Criminal perjury of three Kidsland managers, update 23 July 2021

三名凱仕蘭經理的刑事偽證，中华民国110年7月23日更新

_klss0015 | dated 25 July 2021, by Rene Helmerichs

PDF: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1vb59TuptmoRxA4B9gXIfGLQ_Ht3dtMox/view?usp=sharing

Track: http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/06/tpro0001.html

708203臺南市安平區健康路三段310號

受文者：臺灣臺南地方檢察署

發文日期：中華民國110年7月23日

發文字號：tpro0001、第1次

 

中華民國 | Taiwan

臺灣臺南地方檢察署

Tainan District Procuratorate, case file:

110他3227：義

 

被告（有三個）| Defendants: (There are three)

一起工作：701台南市東區長榮路二段32巷6號

一起工作：06-2082888、06-5118086

1、江佩樺（Jiang Peihua、Clare Chiang）總經理

2、徐乙彤（Xu Yitong、Denise "Madness" Xu）教學部經理

3、黃姿瑜（Huang Ziyu、Stacy Huang）ESL項目經理

 

主旨 | Purpose

106年5月20日和106年12月28日的會面記錄。106年5月20日的記錄證明，被告人在聘請瑞內之前知道並理解並充分意識到外國英語教師瑞內在加拿大有犯罪記錄的事實瑞內於106年5月26日擔任教師。106年5月20日的電話錄音和隨後日期為106年5月26日的電子郵件證明，被告無意核實加拿大刑事定罪與性無關。106年12月28日的記錄證明被告在107年11月26日的聽證會上故意欺騙民事法院法官。107年11月26日，兩名被告均聲稱不知道瑞內在加拿大的刑事定罪或872天監禁在精神病院。

Meeting records from 20 May 2017 and 28 Dec 2017.  The record of 20 May 2017 proves both Defendants knew and understand and were fully consciously aware of the fact that foreign English teacher Rene (瑞內) had a criminal record in Canada before they hired Rene (瑞內) as a teacher on 26 May 2017.  The telephone recordings from 20 May 2017 and subsequent email dated 26 May 2017 prove the defendant had no intention of verifying that the Canadian criminal convictions were not sexually related.  The record of 28 Dec 2017 proves the defendants intentionally deceived the Civil Court judge during the hearing on 26 Nov 2018.  On 26 Nov 2018, both defendants claimed not to know about Rene (瑞內)'s Canadian criminal convictions or 872 days of imprisonment in psychiatric institutions.

 

隨附DVD上的文件說明（12個文件，2個二維碼）

Description of DVD files (12 files, 2 QR Codes):

一、文件名：《20170520u2_meeting_transcript_34p.pdf》

106年5月20日瑞內（Rene）、瑞內的妻子蕭帆琇（Lindsay）和凱仕蘭（Kidsland）補習班經理徐乙彤和江佩樺（Clare）面對面：書面會議記錄（至少與瑞內個人有時間轉錄的一樣多）。

1. The 20 May 2017 in-person meeting between Rene (瑞內), Rene (瑞內)'s wife Lindsay (蕭帆琇), and Kidsland (凱仕蘭) cram school managers Denise (徐乙彤) and Clare (江佩樺): the written meeting record (at least as much as Rene (瑞內) personally had time to transcribe)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/145zs_1nVsac1hocmP6HoPt9g0KCRM2u5/view?usp=sharing

二、文件名：《20170520_001_Kidsland_meeting.m4a》

及：《20170520_002_Kidsland_meeting.m4a》

106年5月20日瑞內、蕭帆琇（Lindsay）和凱仕蘭補習班經理徐乙彤和江佩樺面對面：兩個 MP4（音頻）文件中的會議原始錄音。

2. The 20 May 2017 in-person meeting between Rene (瑞內), Rene (瑞內)'s wife Lindsay (蕭帆琇), and Kidsland (凱仕蘭) cram school managers Denise (徐乙彤) and Clare (江佩樺): the original audio recordings of the meeting in two MP4 (audio) files.

001: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1R_encC4FC_4t66tOa3zFejvK2DlDxofS/view?usp=sharing

002: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1u_MPmzfOnumR2QJEWoKJ9HAGGWDopJtt/view?usp=sharing

ALL: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1wCSq3aqA2qPHXo5X8HGF2iX6g-t1dSVu?usp=sharing

三、文件名：《20170520_003_call_14-34-18_IN_0915532820.mp3》

及：《20170520_004_call_15-50-28_OUT_0915532820.mp3》

106年5月20日瑞內、蕭帆琇（Lindsay）和凱仕蘭補習班經理徐乙彤和江佩樺面對面：與徐乙彤、瑞內和蕭帆琇進行了兩次後續電話交談。

3. The 20 May 2017 in-person meeting between Rene (瑞內), Rene (瑞內)'s wife Lindsay (蕭帆琇), and Kidsland (凱仕蘭) cram school managers Denise (徐乙彤) and Clare (江佩樺): two follow-up telephone conversations with Denise (徐乙彤), Rene (瑞內), and Lindsay (蕭帆琇).

003: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1w18sLFe8k5mTgFQO5aLbt3VDRN5rdbrs/view?usp=sharing

004: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VmuXwtCuzv0QjcsjHfEa9ks9gSPz8w7O/view?usp=sharing

ALL: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1wCSq3aqA2qPHXo5X8HGF2iX6g-t1dSVu?usp=sharing

四、文件名：《20170526_Gmail_and_contract_10p.pdf》

106年5月26日凱仕蘭教學部經理徐乙彤的電子郵件告訴瑞內不要提交犯罪記錄檢查。兩年的教學合同（106年7月1日至108年7月31日）是在電子郵件發出幾個小時後簽署的。電子郵件（1頁）和合同（9頁）在一起。

4. The 26 May 2017 email from Kidsland (凱仕蘭) Teaching Department manager (教學部經理) Denise (徐乙彤) tells Rene (瑞內) not to submit a criminal record check.  The two-year teaching contract (1 July 2017 to 31 July 2019) was signed a few hours after the email.  The email (1 page) and contract (9 pages) are together.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/10gz_5ujQT3KYxfA2tTDT7GFnVn7Q63dj/view?usp=sharing

五、文件名：《20171228u2_meeting_transcript_50p.pdf》

106年12月28日瑞內（Rene）和凱仕蘭補習班經理徐乙彤（Denise）和黃姿瑜（Stacy）的面對面會議：書面會議記錄（至少與瑞內親自有過的一樣多）轉錄時間）。

5. The 28 Dec 2017 in-person meeting between Rene (瑞內) and Kidsland (凱仕蘭) cram school managers Denise (徐乙彤) and Stacy (黃姿瑜): the written meeting record (at least as much as Rene (瑞內) personally had time to transcribe).

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yQIaW-Ya1g3woFmiH_3F4Pc8zTMu_prK/view?usp=sharing

六、文件名：《20171228_001_Kidsland_meeting.m4a》

106年12月28日瑞內和凱仕蘭補習班經理徐乙彤（Denise）和黃姿瑜（Stacy）的面對面會議：一個 MP4（音頻）文件中的原始錄音。

6. The 28 Dec 2017 in-person meeting between Rene (瑞內) and Kidsland (凱仕蘭) cram school managers Denise (徐乙彤) and Stacy (黃姿瑜): the original audio recording in one MP4 (audio) file.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1cx_tLwvAIliagwFfiaHRe8XYAIZDChfX/view?usp=sharing

七、文件名：《20181126_Civil_Court_Ch_23p.pdf》

107年11月26日的法庭記錄。

7. The court record from 26 Nov 2018.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1kOni24X4DUZKx1-DcrPahY6ZLy0cpnfE/view?usp=sharing

八、文件名：《20181126_Civil_Court_En_Ch_23p.pdf》

107年11月26日的法庭記錄翻譯成英文，由於瑞內不會中文，也不會真正打字，只能聽懂不到20%的中文口語。我們在審問瑞內關於這個案子時需要英文副本。

8. The court record from 26 Nov 20018 translated into English, since Rene (瑞內) cannot read Chinese, cannot actually type Chinese, and only understands less than 20% of spoken Chinese.  We'll need the English copy during interrogations of Rene (瑞內) about this case.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1crJ8nQaq0dPqIEzxkykD7oF96C6kPU1Q/view?usp=sharing

九、文件名：《20210521_Kidsland_Perjury_20p.pdf》

指控，說明和依據，107年11月26日法庭記錄中的陳述樣本。

9. Accusations, explanation and basis, sample statements from the 26 Nov 2018 court record.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1vaSdCFmdOICyzBXN2MWW5WuUEN8m-huM/view?usp=sharing

十、文件名：《tpro0001_20210723_stamp_5p.pdf》

這個文件。

10. This document.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1vb59TuptmoRxA4B9gXIfGLQ_Ht3dtMox/view?usp=sharing

 

二維碼鏈接到跟踪本文件及其聲明的調查的網站。這使調查人員和記者可以自由訪問所有信息。它還允許將此案件與與同一被告或整個檢察官辦公室有關的其他案件聯繫起來。如果DVD在檢察官辦公室與本文件分開，則第二個QR提供了該文件的直接下載，其中包含指向所附DVD上每個部分的可點擊鏈接。

The QR Code links to a website tracking the investigation of this document and its claim.  This allows investigator and journalists free access to all information.  It also allows this case to be linked to other cases related to the same defendants, or the prosecutor's office as a whole.  A second QR offers a direct download of this document with clickable links to each of the Parts on the attached DVD, should the DVD become separated from this document in the prosecutor's office.

Web L-QR: http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/06/tpro0001.html

PDF R-QR: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1vb59TuptmoRxA4B9gXIfGLQ_Ht3dtMox/view?usp=sharing

 

我的名字的意思是「把你自己放在我的鞋子裡，做我」，

它是英語的直接翻譯，就像「瑞內」是直接翻譯一樣。

My name means "Put yourself in my shoes, BE me.".

It is a direct translation from English, just as "Rene" is a direct translation.

 

謹  狀 | Sincerely,

 

中華民國110年07月23日

Republic of China, July 23, 2021

原告：Rene Helmerichs（中華民國：是瑞內）

 

Back to KLSS Pages: http://p08.rene.guru

====

#rene.guru

End of page.  Comment on the Main Page:

http://p1.rene.guru

Journal Of A Schizophrenic, with a twist of mental order.

台灣人權促進會 Please help!

台南法律援助基金會極端歧視的證據

Evidence of extreme discrimination from the Tainan Legal Aid Foundation.

_tahr0001 | dated 21 July 2021, by Rene Helmerichs

 

To Taiwan's LAF, also to Taiwan Association for Human Rights (台灣人權促進會)

關於：嚴重歧視 | Regarding: serious discrimination

 

1、LAF與林賽（蕭帆琇飾）的電話錄音，內容涉及丈夫瑞內（瑞內）和律師斯科特（林宏帆）多次堅稱瑞內拒絕接受法庭要求的精神評估。瑞內拿著一份文件，證明瑞內想要做精神評估，沒有拒絕精神評估，但醫生拒絕做精神評估。電話交談：

1. A recording of a telephone conversation from LAF to Lindsay (蕭帆琇) about her husband Rene (瑞內), and lawyer Scott (林泓帆) who repeatedly insisted that Rene (瑞內) refused a the court-requested mental assessment.  Rene (瑞內) was holding a document that proves that Rene (瑞內) wanted the mental assessment, did not refuse the mental assessment, but the doctor declined to give the mental assessment.  Telephone conversation:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/16xDnJKoDXf2IUWV3-pSuJF4kPetW2ffr/view?usp=sharing

2、蕭帆琇和瑞內的回复：

2. A reply from Lindsay (蕭帆琇) and Rene (瑞內)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ICZoPa4R3G8r8PZBZjsNDk1PRUs0glYq/view?usp=sharing

概括 | Summary:

補習班指控一名嚴重的精神病患者犯罪。這個人是瑞內。台南區刑事法院於110年5月31日安排精神評估，瑞內參加精神評估，但醫生拒絕提供精神評估。醫生是李俊宏。醫生告訴瑞內，法庭必須將瑞內送到另一家醫院。醫生隨後告訴法庭，瑞內拒絕接受精神評估。瑞內對心理評估進行了錄音。瑞內將整個對話從錄音中轉錄成PDF文件。瑞內（瑞內）於110年7月13日向刑事法院提交了記錄。瑞內（瑞內）於110年7月16日要求對該事件進行刑事調查。

A cram school accuses a severely mentally ill person of crime.  The person is Rene (瑞內).  The Tainan District Criminal Court arranges a mental assessment on 31 May 2021.  Rene (瑞內) attends the mental assessment, but the doctor refuses to provide the mental assessment.  The doctor is Chun-Hung Lee (李俊宏).  The doctor tells Rene (瑞內) that the court must send Rene (瑞內) to a different hospital.  The doctor then tells the court that Rene (瑞內) refused the mental assessment.  Rene (瑞內) audio-recorded the mental assessment.  Rene (瑞內) transcribed the entire conversation from the audio-recording into a PDF document.  Rene (瑞內) submitted the record to the Criminal Court on 13 July 2021.  Then Rene (瑞內) requested a Criminal Investigation of the incident on 16 July 2021. 

附上110年7月16日的PDF文件：

The 16 July 2021 PDF document is attached:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1GWXxfYdff2OyLngU3TETubjHxH4kzRK3/view?usp=sharing

瑞內於110年7月16日向瑞內提供了一份副本。瑞內問林宏帆是否閱讀了文件，如果沒有，請將文件退還給瑞內。林宏帆說這份文件與瑞內的其他著作相同。換句話說，律師忽略了該文件。此前，林宏帆拒絕向法庭提交刑事調查請求，以證明瑞內對所有刑事指控的清白。律師告訴瑞內“你錯了”，並暗示瑞內應該接受有罪判決。

Rene (瑞內) provided a copy to Scott (林泓帆) on 16 July 2021.  Rene (瑞內) asked Scott (林泓帆) if he read the document, and if not, to please return the document to Rene (瑞內).  Scott (林泓帆) said the document was the same as other writings from Rene (瑞內).  In other words, the lawyer ignored the document.  Previously, Scott (林泓帆) refused to submit Criminal Investigation requests to the court proving the innocence of Rene (瑞內) about all criminal allegations.  The lawyer told Rene (瑞內) "you're just wrong", and implied that Rene (瑞內) should accept a guilty verdict.

瑞內指出，同一位律師，林宏帆之前曾允許同一名補習班經理在相關民事法庭訴訟中在法庭上作假證。作證日期為107年11月26日。林宏帆並未告知法官，學校故意聘請了一名重度精神病教師，該教師此前曾被關押在精神病院共計872天，並有加拿大犯罪記錄。也就是說，林宏帆沒有充分告知法庭，在補習班聘請瑞內之前，瑞內確保補習班管理人員都知道瑞內的心理健康史和犯罪記錄。

Rene (瑞內) identified that the same lawyer, Scott (林泓帆) previously allowed the same cram school managers to give false testimony in court during a related Civil Court proceeding.  The date of the testimony was 26 Nov 2018.  Scott (林泓帆) did not inform the judge that the school knowingly hired a severely mentally ill teacher who previously spent at total of 872 days locked into mental hospitals, and has a Canadian criminal record.  That is, Scott (林泓帆) did not adequately inform the court that Rene (瑞內) ensured the cram school managers all knew about Rene (瑞內)'s mental health history and criminal record before the cram school hired Rene (瑞內). 

LAF律師林宏帆知道，補習班的管理人員故意向法官隱瞞犯罪記錄和精神疾病（精神分裂症、分裂情感障礙、雙相情感障礙、妄想症、妄想症和極端精神病）。結果，法官做出了一個不可能的裁決。台南地區民事法院法官羅鬱棣裁定補習班（芝麻街凱仕蘭飾）合法聘用瑞內。

LAF Lawyer Scott (林泓帆) knew that the cram school managers intentionally concealed the criminal record and the mental health illnesses (Schizophrenia, Schizoaffective Disorder, Bipolar Disorder, Delusional Disorder, Delusions Of Grandeur, and extreme psychosis) from the judge.  As a result, the judge made an impossible ruling.  Tainan District Civil Court judge, Luo (羅郁棣), ruled that the cram school (芝麻街凱仕蘭) lawfully hired Rene (瑞內).

上週末，110年7月16日至110年7月20日，律師林宏帆告訴瑞內，中華人民共和國歡迎瑞內，林宏帆告訴瑞內價格的單程票。

Over the weekend, between 16 July 2021 and 20 July 2021, lawyer Scott (林泓帆) told Rene (瑞內) that the People's Republic Of China welcomes Rene (瑞內), and Scott (林泓帆) told Rene (瑞內) the price of a one-way ticket.

110年6月20日，瑞內開始通知法律援助基金會，如果律師林宏帆拒絕幫助瑞內或拒絕確保法院了解瑞內沒有拒絕精神評估110年5月31日，時任律師林宏帆選擇不代表瑞內。

On 20 June 2021, Rene (瑞內) began notifying the Legal Aid Foundation that if lawyer Scott (林泓帆) refuses to help Rene (瑞內) or refuses to ensure the court understands that Rene (瑞內) did not refuse the mental assessment on 31 May 2021, then lawyer Scott (林泓帆) is choosing not to represent Rene (瑞內). 

110年7月20日，林宏帆律師多次嘲諷瑞內。律師林宏帆連連高呼“你拒絕精神評估。你拒絕精神評估。大家都同意你拒絕精神評估。”

On 20 July 2021, lawyer Scott (林泓帆) taunted Rene (瑞內) repeatedly.  Lawyer Scott (林泓帆) repeatedly chanted "You refused the mental assessment.  You refused the mental assessment.  Everyone agrees you refused the mental assessment." 

瑞內持有110年7月16日的文件，證明瑞內沒有拒絕精神評估。為什麼在瑞內禮貌地向LAF解釋林宏帆嚴重刑事疏忽之後，瑞內還要接受LAF律師林宏帆不斷的嘲笑和歧視？

Rene (瑞內) was holding the 16 July 2021 document which proves that Rene (瑞內) did not refuse the mental assessment.  Why should Rene have to accept continual ridicule and discrimination from LAF lawyer Scott (林泓帆) after Rene (瑞內) politely explained to LAF that Scott (林泓帆) is severely criminally negligent? 

瑞內是否應該因為林宏帆沒有做LAF付錢給林宏帆做的工作而入獄？每個人都認為瑞內有精神病，很危險，但他不是！瑞內其實是一個美滿的人，他的妻子也真的為這種情況發瘋了！

Should Rene (瑞內) go to jail because Scott (林泓帆) isn't doing the job that LAF pays Scott (林泓帆) to do?  Everyone thinks Rene (瑞內) is mentally ill and really dangerous, but he isn't!  Rene (瑞內) is actually a happily married person, and his wife is really also going crazy over this situation!

林宏帆的吟唱將瑞內逼到了崩潰的邊緣，而瑞內一拳打在了脆弱的LAF分隔牆上。牆破了，需要專業修理。瑞內堅稱牆是因為律師的歧視而破裂的，當時有兩名警察和LAF主管都目擊了這一事件。事件的多個錄音存在。

Scott (林泓帆)'s chanting drove Rene (瑞內) to the breaking point, and Rene (瑞內) punched a flimsy LAF dividing wall.  The wall broke and will need to be professionally fixed.  Rene (瑞內) insists that the wall broke because of the lawyer's discrimination, and there were two police officers and the LAF supervisor who all witnessed the event.  Multiple audio-recordings of the incident exist.

事件發生的日期是110年7月20日。地點是：

The date of the incident was 20 July 2021.  The location was:

700005台南市中西區忠義路二段14號8樓

110年7月21日的今天，法律援助基金會給雷內的妻子蕭帆琇打電話。對話和回复附在語音文件中。

Today, 21 July 2021, the Legal Aid Foundation telephoned Rene's wife Lindsay (蕭帆琇).  The conversation and the reply are attached in voice files.

 

台灣人權促進會請幫幫我！

Rene Helmerichs

21 July 2021

copied to http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/07/tahr0001.html

====

#rene.guru

End of page.  Comment on the Main Page:

http://p1.rene.guru

Journal Of A Schizophrenic, with a twist.

The Untrackable Invisible Lawsuit

Stopping CJCU's Persistent Perjury

_cjcu0004 | dated 20 July 2021, by Rene Helmerichs

CJCU List at: http://p14.rene.guru

 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1z85Ud8AKBFT1PQ8G_Bw1JDVXo2DJZYPz/view?usp=sharing

"Are you ready to help me save the world?"

It'd be only the CHRISTIAN thing to do.

====

#rene.guru

End of page.  Comment on the Main Page:

http://p1.rene.guru

Journal Of A Schizophrenic, with a twist.

Criminal Perjury at CJCU (長榮大學) update 18 July 2021

"Birds of a feather flock together."

_cjcu0003 | dated 18 July 2021, by Rene Helmerichs

CJCU List at: http://p14.rene.guru

 

Chang Jung Christian University (長榮大學)

Department Of Translation Studies (翻譯學系)

Professor Sally Wu (吳宜錚)

This one made me laugh.  Thanks for the laugh Sally.

As the picture shows, Sally is confused. 

Sally is accusing me of threats and blackmail (literally extortion) based on an incorrect Chine translation.  I used the English expression "buys me" in a sentence describing the relatively cheap cost of photo copies in Taiwan.

First, an English cram school mistranslates my statement.

My statement was "10USD buys me 1000 fliers".  The cram school claims I wrote "Pay me 10,000 USD to buy fliers from me."

This actually went into criminal court in Taiwan.  I had the first day of trial last week on 13 July 2021.  The prosecutor was interrogating the general manager of the cram school.  The general manager explained how fearful the statement made her.

Now, I did demand a second opinion about that statement.

My first criminal court appearance was on 25 Sept 2019.  I submitted a grammatical proof to the court on 29 April 2020.  I mean, I'm an English teacher after all.

Finally in December 2020, the court receives a second opinion.  The second opinion was from a university in Tainan City, Taiwan, called Chang Jung Christian University (長榮大學) or CJCU.  Apparently they have a Department of Translation Studies there, which is supposed to be quite repeatable.

On 9 Dec 2020, Chang Jung Christian University (長榮大學) Department Of Translation Studies (翻譯學系) sent a letter to the court saying means "buy from me 1000 fliers for 10 USD". 

Remember, I'd written "I can buy 1000 fliers at the photocopy store for just 10USD", except I'd said only "10USD buys 1000 fliers", "buys me" since I'm the one paying the money to buy the fliers.

My Legal Aid lawyer told me about the CJCU translation in January 2021.  I complained to my Legal Aid lawyer that the university translation is wrong.  My lawyer did nothing.

Well, that's over-statement.  He did do something.  He contacted his friend in Florida and asked if I was correct that the translation is wrong.  He said his friend agreed with me.  And THEN the lawyer did nothing.

We had a pretrial on 25 March 2021.  My wife and I visited the lawyer's office on 20 March 2021.  My wife rarely gets really excited about something.  But about this, she was livid.  She was screaming in the house "How can they translate the statement like that?!  Are they translators or now?!"

Now, my wife is Taiwanese.  She didn't go to school to learn English.  She's just been practicing it with me for years and years.  And we talk about everything.  She knows me inside and out.  If she agrees that my statement doesn't mean what the translators say it means, then she can also explain why.

I was beside myself in June when I got the notice to attend the criminal trial on 13 July 2021. 

My wife suggested I get a third opinion about the translation.  She said she was willing to pay for it. 

Then I found an email address of the CJCU contact in the court letter from 9 Dec 2021.  I emailed Kai-Hui Chen (陳凱惠), the Assistant Manager (助理管理師) of the Department Of Translation Studies (翻譯學系).

On 21 June 2021, I offered a contract to CJCU.  I requested CJCU's translation services.

Kai-Hui Chen (陳凱惠) provided my information to professor Sally Wu (吳宜錚).  Sally Wu (吳宜錚) emailed me that afternoon.

The following day, Sally Wu (吳宜錚) clarified everything.  Sally Wu (吳宜錚) said that my statement "10USD buys 1000 fliers" means "10USD allows me to buy 1000 fliers".

AND THEN

Sally Wu (吳宜錚) confirmed that my statement doesn't mean what the cram school claims, nor what CJCU claimed in December 2020.

So I went back to Kai-Hui Chen (陳凱惠) and asked her who the original translator was.  Kai-Hui Chen (陳凱惠) replied, "Sally Wu (吳宜錚) was the translator in December".

I wasn't sure if Kai-Hui Chen (陳凱惠) understood my question.  So I asked again.

The second time I asked, Kai-Hui Chen (陳凱惠) answered "Yeah, it was Sally.  She finished in January."

So, I asked Sally Wu (吳宜錚) if she can kindly inform the court of her fuck-up so that I don't wind up with being wrongfully convicted of extortion over this nonsense.

Remember, I paid this woman about $50USD after she translated my statement on 22 June 2021.

Instead of helping me, Sally Wu (吳宜錚) tells me that she is so sorry about the unfavourable court ruling but that I didn't provide enough context.  Evidently she translated my statement incorrectly to me on 22 June 2021.

Context?  Was it my original statement or not?

Is the translator supposed to tell the original author that the original author didn't mean what the author says he meant?

So I write up crime proceedings against her about perjury, the whole part about giving a wrong translation to a court that can cause the court to wrongfully convict someone, etc.

Here's a link to the PDF that I submitted to the court AND to the prosecutors on 25 June 2021:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1TOmgIvbsQj353eh02k6P1fZavYVCRew5/view?usp=sharing

Now, in court on 13 July 2021, the prosecutors question the witness (Clare, general manager of the Kidsland school) as though the statement is true.

Today, 18 July 2021, the lawyer who isn't really my lawyer anymore, writes me that CJCU replied to the allegation of perjury.  Apparently the whole Department of Translation is in on this now:

The following is CJCU's latest response to the court's document regarding English translation.  The main meaning is: "after a comprehensive comparison of your context, both with threatening and intimidating meaning, so they thing the correct translation is '10USD buy 1000 fliers from me".

Here's a link to the 8 July 2021 CJCU letter.  The whole Department Of Translation Studies (翻譯學系) corrals behind their errant professor:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1EERrXjH4Bc7PMILaG869Ab_iR2Bsr256/view?usp=sharing

I DO know what I'm going to do next.  I'm going to write a request to the Criminal Court to investigate the translation on the basis of the fact that Sally Wu (吳宜錚) provided two conflicting translations.  A translator has no right to tell the author of a statement what the author's original meaning was. 

Furthermore, the "due criminal court process" surely cannot tolerate proceeding with a criminal trial until the meaning of the statement is resolved.  It would turn the whole Criminal Justice system in Taiwan into a complete joke... or... is that what's supposed to be happening? 

I even have a receipt!

Of the 1000 fliers and the payment to Sally Wu (吳宜錚)!

The receipts are in with the original email which contained the original statement, and the context after the receipts:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NVqBbfb3JXVHk89byCUZaPSUWwwU5Jxo/view?usp=sharing

What do I know, I'm allegedly Delusional.  Reference Friday's neat post where I literally proved that Taiwan's Ministry Of Justice is in blatant violation of it's own Constitution Article 13.  It's a solid proof, read it yourself (at the link, download the PDF under the date, I find that's easier to read than a website):

http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/07/cnpc0001.html

 

"Are you ready to help me save the world?"

It'd be only the CHRISTIAN thing to do.

====

#rene.guru

End of page.  Comment on the Main Page:

http://p1.rene.guru

Journal Of A Schizophrenic, with a twist.