In July 2025, several rescuers in Shenzhen’s Guangming District said a man surnamed Yang obtained stray cats and kittens through adoption channels such as Xianyu, then killed them or caused them to disappear. Shen Yidu / Tencent News reported that on July 23, Shenzhen Guangming police issued a filing notice: Yang was placed under criminal investigation for fraud after allegedly using adoption as a pretext to kill more than twenty cats. In August, the case was reportedly returned to an administrative case because the monetary loss could not be determined. The case shows a hard legal reality: the temporary criminal path did not come from a dedicated animal-protection law, but from existing concepts such as fraud and property loss.

Four cats handed over in trust

According to Shen Yidu, Fang Ping and Chen An had long fed a mother cat in their community. At the end of June 2025, the mother cat gave birth to three kittens. The two women brought the family indoors temporarily and posted an adoption notice on Xianyu.

On the night of July 21, Yang came to adopt them. He appeared to be a genuine cat lover and took all four cats. Within 24 hours, they disappeared. Other rescuers soon contacted Fang and said cats they had handed to Yang had also vanished.

The mother cat and kittens were small lives raised by community kindness. That trust became the very thing exploited by a false adoption.

More than twenty cats and a filing notice

After Fang posted about the case online, other rescuers reached her within hours. In the following days, more than ten people reported that over twenty cats had been handed to Yang and then disappeared or were killed.

On July 22, Fang reported the case to the Yutang police station in Guangming. On July 23, she received a filing notice from Shenzhen Guangming police. Shen Yidu reported that police initially treated the matter as a criminal fraud case and detained Yang.

The notice matters because it shows the victims tried to move beyond online anger and bring evidence into a real procedure.

From criminal filing back to administrative handling

The report says that in August, when the case was transferred to prosecutors, it was returned to administrative handling because the monetary loss could not be determined.

That turn is why this case belongs in the archive. It was once described as China’s first criminal filing in a cat-abuse case, yet the legal path still came back to the question of measurable property loss. For the cats, the lives were gone; for the rescuers, the pain was never merely financial.

The case shows that some rare accountability in animal-harm cases still depends on borrowing legal routes such as fraud, property or public order, not on direct protection of the animals’ lives.

Continuing accountability and memory

Fang and other rescuers said they would continue through civil litigation. They also explored private criminal prosecution, but gave it up because the chance of success was very low.

The cruelty here lies not only in the deaths or disappearances, but in the abuse of adoption itself. Rescuers give animals away expecting care and survival; Yang allegedly used that expectation as a tool.

The mother cat, the three kittens, and the other cats should not vanish into a short news cycle. They were fed, held, and hoped for. This record keeps that broken trust visible.

Timeline

• Late June 2025: The mother cat gave birth to three kittens; Fang and Chen temporarily cared for them.
• July 21, 2025, 21:43: Yang came through the adoption notice and took the four cats.
• July 22, 2025: Fang reported the case; more rescuers said cats handed to Yang had disappeared.
• July 23, 2025: Fang received a filing notice; media reported Yang was criminally investigated for fraud.
• August 13, 2025: The case was reportedly returned to administrative handling because monetary loss could not be determined.
• Later: The rescuers said they would continue civil action.

Public Sources

This file relies mainly on the Shen Yidu / Tencent News report, with Yangcheng Evening News and Sohu republications as cross-references. Names of rescuers are recorded as pseudonyms used in public reporting.

• 北青深一度 / 腾讯新闻《抓住那个虐猫的“领养人”》
• 羊城晚报转载《残忍！男子虐杀20余只猫被刑事立案》
• 搜狐转载同案报道