Statement Regarding the Incident on the Afternoon of April 29, 2025

 
I. Background
My name is Cui Haoxin, residing within the jurisdiction of Dongguan Street Police Station, Jinan City. Since my criminal detention at Dongguan Street Police Station on January 23, 2020, I have developed a habit of checking for any unusual activity outside my door due to psychological trauma. This incident involves my neighbor (hereinafter referred to as “the other party”), who, since moving into the apartment across from mine in 2024, has repeatedly caused conflicts, disrupting my and my family’s daily life. Below are two notable incidents:  

    February 25, 2024: The other party used an open flame for a barbecue on the rooftop terrace, posing a fire hazard. My parents were living with me at the time, and out of concern for safety, I politely advised them to stop, but they ignored me and dumped unextinguished charcoal on the rooftop. I contacted the property management, who intervened to address the issue.  
    December 30, 2024: The other party, intoxicated, kicked and banged on my door, behaving aggressively and appearing ready to resort to violence. I considered calling the police but, due to my 2020 experience, hesitated and only notified the property management.

The other party’s doorway is constantly cluttered with crates of beer, and their drunken disturbances have been frequent. To avoid conflict, I have consistently adopted an attitude of avoidance, minimizing contact with them.  
II. Incident Details
On April 29, 2025, at approximately 3:00 PM, I went for my routine walk, confirming no unusual activity outside my door beforehand. However, upon opening the door, I was startled to find the other party standing behind it, holding a crate of empty cans and reeking of alcohol. As their crate heavily struck my door, I casually remarked, “Be careful.” Unexpectedly, the other party flew into a rage, hurling verbal insults and brandishing a keychain in their right hand, making stabbing motions toward me. I instinctively raised my hand to block, and the other party then swung a punch at me. Due to their excessive force, the punch landed on me but caused them to lose balance and fall to the ground.  
Subsequently, the situation escalated in the confined space of the elevator. The other party’s wife joined in, grabbing my arm and preventing me from evading, allowing the other party to strike my face and eye area multiple times, causing physical injuries (as confirmed by medical evaluation: suspected fracture of the left ankle and blurred vision).  
III. Incident Handling and Appeals
After the incident, I went to Dongguan Street Police Station and proactively submitted surveillance footage from my doorway as evidence, demonstrating the sequence of events and the other party’s provocative actions. The other party also has surveillance at their door, and the police station initially stated they would retrieve it, but no progress has been reported. Regrettably, the police classified the incident as a “mutual fight,” and the other party claimed to be injured.  
After consulting legal professionals, I believe the police’s classification fails to adequately consider the facts and legal basis:  

    Legal Basis for Self-Defense: According to Article 20, Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China, “An act taken to stop an unlawful infringement in order to protect the state, public interest, or the personal, property, or other rights of oneself or others from ongoing unlawful infringement, causing harm to the unlawful infringer, constitutes self-defense and bears no criminal liability.”  
        The other party, intoxicated, brandished a keychain in a stabbing motion, posing a clear threat to my personal safety. My blocking action was an instinctive response to stop the unlawful infringement, meeting the criteria for self-defense.  
        In the elevator, the other party’s wife restrained me, preventing escape from the confined space, and the other party continued to assault me. Any defensive actions I took were necessary to protect myself and did not exceed the limits of necessity.
    The Other Party’s Provocation: Surveillance footage can confirm that the other party initiated the conflict with verbal insults, stabbing motions with the keychain, and physical punches. As the victim, I only took minimal defensive actions to protect my safety.  
    Historical Context: Since 2020, I have endured multiple violent incidents, resulting in significant psychological trauma. In this incident, had I not taken defensive measures, I could have suffered severe injuries (e.g., stab wounds from the keychain).

IV. Questions and Requests  

    Given the other party’s proactive provocation and threatening actions, why was my defensive behavior, taken to protect my safety, classified as a “mutual fight”?  
    Has the police station thoroughly retrieved surveillance evidence from both parties? If the other party’s footage has not been collected, does this affect the fairness of the case classification?  
    According to Article 20 of the Criminal Law and the Guiding Opinions on the Lawful Application of the Self-Defense System (2020) issued by the Supreme People’s Court, Supreme People’s Procuratorate, and Ministry of Public Security, self-defense should be evaluated based on “causation,” “timing,” “target,” and “extent.” I respectfully request that law enforcement authorities re-examine this case and legally recognize my actions as self-defense.

V. Conclusion
Since 2020, I have been repeatedly victimized by similar violent incidents, leaving me physically and mentally exhausted. I have no intention of engaging in conflict with anyone and only seek to protect my lawful rights and avoid unlawful harm. I earnestly request that relevant authorities conduct a thorough investigation, retrieve all evidence, restore the truth, and uphold fairness and justice.  
Declared by: Cui Haoxin
Date: May 15, 2025  



2025年4月29日下午事件经过说明

一、事件背景

我叫崔浩新，居住于济南市东关大街派出所辖区内。自2020年1月23日在东关大街派出所被刑事拘留后，我因心理阴影，出门前习惯确认门外动静。此次事件涉及邻居（以下简称“对方”），其自2024年搬入我对门后，多次引发矛盾，影响我及家人正常生活。以下为两起典型事件：  

2024年2月25日：对方在楼顶天台使用明火烧烤，存在消防安全隐患。我父母当时居住在我家，我出于安全考虑好言劝阻，但对方不予理睬，并将未燃尽的木炭倾倒在楼顶。我向物业求助，物业介入处理。  



2024年12月30日：对方酒后在我家门外踢踹，态度蛮横，似有动手意图。我本欲报警，但因2020年经历，顾虑重重，仅通知物业处理。


对方家门口常年堆放啤酒箱，酒后扰民现象频发。我为避免冲突，一直采取回避态度，尽量减少与其接触。

二、事件经过

2025年4月29日下午3时许，我按惯例出门散步，出门前确认门外无异常。然而，开门后发现对方站在我门后，手提一箱空易拉罐，散发酒气。我惊讶之余，其箱子重重撞到我家门上。我随口提醒：“小心些。”不料，对方立即暴怒，恶言辱骂，并挥舞右手钥匙串向我做捅刺动作。我下意识抬手格挡，对方随即挥拳击打我，但因动作过猛，拳头打在我身上后失去平衡，摔倒在地。  

随后，在狭窄的电梯间内，场面更为混乱。对方妻子加入，拉扯我手臂，使我无法躲避，导致对方再次向我面部、眼部击打数拳，造成身体伤害（具体伤情已由医疗机构鉴定，左踝骨疑似骨折，视力模糊）。  

三、事件处理及诉求

事发后，我前往东关大街派出所，主动提交我家门口监控视频作为证据，证明事发经过及对方主动挑衅行为。对方门上亦有监控，派出所曾表示会提取其监控证据，但至今未见进展。令人遗憾的是，派出所将此次冲突定性为“互殴”，对方还声称自身受伤。  

经咨询法律专业人士的意见后，我认为，派出所的定性未能充分考虑事实与法律依据：  

正当防卫依据：根据《中华人民共和国刑法》第20条第1款，“为了使国家、公共利益、本人或者他人的人身、财产和其他权利免受正在进行的不法侵害，而采取的制止不法侵害的行为，对不法侵害人造成损害的，属于正当防卫，不负刑事责任。”  

对方酒后持钥匙串向我捅刺，存在明显人身威胁。我的格挡行为系本能反应，旨在制止不法侵害，符合正当防卫的要件。  



在电梯间内，对方妻子拉扯我，使我无法逃离狭小空间，对方继续殴打我。我的任何防御动作均属紧急避险，未超出必要限度。


对方挑衅在先：监控视频可证明对方先以言语辱骂、钥匙捅刺、挥拳攻击，挑起事端。我作为受害方，仅为保护自身安全而采取最低限度防御。  



历史背景：自2020年以来，我因类似暴力事件多次受到身心创伤，心理负担沉重。此次事件中，我若不采取防御措施，可能遭受更严重伤害（如钥匙刺伤）。


四、我的疑问与请求  

在对方主动挑衅、持物威胁的情况下，我为保护自身安全进行的防御行为，为何被定性为“互殴”？  



派出所是否全面调取了双方监控证据？若对方监控未被提取，是否影响案件定性公平性？  



根据《刑法》第20条及最高人民法院、最高人民检察院、公安部《关于依法适用正当防卫制度的指导意见》（2020年），正当防卫的认定应综合考虑“起因条件”“时间条件”“对象条件”“限度条件”。恳请执法机关重新审查本案，依法认定我的行为属正当防卫。


五、结语

自2020年以来，我因类似暴力事件多次受害，身心俱疲。我无意与任何人发生冲突，仅希望维护自身合法权益，免受不法侵害。恳请相关部门依法调查，调取全部证据，还原事实真相，维护公平正义。  

声明人：崔浩新

日期：2025年5月15日