article 1092 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China (this amount does not include the xxxxxxx yuan already paid in the original judgment), so as to ensure the complainer's fund demand for treatment in the advanced stage of cancer.

    3. Legally change the subject of bearing the case acceptance fees: Request to order the defendant Ren xx to bear all the original case acceptance fees of Case No. (2025) Hu 0117 Min Chu No. 19666, and pay the complainer 7,614 yuan of acceptance fees if already prepaid.

    4. Legally pursue the disciplinary and legal responsibilities of the Complained persons:

    (1) Request to impose corresponding disciplinary sanctions on Lu Wangshu, Cai Jun, Chen Chang and Zhuang Qian in accordance with the provisions of Article 126 of the Regulations on Disciplinary Actions of the Communist Party of China and Article 10 of the Judges Law;

    (2) Request to severely pursue the illegal trial and dereliction of duty acts of Lu Wangshu and Cai Jun in accordance with the provisions of Articles 8 and 14 of the Measures for the Investigation of Responsibility for Illegal Trials by Judges of People's Courts, and revoke their relevant judicial positions;

    (3) Request to file a case for investigation into Lu Wangshu's act of improper judgment in accordance with the provisions of Article 399, Paragraph 2 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China, and pursue her criminal responsibility in accordance with the law.

     

    Solemn Statement

     

    The complainer is a patient with advanced lung cancer, and his condition has developed brain metastasis and bone metastasis. Due to the improper judgment of Judge Lu Wangshu, he was illegally deprived of a huge amount of medical expenses, resulting in the complainer being unable to purchase high-priced mature self-funded drugs in a timely manner for effective treatment, and having to be forced to participate in a clinical drug trial with extremely high risks. His condition continues to deteriorate, and he has suffered great physical and mental blows.

    If unpredictable tragedies such as the complainer's suicide occur due to improper handling of this complaint, all legal consequences and social impacts shall be fully borne by Lu Wangshu, Cai Jun, Chen Chang and Zhuang Qian.

    I earnestly request your Supervision Office to conduct a comprehensive and thorough investigation into the matters Complained this time in accordance with the principle of taking facts as the basis and law as the criterion, make a fair handling in accordance with the law, timely protect the legitimate rights and interests of the complainer, demonstrate judicial justice, and avoid causing bad social impacts!

     

    Respectfully,

    Complainer (Electronic Signature): Shi Chaosheng

    March 18, 2026

     

    Annexes of Core Evidence

    1. Income certificates of the complainer and Ren xx, the defendant in the original trial;

    2. Court trial opinions of the divorce case (Case No. 25967);

    3. Application for investigation order and three objections;

    4. Partial petition materials;

    5. Civil judgment of Case No. 19666.