According to the previous upstream news, “Hunan Mei wrote a suicide note for 5 years and 4 divorce suits were rejected, and the man who was addicted to gambling and domestic violence threatened to retaliate for divorce many times”, from December 2016 to present, a post-80s woman in Jingtou Town, Hengyang County, Hunan Province Ning Shunhua, who couldn’t bear her husband Chen Dinghua’s long-term addiction to gambling, chose to litigate for divorce. After that, Chen Dinghua was detained 3 times, Ning Shunhua was detained 1 time, and the Hengyang County Court issued habeas corpus twice. But to this day, she has sued for divorce four times, but her wish for divorce has not yet been realized. On March 3, 2021, Ning Shunhua sued the Hengyang County Court for divorce for the fifth time, and the case is currently under trial. In interviews with reporters, Chen Dinghua said on many occasions that he would retaliate once divorced.

On the morning of April 14, a relevant person from the Hunan Provincial Higher People’s Court revealed to reporters that the Provincial Higher People’s Court has paid attention to this incident and is learning about the relevant situation. “We are under a lot of pressure. We have been doing this work and thought of many ways, but they were of no use.” On the morning of the 14th, He Jian, director of the Jingtou Town Police Station in Hengyang County, told reporters frankly, “In order to persuade him to let go, We found friends who had played well with him since childhood, but it was useless, “Because of the divorce issue, he was dealt with by the public security organs five times before and after, and the general crackdown has no effect on him.

“I also called him (Chen Dinghua) for more than 40 minutes this morning. I told him that the other party has sued for divorce so many times, and the relationship foundation is definitely gone, but in the end, it is still the same.” He Jian thinks “He has a problem with his mental state, and his thoughts are extreme. We are contacting his family to see if he can go to the hospital.” “Chen Dinghua is in Guangdong. In fact, he is in good condition. He looks good, has a house and a car. Tell me you can make hundreds of thousands a year.” He Jian hopes that the media, including the media, will give Chen Dinghua more guidance and try not to stimulate him.

Both Ning Shunhua and Chen Dinghua are from Fuling Village, Jingtou Town, Hengyang County. Wei Shufeng, the village party secretary, told reporters that men are unwilling to let go, and women are unwilling to follow him. In addition to the man who likes gambling, everything is fine. “The village even found him (Chen Dinghua) a girlfriend, and wanted him to distract him, but he didn’t even look at it.”

On the morning of April 14, Mao Yan, deputy director of the Hengyang County Women’s Federation, told reporters that the Women’s Federation has been following this divorce lawsuit and will contact Ning Shunhua for the latest situation. “I actually didn’t have a child. I said this to prove that the relationship between the two parties has broken.” Ning Shunhua said in an interview with reporters that she had established a new family outside and gave birth to children. On the morning of the 14th, Ning Shunhua Denying her claim, she told reporters that the Hengyang County Women’s Federation had already spoken to her.

On the morning of the 14th, Chen Dinghua told reporters that the police from Jingtou Town Police Station had contacted him that morning and hoped that he could let go. “It’s the same as you said (retaliation).” Chen Dinghua said.


By zhiwo

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Notify of
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
6 months ago

Since December 2016, Ning Shunhua, a post-80s woman in Hengyang County, Hunan Province, has chosen to litigate for divorce four times because she couldn’t bear her husband Chen Dinghua’s indulging in gambling for many years, but was rejected by the court. On March 3 this year, she filed a divorce lawsuit with the Hengyang County Court for the fifth time and successfully filed the case on the same day. Recently, Peng Xianjin, the official of the company, said in response to upstream reporters that “the case is being processed, and other questions are inconvenient to answer.” Ning Shunhua has long been separated from Chen Dinghua, because she has worked and settled in Guangdong, and her husband and wife relationship with Chen Dinghua exists in name only. Earlier, Ning Shunhua said that she had set up a family with others and had children, but on the morning of the 14th, Ning Shunhua denied her statement, “This is to prove that the relationship between the two parties has broken down.” Even so, before. In the four divorce proceedings, the reason for the judge’s decision not to divorce was “the relationship between husband and wife has not completely broken down.” The judge’s attitude towards this divorce lawsuit is puzzling, to put it bluntly, because Chen Dinghua threatened to retaliate with murder for divorce. Ning Shunhua realized that she was unsatisfactory when she met people. She was introduced to Chen Dinghua by a matchmaker to get married. Chen Dinghua was addicted to gambling and could not extricate himself, because gambling was detained by the local police station. When Ning Shunhua advised him not to be addicted to gambling, Chen Dinghua called her a “stupid X”, and the man and his family accused Ning Shunhua of being wrong. Since November 13, 2016, Ning Shunhua ran away from home, separated and litigated for divorce, and began a life like a nightmare. On December 2, 2016, Ning Shunhua sued the Hengyang County People’s Court for divorce on the grounds that the relationship between her husband and wife had indeed broken down. At this time, it was less than half a year since the two parties registered their marriage. Three days after Ning Shunhua sued for divorce, because Chen Dinghua participated in gambling twice, Ning Shunhua also received a penalty decision from the Hengyang County Public Security Bureau: Decided to fine Chen Dinghua 1,500 yuan and administrative detention for 12 days. On December 27, the Hengyang County People’s Court rejected Ning Shunhua’s divorce request. On July 13, 2017, Ning Shunhua filed a divorce lawsuit with the Hengyang County Court for the second time. The next day, Chen Dinghua approached Ning Shunhua for financial compensation. After the two sides had a dispute, Ning Shunhua slapped Chen Dinghua twice. On the night of July 15th, Chen Dinghua went to his father-in-law Ning Mingzhong’s home to find trouble. Chen Dinghua hit Ning Mingzhong’s left eye with his fist and injured him. Because of this, on July 24, Chen Dinghua was detained for 5 days and Ning Shunhua was detained for 3 days. On December 12, 2017, the Hengyang County Court denied Ning Shunhua’s divorce petition for the second time, and Ning Shunhua appealed. On April 16, 2018, the Hengyang Intermediate People’s Court upheld the original verdict. During the second instance, Ning Shunhua was forcibly taken away by Chen Dinghua at the entrance of the Hengyang Intermediate Court with his ID card and mobile phone. On October 22 of the same year, Ning Shunhua sued the Hengyang County Court for divorce for the third time. On March 26, 2019, the presiding judge Peng Xianjin dismissed Ning Shunhua’s claim. The reason given by Judge Peng Xianxian was that “there is no definitive evidence to prove that the relationship between husband and wife has completely broken down.” Ironically, before Ning Shunhua’s third prosecution, Chen Dinghua used WeChat chat to send threatening messages such as “retaliation, killing” to Ning Shunhua’s younger brother several times. Therefore, he was sentenced to administrative detention by the Hengyang County Public Security Bureau for the third time for 5 days. Penalty. On November 7, 2019, Ning Shunhua filed a divorce lawsuit with the Hengyang County Court for the fourth time. In the face of Ning Shunhua, who is unyielding in seeking legal justice, Chen Dinghua continues to escalate his level of violent coercion. On December 18, 2019, after the hearing of the Hengyang County Court, Chen Dinghua rented a car to chase after Ning Shunhua who had left first and drag her out of the car. As a result, Ning Shunhua had blood stains on her face and neck, and hematoma on the back of her brain. Chen Dinghua had blood stains on his face and hands, and his glasses and mobile phone were damaged. The Hengyang County Public Security Bureau imposed administrative detention on Chen Dinghua for the fourth time. While the court did not support Ning Shunhua’s claim, it revealed its contradictory approach. The presiding judge Peng Xianjin issued personal safety protection orders twice on December 12, 2019 and June 28, 2020, prohibiting the respondent Chen Dinghua from committing domestic violence against the applicant Ning Shunhua; Chen Dinghua is prohibited from harassing, stalking, and contacting Ning Shunhua. Shunhua and related close relatives. Despite this, on August 5, 2020, the presiding judge Peng Xianjin rejected Ning Shunhua’s litigation request again on the grounds that “in order to ensure family stability and social harmony, it is more appropriate not to divorce”. Whether in the five years of Ning Shunhua’s divorce lawsuit or in the face of recent interviews after media intervention, Chen Dinghua has made no secret of his anti-social and violent personality. He beat and threatened Ning Shunhua and his family, threatened to retaliate against the judge, and intercepted and smashed Ning Shunhua’s lawyer’s car at high speed. Chen Dinghua even described his “retaliation plan” to reporters: When my mother dies and sells the house and car, it will take a few days and spend a lot of money. If you get divorced, you will have no wives and parents, and you will have no worries, and if you die, there will still be people at the bottom. Ning Shunhua only wanted to get a divorce, but she encountered significant and consistent death threats. Chen Dinghua’s death threat seemed to have a deterrent effect, and the judge again rejected Ning Shunhua’s appeal. For personal freedom and marriage independence, Ning Shunhua risked her life to launch the fifth “charge”. Can the court support her this time? Ning Shunhua was threatened by Chen Dinghua and repeatedly ruled by the court to lose the lawsuit. This shocking divorce case went beyond the controversy during the divorce cooling-off period and reached a core issue: facing a marriage without factual and emotional basis, just Because of the death threat from one of the parties, the court ignored Ning Shunhua’s petition. Is such an inaction in justice appropriate? Ning Shunhua has become the “hostage” of her nightmarish marriage. Has the law enforcement system lost its way? After four divorce petitions were dismissed, together with the death threats that followed him, to put it mildly, the Hengyang city and county courts and the anti-social Chen Dinghua were jointly suppressing Ning Shunhua’s legitimate and legal divorce request. In other words, Ning Shunhua filed five divorce proceedings in Hengyang County in five years, as well as Chen Dinghua’s escalating verbal and violent threats and even his publicly publicized plan of retaliation, making this case no longer a family trial, but a test of Hengyang. The enforcement power of the judicial system at the city and county levels. The repeated verdicts of Ning Shunhua losing the lawsuit over the years are nothing more than a postponement. If Ning Shunhua is not afraid of death and wants to challenge Chen Dinghua’s death threat, what are the law enforcement agencies afraid of? Chen Dinghua’s anti-social personality is not just a guess, but he has proved himself for many years. He has been harassing and chasing Ning Shunhua for many years (it is said that he will buy a car to retaliate against Ning Shunhua in Guangdong), publicly revealing his complex and plans for misery and revenge and killing to the media, and publicizes death threats against specific and unspecified people. This has gone beyond the professional scope of the family judge Peng Xianjin. Chen Dinghua’s death threat should be dealt with first by the entire local law enforcement system. In general, Judge Peng Xianjin repeatedly rejected Ning Shunhua’s appeal with “the relationship between husband and wife has not been completely broken”, perhaps for the sake of peace, and delaying Chen Dinghua’s retaliatory killing plan. However, under Ning Shunhua’s insistence, compared with the happiness of the parties and the connivance of villains, such a judicial decision is too dazzling. Ning Shunhua should not be a victim of social harmony, and the judiciary should not condone anti-social villains like Chen Dinghua. Fighting against Chen Dinghua and supporting Ning Shunhua in accordance with the law should no longer be delayed.

6 months ago

It seems that our law has loopholes in preventing problems before they happen. For a dangerous person, the law can only tolerate when he does not kill; he can only make a difference after he kills. That is to say, as long as a person is bad enough, before he kills, he can make an innocent person suffer for nothing, but society can do nothing! What a desperate situation. When the law cannot stop evil, it should be perfected immediately. In such a big China, there are inevitably such anti-social elements. But there should also be an elite figure out a way to punish the villain! Don’t let innocent and weak people be bullied, and then the whole society will be helpless.

6 months ago

Some people say that the law is after the fact. I disagree. The law has two major functions: regulation and punishment. The role of regulation is to prevent trouble before it happens; the role of punishment is after the fact. What should I do? My IQ is not enough. Just take a look at foreign practices that I know. There is a law in the United States that I don’t know what it is called. Anyway, it prohibits potentially dangerous elements from approaching people who claim rights. Some people say that the US law is more formalistic, so we can improve it and let it be implemented. There are also electronic devices in South Korea that allow certain dangerous elements to be monitored. We can also think of ways to improve it and make it more suitable for China. Of course, in the final analysis, the most terrible thing is the Chinese people’s bad traditions in the relationship between husband and wife! The so-called persuasion and not persuasion is deeply ingrained in thinking. The staff of the divorce registry office deliberately failed to act, causing those who wanted to get divorced to give up, which was considered to be of immense merit. what? This is obviously malfeasance! If one of the women was a victim of domestic violence, and finally mustered up the courage to divorce, the result of such a shameless behavior by the staff of the state organs would make her dead in the future. Is this an accomplice? ! People who regret divorce can remarry! Is it necessary for you to do it on your behalf? My parents said that it’s good for us, knowing that er sneered at it, and replaced it with a state agency worker. You hit a passerby on the street, even if it is a minor injury, it is a big deal. Everyone shouts to beat a child, even if the bear child is killed, he has to endure it. Only beating a wife is different, all kinds of fear of wolves and tigers, and even more disgusting is the so-called bedside quarrel at this time! I’m not pure! I think you are implying a marital qj! I can’t imagine how tragic it would be to be in sleep clothes after being beaten down. This is the treatment of female prisoners of war by barbarians. Do you know how bad you hurt those who say “he” lightly there? So first change your mind. Then 1.4 billion Chinese, there are always smart people who can come up with ways to solve problems.

6 months ago

The relationship between husband and wife has broken down or there is no evidence to prove that the relationship between husband and wife has completely broken down. The frequency with which this sentence really appears in divorce proceedings is unusually high. Basically, every case can’t get around this. But what is a breakdown in a relationship and how to prove it is a technical job and an intractable disease. In many cases, it is also at the discretion of the presiding judge. For the party who advocates the breakdown of the marriage, it is necessary to list and collect enough evidence to convince the judge of the state, but the defendant only needs to say that I still love him/her very much and hope to continue living with him/her. With just this sentence, it is very likely that all your efforts will be lost, and the end is to go back and live. In this case, the judge believed that the plaintiff did not have enough evidence to prove that the relationship broke down. This invisibly increased the difficulty of the woman’s divorce testimony and also caused the continued occurrence of this case. It is understandable that the court respects objective evidence in the process of hearing the case, but the case itself has already complied with the relevant provisions of the previous marriage law and the current civil code. It is only because of the evidence that it leads to an imbalance. It does not combine the previous divorce claims and continuous Behavior, simply because there are problems in the collection of evidence from objective facts, it is impossible to escape from the sea of ​​suffering and cause tragedy. This also shows that the court has a certain degree of mechanization in the trial of cases. If a case continues to occur, then the court should take the initiative to understand the situation, rather than sit down and ignore subjective judgments. For the divorce plaintiff, it is very necessary to claim favorable evidence. As far as the current judicial environment is concerned, we cannot change this requirement, so we can only adapt to this requirement by ourselves and collect as much evidence as possible that is beneficial to us to prove that the marriage relationship has broken down. Evidence, such as the certificate of the neighborhood committee, the testimony of the neighbor, the separation certificate, etc.

6 months ago

First of all remind everyone to look carefully at the original news. From the context, “I have thought of a lot of methods, but none of them worked” should be said by the director of the local police station, not a response from the Provincial High Court. ——The Provincial High Court only “understood the situation” on April 14. How could it be possible to “think many ways” in time? (Even if you don’t read the original text, in terms of social common sense, the elders in the big yamen of the Provincial High Court are unlikely to have time to “think many ways” for a divorce case in a mere divorce case, even if they really do not care about it. Er, it’s impossible to use “but it’s useless” when interviewing the media.) Then, this news report kept exaggerating “the law can’t help him”, as if it’s impossible to cure it. He was like, but secretly revealed that the crux of the matter was not how good this husband is. The local cadres who appeared in the news report, apart from the master of the Provincial High Court who were still “understanding the situation,” had only one police station director and A deputy director of the Women’s Federation of a county, let alone the provinces and cities, and even a major leader in the county did not make a statement. Of course, there is “no way”. ——The crux of the matter lies in the fact that the leaders don’t pay much attention to it at all, and most of them don’t even know. Let me say that as long as the county leaders-there is no need for the secretary and county chief, the secretary of the political and legal committee or even the chief of the public security is enough-to approve a “handle as soon as possible” note, the local gods There are definitely 10,000 legal methods to settle that husband. Note that the word “as soon as possible” or similar expressions cannot be omitted. If it is just “handle it properly”, it means the opposite. Now that this matter has become public opinion, the local masters can’t pretend to be blind, and it is estimated that there will be results soon.

6 months ago

Randomly collect Deng Yingchao and Sister Deng’s opinions on the formulation of the first law of New China and the marriage law: “Although the bourgeois marriage law reads “marriage freedom” beautifully in the text, in fact the majority of working people have Marriage is not free. Although the Kuomintang’s reactionary government’s pseudo-“Six Laws” stipulates “permitting divorce”, it also imposes many conditions. Divorce is not allowed if the conditions are not met. In addition, the court’s various embarrassments are actually not. Marriage is free.” “Everyone has no dispute about the principle of freedom of marriage, and basically there is no dispute about the principle of freedom of divorce. However, there are different opinions on the “one party insists on divorce can be divorced.” At the joint symposium on politics, law, youth, and women, Only one comrade in the Organization Department and I agreed that one party insisted that divorce can be divorced, and the rest of the comrades all advocated that divorce should be subject to conditions. Why do I advocate that one party can leave without imposing conditions? The reason is that China has been stagnated in feudal society for a long time, and it is most affected. It is women who oppress, and women suffer the most in marriage issues. Early marriages, marriages between old and young, business marriages, and arranged marriages are common phenomena. Therefore, if one party insists on divorce, the divorce is mainly based on the interests of the majority of women. Many conditions just give cadres with feudal ideas an excuse to control and restrict the freedom of divorce. In the past, there was no such thing, and many tragedies occurred.” “In short, I insist on no conditions, and one party insists on leaving. As for the need to go through some The necessary steps can be explained in the instructions.” “After several disputes and several revisions, some issues have been resolved, but the main issue of the dispute is that if one party insists on divorce, it can be divorced without any conditions. There are still differences of opinion and a consensus has not yet been reached. There are a large number of opponents on this point, including me and a few in favor of it. Now in order to meet the urgent needs of the localities and the immediate interests of the broad masses of people, there can be no further delay. Therefore, everyone agreed and agreed to take the current draft first (although I still don’t fully agree). The Women’s Committee majority agreed to the final draft and attached our different opinions. Please refer to the central government for final decision. A draft marriage bill was submitted to the Law Committee, and the Law Committee was asked to submit its opinions to the Central Committee. We are arguing about the right and wrong and asked the Central Committee to give a reminder. Comrades of the Women’s Committee hope that the Central Committee can discuss with the comrades of the Women’s Committee after review, or allow the Committee to allow the Women’s Committee to discuss How about comrades participating? It’s up to the Central Committee to decide.” The Marriage Law was submitted to the Seventh Meeting of the Central People’s Government Committee on April 13, 1950, and was promulgated by the chairman’s express order, and came into effect on May 1, 1950. Sister Deng commented on this: “The “Marriage Law of the People’s Republic of China” is a marriage law that has not been seen in China for thousands of years.” “It is a concentrated expression of the demands of the working people, especially working women, on marriage issues. “Looking back now, look at the principled height of the first marriage law, think about how long China has stayed in the traditional agricultural society in the patriarchal system, and you can feel the weight of this law. The light of idealism. Of course, there are faculty members. His elders’ comments on the oppression of rural women by “theocracy, clan rights, patriarchy, and husband’s rights” are still clearly visible to this day. He knew the weight of the remnants of Chinese feudalism and the resistance to women’s liberation at that time, but he personally announced it. Really, there is a revolutionary romanticism. The reality is imperfect, but by adhering to the correct principles, there is always a trend towards perfection. Distorted principles are cheap to engage in, and you will get caught up in various quagmire discussions and be disturbed by emotions from different positions. No matter what you do at this time, no one will be satisfied. This original intention has a very high legitimacy. Don’t dig your own dam, and then feel the squalor.

6 months ago

Divorce retaliates against society. Therefore, the analysis of the law in this case is biased, because this is the reality. In this case, which judge is the biggest one. The man said: When my mother dies and sells the house and car, it will take a few days to spend a lot of time. If you get divorced, you will have no wives and parents, and you will have no worries, and if you die, there will still be people at the bottom. In interviews with reporters, Chen Dinghua said on many occasions that he would retaliate once divorced. Moreover, Chen Zhen has acted, very obviously excessive, but he cannot detain the woman for a long time: Chen Dinghua has beaten the woman and her family violently, the judge: threatens to retaliate against the judge, the woman’s lawyer: intercepts and smashes the woman’s attorney on high speed Faced with such a person, the entire society has lost its ability to restrain. Because of his current behavior, the law cannot punish severely, so this person is a potential threat. If it explodes, it may cause a series of harm. It’s not that the woman who has never happened before may have her family killed — the judge in the case of divorce killing the woman’s family may be killed — the judge will be killed after the divorce is sentenced. At about 12:20 on November 13, 2020, the Shuangcheng Branch of the Harbin Public Security Bureau will accept To the police: Hao Mou, the person in charge of the Zhou Family Court of the Shuangcheng District People’s Court, was stabbed. The police from the Zhoujia police station rushed to the scene immediately and arrested the suspect Wu Mouren on the spot. Hao Mou died after being rescued by 120 first-aid personnel. Upon trial, the criminal suspect Wu Mouren confessed to the fact that he stabbed Hao to death with a sharp knife after drinking because he refused to accept the divorce sentence. At present, the suspect Wu Mouren has been criminally detained by the public security organs, and the case is under further investigation. Revenge against the society-after divorce, the man retaliated against the society after divorce, and 19 people were hit by driving in the society. 6 people were killed in a row. The man was hit by 19 people after being divorced and revenge in the society. Who would bear the consequences? So, it’s really out of control. The woman’s life is also suffering. The current possible solution is to put the man’s forced mental illness into custody, but this thing seems to be useless. People just threaten the society verbally, get caught? How long can it be shut down? In fact, it is not that the public security organ did nothing. The male protagonist has been sentenced to administrative detention for 5 days by the Hengyang County Public Security Bureau three times. However, for such a person, the current law has no solution.

6 months ago

I want to know 1. Why doesn’t the court decide on divorce? 2. I saw on Tencent News that the man gambling and lending usury. What is the local background of the man? Who is the umbrella? Why can we lend usury without being caught? Is loan shark legal? Does he gather crowds to gamble? Gathering crowds to gamble is also illegal, right? 3. Has the judge received personal threats? Is this the reason why this case was not judged in time? If so, how should judges protect their own rights? How to uphold justice when faced with threats? Or should the judge choose to abandon the interests of the victim and the principle of fairness and justice when facing danger?

6 months ago

I spent some time in California before. According to local law, death threats are made to others. If the situation is serious, the sentence can be up to three years. If the situation is serious, the sentence will be doubled to six years. The threat to kill the judge is another crime, the highest five years or ten years (not a legal profession, please correct me if the introduction is wrong) in our country? Judging from this case, it seems to be how many days in detention, how many days in detention, and how many days in detention? So is the focus here on the divorce process? I don’t think so.

6 months ago

This divorce case looks like a divorce case! In fact, in all cases in general and society, especially those that will not have a significant impact on society, all agencies are persuading people to calm down and squeeze the living space of the weak, which is extremely ridiculous! Years after years, I was maliciously looking for things by my neighbors (really trivial), but it was disgusting, which seriously affected my life, from the most basic village, to the district, to the essentials (now the use of fake characters is really sad enough) to cracking down on the black Eliminate evil (saying that you can’t reach the black viciousness)! Just sent to the court. No one is in charge, and no one can stop the improper behavior of neighbors from the standpoint of public order and good customs from a legal point of view! There are a few hateful things. 1. The district said that the other party was unreasonable and that I was unreasonable and unreasonable. . . Why am I going to forgive people? ? People are still doing things that harass me. . . 2. I ask the essentials: Is this kind of repeated trouble-seeking behavior considered to be quarreling and provoking trouble? The important foreman, the young hairy boy, is domineering and does not have the image that the staff should have, and he screams: It is not you who make troubles and provocations, but we make them. . . I asked how does it count as making trouble? This product can’t say 123! I asked again: I have a problem with my neighbor. You have not sent the police once or twice. You should know a little bit about the specific situation. You should have a judgment in your mind who is to blame. . I haven’t finished speaking yet. . This guy interrupted sharply: I have no judgment! I do not know! . . . I really wanted to fuck him! As an executive officer (essentials, mediators in the district), he doesn’t even have the most basic knowledge of public order and good customs! Blindly indulge unreasonable and unreasonable people! Although the other party did not constitute a serious crime, at least as a whip holder, you should be strict with such persons, right? Blindly persuaders focus on neighboring relationships! The last is to condone evildoers! These people are also responsible for the intensification of conflicts in the end! I’m afraid of being locked up in a small black room, the writing is a bit messy, I’m really sorry!

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x