Legal expert Hao Jingsong told the newspaper that the public security bureau should have implemented a criminal detention procedure before the approval of Zhou's arrest. The family of the arrested person should also be notified of his criminal detention. But Luo Dacui indicated that she hadn't received any such notification.

On the evening of May 15, Luo Dacui was detained by the police to assist with their inquiries. She remembers the day quite clearly. Just two or three days before that, her husband Zhou Zhenglong left home with several "forest public security officers", to assist in an investigation by experts from the State Forestry Bureau. He hasn't been home since then. But Luo Dacui had no idea whether Zhou Zhenglong was detained by the police that day.

Shaanxi Provincial Government has disclosed the history of the case. Firstly, Shaanxi Provincial Public Security Bureau and Ankang Public Security Bureau, after investigations, made Zhou an official suspect. On May 12, a case was opened against him on suspicion of fraud. By May 20, sufficient incriminating evidence had been found and on June 24, a request was submitted to the procuratorate for approval to arrest Zhou. On June 28, the arrest was approved.

The Shaanxi Provincial Public Security Bureau did not say whether Zhou Zhenglong had been detained on May 12. Legal expert Hao Jingsong said that on May 20 when the case was solved, the police had already taken Zhou into custody for a few days. According to the Criminal Procedure Law, criminal detention should last a maximum of one month. That is to say, the police should have submitted their arrest approval request to the procuratorate before June 20. However, it was actually submitted on June 24, after the expiry of the lawful detention period.

Neither Shaanxi Provincial Public Security Bureau nor the Information Office of Shaanxi Provincial Government were prepared to make any statement on the issue.

Why did Zhou leave "irrefutable evidence" at home?

The Shaanxi Provincial Public Security Bureau said at a press conference that police had discovered a picture of a tiger on a New Year Calendar and a mold of a tiger's claw at Zhou's home. Many reporters were incredulous at this claim. Why would Zhou leave such "irrefutable evidence" at home where it would easily be discovered?

Luo Dacui said she had never seen the Calendar or the tiger claw before the police search. "The first time I saw them was when they (the police) came to the house. They said they had found evidence in our wardrobe," she said, pointing to a mottled cabinet in the back room.

The Beijing Times tried to contact the Ankang Public Security Bureau to ask about this question, but the phone to its advocacy section was not being answered in the afternoon of July 12. Other related departments in Shaanxi Province also failed to answer their phones.

(China.org.cn by Wang Wei, July 4, 2008)