【新唐人2012年8月21日訊】對於周克華是否被擊斃，不僅網友議論紛紛，連專業人士也提出了質疑，對此，重慶警方一再聲明，網上質疑周克華沒有被擊斃的信息純屬誤解與造謠。但是近期重慶異常的「森林防火封山」舉措，又引發了網友的聯想和關注。評論人士指出，這一系列的懷疑背後，藏著比周克華更大的危機。

廣州胡朝暉律師18發表微博說，「本人作為一名律師，從刑事訴訟的角度，總覺得周克華是否被擊斃，以及怎樣被擊斃，的確嚴重存疑。被擊斃的不是周克華，這樣的事情可能發生嗎？本人綜合大量現場圖片以及網民質疑，冒死從五個方面深入分析該案的種種疑點。」

胡律師軍警生涯23年，經歷80年代初期的對越作戰，在軍法部門工作多年。他在博文中提出了五個方面懷疑和分析：一、周克華到底是怎樣被擊斃的？二、槍擊案現場勘查過程是否真實客觀？三、兩位聲稱擊斃周克華的警察說的都是實話嗎？四、被擊斃的是通緝令中的悍匪周克華嗎？五、有可能是誤殺了便衣兄弟嗎？

胡律師按照頭部比例，對比公布的圖片發現，被擊斃的「周克華」，和之前搶劫時的周克華身高相差10多公分，按散落在身邊的證物的比例計算，死者身高估計才約1.50米。而官方公布的資料顯示，周克華身高1.67米。另外死者的右邊下顎比周克華短半寸，耳朵形狀也不一致。

胡朝暉律師：「可以肯定的說，從專業的業務的角度來說，我是覺得，新聞裡面播的不是客觀的事實。因為我們做律師的主要是講證據，我分析的這些東西，也是根據現有我們能夠看到的這些證據，得出了我自己的一個想法。我只能提出這些疑點，但我沒辦法解釋啊，這個本來應該是警方來解釋。」

對於網上質疑聲一片，重慶市公安局網安總隊官方微博「重慶網警」19號回應：重慶沙坪壩區公安分局正在組織民警，深入搜查周克華曾經的藏身之地，請市民理解予以支持。對於網上質疑周克華未被擊斃的信息純屬誤解與造謠，悍匪周克華已被擊斃毫無疑問。

雖然警方一再聲明，但重慶官方在稱擊斃周克華後，對曾被認為是周克華藏身地的歌樂山採取異常的「森林防火封山令」，嚴禁外來車輛和人員進入，再次引起網民的高度關注與聯想。

網友黎先生指出，對歌樂山採取「森林防火封山」的是大批軍警，而往年都沒有這種舉動。

網友黎先生「他說是森林防火，但是你看看他公布出來的圖片，就已經很明顯，他們是在說謊。如果你說森林防火，為甚麼要全副武裝呢？帶著鋼盔，帶著衝鋒槍？他說是要尋找周克華曾經藏匿的山洞，周克華都已經死了，你們帶槍上去幹啥呀？如果是真正的森林防火根本就不需要這麼多人，也不需要荷槍實彈。」

深圳獨立作家朱建國指出，警方一再聲明，卻無法止住民眾懷疑，這背後隱藏著比周克華更大的危機。

朱建國：「警方的公信力在老百姓的心中消失掉了，這個比周克華存在，比一千一萬個周克華存在都還更危險哪。執政的系統，執法的系統沒有公信力了，警察的公信力沒有了，它的根基是政府的公信力沒有了，執政黨的公信力沒有了。」

朱建國認為，只有實行民主，法制，才能從整體上提高政府公信力，但是現在的當局並沒有朝這條路上走。

採訪/朱智善 編輯/尚燕 後製/柏妮

Authorities Hide a Greater Crisis Than Zhou Kehua

Was Zhou Kehua killed?

—This question is raised by both netizens and professionals.

The Chongqing police have repeatedly stated that,

all online questions regarding Zhou Kehua stem from

misunderstandings and misinformation.

But residents of Chongqing are concerned again,

as their hillsides are closed due to a forest fire.

Commentators point out that a greater crisis may be hidden

behind suspicious behavior.

On August 18, Hu Zhaohui, a Guangzhou lawyer,

posted on his microblog:

“As a lawyer, from the criminal proceedings point of view,

I feel there are questions on regarding Zhou Kehua’s death

and on how he was killed—the deceased may not be Zhou;

is this sort of thing possible?

I integrated a large number of on-site pictures as well as

Internet users’ questions to give an in-depth analysis from five aspects of this case."

Lawyer Hu had served in the military police for 23 years,

had worked under the military law department for many years

and had also experienced the Vietnam War in the early 80’s.

Hu analyses the Zhou Kehua case from five aspects:

First—how was Zhou Kehua actually killed?

Second—is an objective investigation being conducted

on the shooting scene?

Third—are the two policemen who allegedly killed

Zhou Kehua telling the truth?

Four—is the deceased indeed the ruthless criminal, Zhou,

or had they killed a plain clothes policeman by mistake?

Lawyer Hu found that the deceased man was 10cm shorter

than the man before the robbery.

From the proportion of the exhibits scattered around,

the height of the deceased was determined to be about 1.5 m.

Yet the official information on Zhou Kehua shows that

he was 1.67 m tall.

Also the right side of the lower jaw of the deceased is

half-an-inch shorter than Zhou Kehua, and shape of the ear is likewise inconsistent.

[Hu Zhaohui, Guangzhou lawyer]:

“I can say for sure that, from a business point of view,

the news broadcast was not reporting on objective facts.

We lawyers talk about evidence—my analysis is based on

the evidence we can see, and I drew an idea of my own.

I can only raise these doubts, but I cannot explain them;

these should be explained by the police."

“Chongqing Internet Police”—the Chongqing Public Security

Bureau’s official microblog responded on Aaugust 19:

The Shapingba District Public Security Bureau is organizing

the police and doing an in-depth search of Zhou Kehua’s former hiding place;

they are asking for public understanding

and public support.

Questions online around Zhou Kehua not really being dead

stem purely from misunderstandings and misinformation.

The ruthless criminal, Zhou Kehua has indeed been killed

and there is no doubt about this.”

Despite numerous attempts by police to still the public,

netizens’ concern increased, as Chongqing officials closed

the Geleshan hillsides due to an alleged forest fire,

prohibiting people and vehicles from entering the mountain.

One netizen Mr. Li says, dispatching a large number of

military and police to close hillsides due to a forest fire has never happened before.

[Mr. Li, Netizen]: “Just look at this published picture—

it’s clear that the officials are lying;

for a forest fire, why do you need to arm yourself

with a machine gun and wear a helmet?

They are searching for Zhou Kehua’s hiding place,

but if he is dead as they say, why do they take their guns up there?

For a real forest fire, you wouldn’t need so many people,

and nor would you need to be so heavily armed."

Shenzhen’s independent writer, Zhu Jianguo, points out that,

the police has repeatedly stated their views,

but they cannot stop public suspicion from surging—

there is a greater crisis than Zhou Kehua hidden behind this.

[Zhu Jianguo, Independent Writer, Shenzhen]:

“The credibility of the police is gone.

This is more dangerous than the existence of

Zhou Kehua or even a million of him.

The ruling system and the law enforcement system

lacks credibility, and the police lacks credibility.

It has all resulted from there being no credibility

of the government and the ruling party.

Zhu Jianguo believes that only democracy and the rule of law

can bring back the overall credibility of the communist party,

but the present authorities have not gone down this path.