Paparazzi continue to slam Jin Chen, allegedly mocking her for lying and saying, “One lie needs countless lies to cover it up”

On January 29, the hashtag #Jin Chen hit-and-run allegation# surged to the top of Chinese social media trending lists. A whistleblower released an official traffic accident report identifying the driver as an assistant surnamed Xu, while simultaneously claiming that Jin Chen herself was the actual driver.

The accusation sparked immediate backlash, partly due to Jin’s public image as a skilled driver from racing-themed variety shows, where she was often labeled a “drift goddess.”

The narrative shifted the following day. On January 30, Shaoxing traffic police issued a statement confirming that the assistant had taken responsibility on paper, but said there was insufficient evidence to classify the incident as a hit-and-run, and clarified that no insurance fraud had occurred.

Jin Chen later issued a public apology, sharing photos of facial injuries. She explained that she required urgent surgery in Shanghai after the accident, left an assistant to handle the scene, and later canceled the insurance claim upon regaining consciousness. According to her statement, all compensation was paid out of pocket and settled by April of the previous year.

Despite these developments, controversy reignited on February 1 when a paparazzo publicly challenged the official conclusions, pushing the topic “Why is Jin Chen still under scrutiny after apologizing?” back into trending discussions.

The paparazzo raised three key questions:

1. Does the case involve attempted insurance fraud?
   While authorities ruled out fraud due to the absence of an actual payout, critics argue that impersonating the driver and contacting insurers may still constitute administrative violations.
2. Does leaving for medical treatment count as hit-and-run?
   Citing traffic laws, critics argue that leaving the scene without proper reporting or preserving evidence may still violate regulations, regardless of medical necessity.
3. Why was the incident concealed for nearly ten months?
   The delay between the accident and public disclosure led to speculation about information suppression, though no concrete proof has been presented.

Public opinion remains divided. Some emphasize legal equality regardless of celebrity status, while others question the motives of the whistleblower, pointing to past controversies and a lack of definitive evidence.

Authorities have stated that certain procedural details are still under review. Given the multiple reversals already seen in this case, many observers are calling for patience until all official findings are fully disclosed.