“助學網”內幕：假慈善之名侵害60名女童，惡魔負責人竟稱“我吃完再給老闆吃”

這起案件揭露一個披著“公益助學”外衣的犯罪網路，主犯王傑利用慈善機構作為掩護，長期性侵、猥褻貧困女童，甚至形成一條黑色產業鏈。案件曝光後，其扭曲的辯解——“我吃完的再給老闆吃”——更讓公眾憤怒至極。

1. 假慈善，真惡魔

2009年，王傑在廣西某地註冊成立“百色助學網”，宣稱專門資助貧困山區女童完成學業。該網站通過社交媒體、公益平臺募集善款，並定期發佈受助女童的照片和感謝信，營造出“正規公益”的假像。

然而，背地裡，王傑及其同夥以“家訪”“助學回訪”為名，長期對受助女童實施性侵、猥褻，甚至拍攝不雅視頻進行勒索或販賣。受害女童大多來自偏遠山區，家庭貧困，父母文化程度低，甚至有些是孤兒，根本無力反抗或舉報。

2. 侵害手段：從“資助”到控制

篩選目標：王傑優先選擇單親、留守或家庭極度貧困的女孩，以“資助學費”“提供生活費”為誘餌，騙取監護人信任。

威逼利誘：一旦女童接受資助，王傑便以“不聽話就停止資助”“告訴學校你拿錢”等手段威脅，迫使她們屈從。有些學生只到手助學金的8成，有的甚至都沒有拿到。

長期控制：部分女童被帶至所謂的“助學基地”，實際是王傑的私人住所，被迫發生性關係，甚至被“介紹”給其他“老闆”以換取更多“資助”。

3. 扭曲的辯解：“我吃完的再給老闆吃”

案件偵破後，王傑面對審訊竟毫無悔意，甚至大言不慚地說：

“這些女孩本來家裡就窮，我給她們錢，她們就該報答我。我‘吃完’（性侵）後，再介紹給‘老闆’們，她們還能多拿點錢，這不是幫她們嗎？” 這番言論徹底暴露他的扭曲心理—他不僅不認為自己犯罪，反而把性侵女童當作“交易”，甚至以“慈善家”自居。

4. 惡行終被揭發

一名受害女童因精神崩潰向學校老師求助，案件才開始浮出水面。警方調查發現：

受害人數：至少60名女童，年齡最小僅9歲，部分女孩被侵害時長達5年以上。

犯罪網路：王傑並非單獨作案，背後涉及多名“老闆”（嫖客），甚至包括個別基層幹部。

證據確鑿：警方在其電腦和手機中查獲大量性侵視頻、轉帳記錄，甚至發現一份“女童名單”，標注她們的年齡、家庭情況和“服務記錄”。

5. 法律審判與後續影響

2016年10月，王傑因詐欺及強姦罪被判處16年刑期，但受害女童的心理創傷難以彌補。案件曝光後，引發公眾對“民間助學機構”監管的強烈質疑：

監管漏洞：該“助學網”運營超過9年，竟無人發現異常，善款流向也從未被審計。

受害者援助缺失：許多女童因長期受侵害，出現嚴重心理問題，但當地缺乏專業的心理干預機制。

公益信任危機：案件導致公眾對民間慈善的信任度下降，正規公益組織也受到波及。

6. 反思：如何保護弱勢兒童？

這起案件不僅是性侵犯罪，更暴露了貧困地區兒童保護的巨大漏洞：

家庭監護缺失：許多受害女童的家長因貧困、無知，甚至主動將孩子“託付”給施害者。

學校與社會忽視：部分老師、村幹部雖察覺異常，但未深究或上報。

網路慈善監管缺位元：類似“個人助學”行為缺乏審核，極易成為犯罪溫床。

如今，儘管主犯已伏法，但那些被摧毀的人生如何重建？類似的悲劇是否仍在暗處上演？此案警示我們：慈善的光環之下，必須要有嚴格的監管和透明的機制，否則“助學”可能淪為“助惡”

The Dark Truth Behind the "Student Aid Network": Sexual Abuse of 60 Girls Under the Guise of Charity—Perpetrator Claims "I Take My Share Before Passing Them to the Boss"

This case exposed a criminal network disguised as a "public welfare charity." The mastermind, Wang Jie, exploited a student aid organization as a front to systematically sexually assault and molest impoverished schoolgirls, even forming a sinister underground industry. When the truth came to light, his twisted justification—"I take my share before passing them to the boss"—sparked public outrage.

1. False Charity, True Evil

In 2009, Wang Jie registered the "Baise Student Aid Network" in Guangxi, claiming its mission was to help underprivileged girls in mountainous regions complete their education. The organization raised funds through social media and charity platforms, regularly posting photos and thank-you letters from the sponsored girls to maintain an illusion of legitimacy.

Behind the scenes, however, Wang and his accomplices used "home visits" and "follow-up meetings" as excuses to sexually abuse the girls, even filming explicit videos for blackmail or sale. Most victims came from remote rural areas—impoverished, with uneducated parents, some even orphans—rendering them powerless to resist or report the crimes.

2. From "Sponsorship" to Exploitation

• Targeting Vulnerable Girls: Wang specifically sought out girls from single-parent families, left-behind children, or extreme poverty, luring them with promises of "tuition support" and "living expenses."
• Coercion and Manipulation: Once a girl accepted the "aid," Wang would threaten to withdraw funding or expose her if she resisted. Some girls received only 80% of the promised money, while others got nothing at all.
• Long-Term Control: Some victims were taken to so-called "aid centers"—actually Wang’s private residences—where they were raped and later "introduced" to other "bosses" (clients) in exchange for additional "funding."

3. A Twisted Justification: "I Take My Share Before Passing Them to the Boss"

During interrogation, Wang showed no remorse, boldly stating:

"These girls come from poor families. I give them money, so they owe me. After I 'take my share' [rape them], I introduce them to 'bosses,' so they can earn more. Isn’t that helping them?"
This statement laid bare his warped mindset—he not only refused to acknowledge his crimes but framed the abuse as a "transaction," even portraying himself as a "philanthropist."

4. The Crimes Come to Light

The case unraveled when one victim, suffering a mental breakdown, confided in a teacher. Police investigations revealed:

• Victim Count: At least 60 girls, some as young as nine, with some enduring abuse for over five years.
• Criminal Network: Wang was not acting alone; his operation involved multiple "bosses" (clients), including low-level local officials.
• Concrete Evidence: Authorities seized explicit videos, transaction records, and a "girls' list" detailing their ages, family backgrounds, and "service history."

5. Legal Consequences and Lasting Impact

In October 2016, Wang was sentenced to 16 years for fraud and rape, but the psychological scars on the victims remain. The case raised serious concerns about oversight in grassroots charities:

• Regulatory Failures: The "aid network" operated undetected for nine years, with no audits on fund usage.
• Lack of Victim Support: Many survivors suffer severe trauma, yet local mental health resources are inadequate.
• Erosion of Trust: Public confidence in private charities plummeted, affecting legitimate organizations.

6. Reflection: How Can We Protect Vulnerable Children?

This case goes beyond sexual abuse—it exposes systemic failures in safeguarding underprivileged children:

• Parental Negligence: Many victims' families, due to poverty or ignorance, willingly handed their daughters to the abusers.
• Institutional Indifference: Teachers and local officials noticed red flags but failed to act.
• Unregulated "Charity": Informal aid initiatives, lacking scrutiny, can easily become fronts for exploitation.

Though the perpetrator is behind bars, the survivors' lives remain shattered. Are similar tragedies still unfolding in the shadows? This case serves as a grim warning: Beneath the halo of charity, strict oversight and transparency are essential—otherwise, "student aid" can become a tool for evil.