_cjcu0001 | updated 27 June 2021, by Rene
Helmerichs
This page summarizes
a recent investigation sent to the Tainan District Prosecutor's Office on 25
June 2021. The investigation is
available and tracked under TPRO item 2 at http://p12.rene.guru
Summary of crime:
The Chang Jung University Faculty Of
Translation translated the exact same English statement two different
ways. One way alleges Extortion, one way
doesn't.
It wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't the exact
same person who translated the exact same statement two different ways on
behalf of two separate contracts with her employer,
First, the person submitted an incorrect
translation to the court. The court paid
her. That's referenced in the PDF file.
Then she submitted a different translation to
me, which I told her that I would also submit to the court. That's also referenced in the PDF file.
Then I paid her.
After I paid her, she realized that I would
submit her inconsistent translations to the same court file.
Next she began insisting that I didn't
provide her with context.
Really, how much context does the expression
"X buys me Y" need? It's not
like it means "You have to pay me X in order to buy Y from me", which
is exactly what she told the court.
"X buys me Y" means the same as
"X buys Y", which means "Pay the amount of X to get
Y."
If the accuracy of a translation always
depends on a translator's subjective feelings, then Google Translate would
never be accurate since it's an automatic translation service.
The professor claims that her submission to
court 6 months earlier is correct, and that the translation which she provide
me (and I paid her to provide an ACCURATE translation) on 22 June 2021 is no
longer correct.
She said it was correct, but when she found
out that it's the same translation which she already translated, and which she
wants to imply extortion, she changed her mind and claimed that I didn't
provide context.
To use an example, essentially what she was
look at clear water under a red lamp and declare "The water is red."
to the prosecutors. Then I came along and
asked her "What color is the water without the light?" and she
replied "It's clear."
When I pointed out that she can't tell the
court that the same sentence which I'd been holding the entire time is red and
is clear, she lost her mind. She
literally told me that she'd stand by her first translation. When I tried to reason with her, she wrote
back that she felt threatened. Honestly,
what choice did I have? At that point, I
had to report her to the prosecutors or find my own ass even more bruised.
Proof of that analogy is in the smaller print
40-combined pages in Exhibit F of the 25 June 2021 submission. The PDF submission is linked below her
e-portfolio below.
Frankly speaking though, I'd have to be either
really stupid, or actually honest, if I were to advertise all of this on the
internet knowing that I'm literally calling her and Her Spirit on to try to
disprove the fact that she is intentionally allowing prosecutors to continue to
use a knowingly false statement (it's knowingly false be cause told me it was
false!).
Because I'm arguing the SAME context and the
SAME thing the WHOLE time, I'm always going to be able to add more context as
long as I'm still arguing about THE SAME context.
I'm truly at a loss of words to describe the
insanity going on inside this woman's head.
This is Sally Wu's
e-Portfolio:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1umnB4npP2iqyXh3rPbcLM0nzrwUrI5O2/view?usp=sharing
She submitted the
correct translation to me, and then, realizing the translation was incorrect,
the professor trying to justify her mistake instead of fixing it. Read all about it:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1TOmgIvbsQj353eh02k6P1fZavYVCRew5/view?usp=sharing
And remember to read the FINE PRINT in
the last 40-condensed pages.
Are you ready to help Me save the world? http://p1.rene.guru
====
#rene.guru
End
of page. Comment on the Main Page:
Journal Of A Schizophrenic, with a
twist.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.