On May 11, the court in Qianxi County, Tangshan City, Hebei Province, issued its first-instance verdict finding Qu Xiaoling guilty of assaulting police. Unable to speak normally due to illness, she struggled to say, "I believe I am innocent," and has filed an appeal. Earlier, in July 2021, Qu Xiaoling and her family injured police officers (minor injuries) while resisting an illegal forced demolition by the township government, and were subsequently charged with assaulting police; she has maintained throughout that she acted in self-defense.
According to a May 28 report by Xin Huang He (The New Yellow River), the Qianxi County Court in Tangshan held a public trial in this case on May 9, 2023. After the court extended the review period nine times, the Qianxi County Court issued its first-instance verdict on May 11, 2026: Qu Xiaoling was found guilty of assaulting police but was exempted from criminal punishment.
The report said Qu Xiaoling's illness has left her unable to speak normally; she removed her mask and struggled to utter six words: "I believe I am innocent." Unwilling to accept the first-instance verdict, and maintaining her innocence, she has retained a lawyer and appealed to the Tangshan Intermediate Court.
According to earlier mainland media reports, in July 2021, during an illegal land requisition carried out by the Leizhuang township government, the family of Qu Xiaoling — who suffers from nasal-type lymphoma — got into a physical altercation with police while resisting the illegal forced demolition, injuring three officers; among them, Feng Guozhong, head of the special patrol police squad, suffered a minor head injury when she struck him with a kitchen knife. Qu Xiaoling was subsequently charged with assaulting police by the Qianxi County Procuratorate.
Qu Xiaoling's defense counsel argued that when the Leizhuang township government moved onto the site on July 20, 2021, no personnel from the court's enforcement bureau were present — itself already an illegal act. Moreover, the Luanzhou Municipal Public Security Bureau, despite knowing full well that the forced land requisition was an unlawful administrative act, still deployed police officers to take part in the land requisition and demolition — a non-police activity — meaning "their conduct did not constitute the lawful performance of official duties."
In addition, Qu Xiaoling filed an in-court complaint, naming Wang Xiaoguo, former deputy director of the Luanzhou Municipal Public Security Bureau, accusing him of unlawfully deploying a large police force to take part in the illegal, violent land requisition, alleging abuse of power.
On May 28, hashtags such as "First-Instance Verdict in Tangshan Farmwoman Assault-on-Police Case" and "Defendant in Farmwoman Assault-on-Police Case Speaks Out" drew heavy attention online.
Internet users commented: "It was already an 'illegal land requisition' — doesn't that make it 'self-defense'? What exactly are ordinary people supposed to do?" "Illegal land requisition." "Are you supposed to reason with bandits?"
"How should we characterize police officers taking part in an illegal land requisition? Can that be considered the lawful performance of duty by the people's police? If she was resisting an unlawful act, how can that be called 'assaulting police'?" "Instead of solving the problem, they solve the person who raised the problem? The land requisition was illegal, and she's still not allowed to resist?"
"If there hadn't been an illegal land requisition, none of this would have happened. When police help carry out an illegal act, that is itself illegal — the unlawful infringement came first, the resistance came after; that is self-defense."
"Whether an illegal land requisition justifies self-defense — one farmwoman against three police officers hardly amounts to excessive defense. Is there even an injury assessment report? What kind of injury was it, how severe, was the force used excessive? First get to the bottom of the illegal land requisition."
"The government broke the law — how were the officials responsible dealt with?" "I support the appeal — why was the land requisition illegal in the first place? There's a sequence of events here; things should be tried together in order." "Since the land requisition was illegal, then the ordinary person was lawfully defending her own rights, lawful self-defense — I support a not-guilty verdict." "I believe she is innocent." "Truly innocent!"