Niutengyu’s Mother: Guangzhou Rights Defense Diary (II): The Joint Scam by the Guangdong Provincial Political and Legal Affairs Commission and the Guangdong High People’s Court—Attempting to Lure My Son Tengyu into Confessing Guilt with Parole as Bait

My son, Niu Tengyu, has been framed and imprisoned by the Guangdong Political and Legal Affairs Commission for nearly seven years， and I have been hoping every moment that my son would leave this wrongful imprisonment， so I have made countless trips for this purpose。 The Guangdong Provincial Political and Legal Affairs Commission and the Guangdong High People’s Court planned to exploit my desire for my son to be released as soon as possible， and set a trap。

The Guangdong High People’s Court repeatedly told me and the child’s father， saying that the child could be released early through parole， but the prerequisite was that the child first confess guilt， after which parole could be arranged。

Because the Guangdong Provincial Political and Legal Affairs Commission and the High Court had repeatedly lied and reneged， I did not initially believe that the Guangdong authorities would truly release my son after he confessed guilt。 The conduct of the Guangdong authorities during this trip to Guangdong to seek redress has precisely confirmed my view。

On the morning of May 25, 2026， I came to the Guangdong High People’s Court and raised three pointed questions with its staff：

1. Last year， Niu Tengyu’s father came to the Guangdong High People’s Court. At that time, the High Court’s staff personally promised Niu Tengyu’s father， saying that the child’s current sentence was already nearly half completed and that he could be released through parole。 The judge in charge of parole at the High Court said emphatically：“As long as your child Niu Tengyu confesses guilt， we guarantee that we will arrange parole for him， I am the person in charge of parole.” Because arranging parole requires the child’s signature， the High Court also sent three judges specifically to the prison to negotiate with the child， and made similar promises to him。 So does this promise made by the High Court at that time still stand？

2. Regarding access to the case files， the Guangdong authorities have long refused to allow our lawyers to review the complete files on various grounds， such as the files having been stolen and “secret files,” which are illegal reasons。 Will our lawyers be able to review the complete files this time？ Will the Guangdong High People’s Court continue to find other illegal reasons to fob us off？

3. Why was Gu Yangyang， identified as the principal figure in this wrongful case， rapidly released after being arrested， and able to walk away unscathed after being changed from the principal offender into a witness？ Why does Niu Tengyu instead have to take his place as the “principal offender”？

The receiving judge said that we（the High Court） could not make the decision and needed to report to the leaders（meaning the Political and Legal Affairs Commission）， and told me to come back the next day。

On the afternoon of May 26， I went to the High Court again and received an official response：

1. Niu Tengyu can meet the conditions for parole， and although he has been classified as an “evil force,” he still meets the requirements for the procedure。 However， the prerequisite for proceeding is that he must first sign a confession of guilt（confessing to part of the charges is also acceptable）。 The process is as follows： Niu Tengyu must submit a written application to the Sihui Prison authorities， who will report it to the Zhaoqing Intermediate People’s Court， without going through the High Court。

2. After our lawyers submit the petition materials， they can review the complete case files， including everything favorable to Niu Tengyu。

3. Gu Yangyang was handled and released by the Maoming cyber-police， so I should go find the unit handling the case; the High Court would not get involved。

Although the Guangdong side once again made emphatic promises， in view of their “record,” I still did not trust them。

So on May 27， I rushed to Sihui Prison to meet with my child and discuss this condition proposed by the Guangdong authorities: confessing guilt in exchange for parole。 The child said：“Since I was arrested in 2019， the public security organs， procuratorates and courts in Guangdong have deceived me many times， trying to trick me into confessing guilt， so I must also be cautious now。 If I sign a confession of guilt， it would mean completely losing the chance to overturn the case。 Unless the authorities put the real evidence in front of me and convince me completely， I will never sign.”

After receiving the child’s response， on May 28， I went to the Guangdong High People’s Court for the third time and again confirmed with Judge Ma， the High Court spokesperson： If my child confesses guilt， will the Political and Legal Affairs Commission and the High Court obstruct the parole procedure？ And can you produce real evidence proving that Tengyu is guilty？

As soon as Judge Ma heard this， his expression changed abruptly. He said bluntly that they could not produce the evidence， and that they could not guarantee that parole could actually be arranged。

Afterward， I strongly demanded to meet the judge who had personally promised last year that he could arrange parole for my son， and who was also the judge in charge of parole at the High Court. The judge arrived very late， speaking tactfully and expressing sympathy throughout， but consistently evading the key issues. After I repeatedly pressed him， the judge revealed： He had worked in the position overseeing parole at the High Court for a very long time， and was now nearing retirement. During all that time， he had never arranged parole for anyone whose total sentence exceeded 10 years。

What he meant was that although my son Tengyu legally meets the conditions for parole， Guangdong had not arranged parole for anyone with a total sentence exceeding 10 years for a very long time. Therefore， if Niu Tengyu confessed guilt， parole would certainly not be possible。

At this point， the intentions of the Guangdong Political and Legal Affairs Commission and the Guangdong High People’s Court were completely exposed， namely—to use the condition of arranging parole to lure Niu Tengyu into confessing guilt. After he confessed guilt， they would then refuse to arrange parole for Niu Tengyu on the grounds that Guangdong had never arranged parole for anyone whose total sentence exceeded 10 years。

Last July， the High Court emphatically promised Niu Tengyu’s father that parole could be arranged and even specifically sent people to the prison to find Niu Tengyu; now they had turned around and openly said “we can’t do it.” However， did the Guangdong authorities only discover today that they could not do it？ If they could not do it， why did they make the promise in the first place？

Clearly， our rights-defense actions have seriously affected the Guangdong authorities. They hoped to use deception to temporarily fob us off and send us back home， and then deal with us at leisure. If Niu Tengyu and I had really believed their lies， we would have directly entered the hopeless situation of confessing guilt first but being unable to obtain release。

Whenever they saw me， the court staff repeatedly urged me to “go home.” On the surface they were cordial， but in reality it was all a delaying and deceptive ploy。

This is the so-called “rule of law” proclaimed by the Guangdong Political and Legal Affairs Commission and the Guangdong High People’s Court! This is the truth behind their claim of “equality for all”! I will not be fooled. Niu Tengyu will not sign either. This shameless scam has already lost its room to lure anyone.