The head of the flag public security is involved in the crime!

First Trial Sentence of 61 Gangs in Inner Mongolia

  Xinhua News Agency, Hohhot, September 30 (Reporter Jia Lijun) The Intermediate People's Court of Ordos City, Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, on the 29th, issued a verdict on the first instance of 61 people including the former party secretary and director of the Urad Qianqi Public Security Bureau in Bayannaoer City, including 61 people involved in the criminal case. They were sentenced to life imprisonment and fixed-term imprisonment of varying terms.

  According to the case-handling agency, gang-related organizations headed by Jia Jingbo illegally absorb public deposits and illegal usury to accumulate funds, continue to accumulate money through business activities such as developing real estate, operating hotels, and contracting projects, and systematically commit various illegal crimes through violence. .

The task force detected dozens of illegal and criminal cases involving Jia Jingbo and others, including more than 10 crimes suspected of organizing, leading, participating in underworld organizations, as well as the crime of provoking disturbances, and illegal detention. The assets involved in the case were seized, detained, and frozen, with a value of 1.452.5 billion yuan.

  Defendant Jia Jingbo committed the crime of organizing and leading a triad organization, as well as 17 counts of illegal detention, illegal mining, corruption, and bribery. He was sentenced to life imprisonment, deprived of political rights for life, and confiscated individuals. All property.

  Forty defendants including Liu Changjiang, Han Yong, and Duan Bao were convicted of 23 crimes including participating in a triad organization, provoking trouble, illegally absorbing public deposits, and illegal mining. They were sentenced to 18 years to 1 year and 6 months. Fixed-term imprisonment.

The remaining 20 defendants were sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment ranging from 4 to 1 year for the crimes of creating disturbances, false litigation, and bid complicity.

  The court sentenced the defendants to different amounts of property penalties based on their criminal facts, charges and circumstances.