2014, Guizhou man Liu Moujie met Huang Moufei at an electronics factory in Dongguan, Guangdong. In 2015, Huang Moufei, who was unmarried, became pregnant, and the following year, they registered their marriage. Huang Moufei claimed that in the first two years of marriage, their relationship was still good. After their son was born, he was cared for by Liu Moujie's parents in Guizhou, while the couple returned to Guangdong to work. However, with the birth of their daughter in 2017, household expenses increased, and Liu Moujie gradually revealed his true nature. Liu Moujie worked intermittently, fishing three days and resting two, often indulging in internet cafes and gambling. Whenever he received his salary, he would head straight to mahjong parlors, losing it all, then come home and beg for money. His wife’s salary, support from her family, and even money for the baby’s formula were all poured into his gambling debts. Huang Moufei, who supported the family alone, frequently argued with Liu Moujie to maintain a normal life. Huang Moufei said: “He often hits people, but I endure it for the sake of the children. I think I should just accept it.” Huang Moufei was beaten multiple times and provided photos of bruises as evidence.
Starting in 2024, desperate Huang Moufei began live streaming to sell products, trying to show a smiling face on camera, introducing cheap clothes and daily necessities. She stated that she interacted with viewers, sang mountain songs, and that “it’s purely work-related,” “live streaming is my only source of income, I cannot give up.” Through relentless effort, her monthly income finally exceeded 5,000 yuan—almost twice Liu Moujie’s salary. However, this hard-earned income was seen by Liu Moujie as “improper.” Liu strongly opposed and began to obsessively monitor his wife’s live streams, becoming furious at any tips or gifts. Once, he stormed into her live broadcast in front of hundreds of viewers, insulting her and smashing a fill light. Afterwards, he even claimed: “I am defending the dignity of the family!” Liu’s father said that Huang Moufei’s live content was “improper,” which was the main reason for the breakdown of their marriage, and suspected she had another partner. They accused Huang of infidelity to defend their son, claiming he was “gentle and never violent.” Liu’s father also said Liu owed about 12,000 yuan, after deducting the 5,800 yuan owed to him, he still owed over 5,200 yuan. “I don’t know if he (Liu Moujie) has online loans, but he just mortgaged a house. If he had online loans, he wouldn’t be able to get a mortgage.” In response, Huang provided records of online loans, stating Liu used her account and identity to borrow money “in my name,” so he could take out a mortgage. He even denied Liu’s gambling and domestic violence behaviors, claiming the real problem was Huang’s misconduct and neglect of the children. Liu’s father said he gave up working to care for the children, and Huang rarely cared for them, only occasionally sending money. They smeared Huang with accusations of “infidelity” and “neglect,” trying to cast her as the villain, whitewashing Liu’s evil deeds. But falsehoods cannot stand. Huang directly showed transfer records, proving she often transferred thousands of yuan to her family.
On May 17, 2025, Huang finally decided to divorce. That afternoon, Liu tied her up with a rope, took her phone and ID, and guarded her like a criminal for two days. It wasn’t until May 18 that Huang managed to escape. On the same day, Liu claimed to the local police that his wife was missing, using “renovating the new house” as an excuse to ask his father for money, which was refused. He then felt an uncontrollable rage. That night, Liu reported to the police that his wife was missing. Hours later, police found Huang at a hotel in Meitan County and returned her phone. On May 20, Liu suddenly agreed to divorce “by himself.” The divorce was processed at the civil affairs bureau, entering a cooling-off period. The property belonged to Liu, and each parent would have custody of one child. The cooling-off period is a reactionary policy meant to hinder women’s liberation, aiming to keep women obedient as household slaves. During this period, Liu committed violence.
The day after signing the divorce agreement, on May 21, Liu took a bottle of pesticide to Huang’s door, once again tying her up and threatening: “If you dare to divorce, I will kill you, the children, and your whole family.” Frightened, Huang quickly said she would not divorce, but Liu insisted on sending her to work. At the company entrance, she escaped again and hid in Zunyi, calling the police. Huang, after fleeing, sought help from her brother and sent him photos taken when she was tied up. Her brother immediately called the police at 6:27 p.m., detailing the threats to his sister and the children’s lives. At that time, the children were attending school normally. That night, before the police arrived, Liu had already devised a revenge plan. He pretended to be kind, took the children to eat barbecue, and filmed videos of them feeding each other, uploading them to social media with the caption “The final celebration,” revealing premeditation and malicious intent.
In the early morning of May 22, Liu posted a photo of a pesticide bottle in the family group with the message “I have made the children take poison,” and “Tell your sister to come and collect the bodies.” When police arrived, the two children had already collapsed on the ground, foaming at the mouth, with dilated pupils, and were pronounced dead after rescue efforts failed. The children had struggled painfully before death, even tearing their pillows, but could not withstand their father’s brute force. Liu, pretending to be remorseful, claimed that his family was waiting in hell for Huang, but after killing the children, he took a small dose of poison himself and called emergency services, suffering no serious harm. On June 5, police confirmed that Liu was detained on suspicion of intentional homicide. His parents justified his actions, claiming they were “justified” because “they feared the children would be abandoned by their mother after remarriage or bullied by a stepfather.” The role of Liu’s parents was not just that of “favoring their son,” but as patriarchal feudal heads. They used accusations like “wife’s misconduct” and “children left unattended” to cover up his gambling, domestic violence, imprisonment, and murder. They painted Huang as morally corrupt and responsible for the tragedy, while they themselves protected their son’s inheritance and family reputation. They attacked Huang for “live streaming improperly” and “being irresponsible to the family,” trying to make her obedient and submissive, while allowing Liu to squander her income without giving her any way out. They claimed “for the children’s sake,” but condoned Liu’s murder of the children because, in their eyes, he was the heir to the family estate and could continue the family line. Huang, as an outsider wife and family servant, was seen as a threat whenever she showed any non-conforming behavior. This “parental love” was essentially patriarchal love for family property and the continuation of the lineage. Liu dared to use his children’s lives as revenge because he viewed them not as independent beings but as “tools.” His willingness to poison them was not about “unfit to be parents,” but because, in a patriarchal society, family, children, and women are private property.
Liu relies on his wife for support, squandering her income while belittling her work as “improper” and “infidelity,” using domestic violence to maintain his feudal patriarchal status. Why are Liu and his parents so arrogant and police powerless against their domestic violence? Because the society is patriarchal. In such a Confucian society, these phenomena are not isolated but widespread, rooted in the glorification of “men outside, women inside,” “virtuous mother and good wife” ideals. The “cooling-off period” system is tailored for them—its existence allows abusers to continue violence and the police to refuse intervention. Conflicts cannot be truly reconciled. Its essence is not about saving marriage but about obstructing women’s escape from violence, oppression, and exploitation, trying to make women “think more,” men “fight for one more chance,” and maintain superficial family stability. The system never punishes or restricts abusers; instead, it forces victims into a dangerous buffer zone, enabling abusers like Liu to legally retaliate. Huang suffered a second kidnapping, threats, stalking, and ultimately the tragic death of her children during this “cooling-off period.” Clearly, this policy is not neutral but a reactionary legal weapon cloaked in “family stability,” fundamentally aimed at maintaining patriarchal rule and hindering women’s liberation. Those who claim “for the good of the family” and “for the children” are actually executioners causing countless women’s suffering. The “cooling-off period” is merely their legal tool—an instrument of violence. We must explicitly state: Liu’s violence is a consequence supported by patriarchal patriarchy, a product of the state’s reactionary system. Women’s liberation requires smashing both feudal patriarchy and the reactionary system.
On June 5 at 18:08, reporters contacted Fenggang County police. Officers stated that the suspect had been placed under criminal detention. Due to ongoing investigation, no further details could be disclosed.
