www.MiracleU.org PAGE CLOSED |頁面關閉
_page0010 | updated 22 Aug 2021, by
Rene Helmerichs with Google Translate.
Previous
title: 以前的標題：
Questions to Legal Aid Foundation
(LAFQ) and TLAF Pages
Closure Notice: 關閉通知：
Taiwan's Legal Aid
Foundation demonstrably allows lawyers to be completely irresponsible, and
allows lawyers to state that defendants aren't cooperating with the lawyer's
wishes, in order to remove the lawyer from the cases (and not assign a new
lawyer). In short, the foundation requires
severely mentally ill individuals such as myself (I'm serious about that) to be
self-represented in a Chinese court knowing that I'm deaf, mute, and illiterate
in Chinese. (Note about the mental
illness: it's a perceptual disorder, not an issue of intelligence. Intellectually, I'm fine, I'm exactly as
smart as any lawyer since I completely understand that we all share exactly
only one eternal mind. Therefore, I
imagine that lawyers should cooperate with me, instead of expecting me to
blindly accept everything they say. But,
the lawyers clearly think otherwise and this organization clearly defends their
lawyers. So, the gloves are off.)
台灣法律援助基金會明文允許律師完全不負責任，並允許律師聲明被告不配合律師的意願，以將律師從案件中撤出（而不是指派新的律師）。簡而言之，該基金會要求像我這樣的重度精神病患者（我是認真的）在中國法庭上自我代表，知道我是聾啞人，中文文盲。（關於精神疾病的注意事項：這是一種知覺障礙，而不是智力問題。在智力上，我很好，我和任何律師一樣聰明，因為我完全明白我們都只有一個永恆的思想。因此，我想律師應該和我合作，而不是指望我盲目地接受他們所說的一切。但是，律師顯然不這麼認為，這個組織顯然為他們的律師辯護。所以，手套脫掉了。）
About
the allegation of lawyer corruption, please refer to "tlaw0002",
lawsuit against LAF Lawyer Scott Lin (林泓帆). "tlaw0002" is
listed in the TLAW Pages at:
關於律師腐敗的指控，請參見「tlaw0002」，針對LAF律師林宏帆的訴訟。「tlaw0002」列在TLAW頁面中：
http://p18.rene.guru
If they contact me to
repair the relationship, I'll begin a new page at http://p10.rene.guru
but, in the meantime, this version of Page 10 is done and permanent. You can click that link. If it leads to this page, then they haven't
contacted me yet.
如果他們聯繫我修復關係，我將在http://p10.rene.guru開始一個新頁面，但與此同時，此版本的第10頁已完成且永久有效。您可以單擊該鏈接。如果它指向這個頁面，那麼他們還沒有聯繫我。
https://www.laf.org.tw/en/index.php?action=contact
Question
12, 26 July 2021
回答您對LAF律師林宏帆（Scott）訴訟的問題
To answer your questions about the lawsuit against LAF lawyer Scott
(林泓帆)
這是訴訟的副本，PDF 格式：
This is a copy of the lawsuit, in PDF:
En/Ch
PDF: https://drive.google.com/file/d/19UfVFw1Neg2VA8W_Xl1Bu9r1QNVNyWER/view?usp=sharing
1、兩年的芝麻街凱仕蘭（Kidsland）教學合同是什麼時候開始的？
Q1. When did the two-year Kidsland
Sesame Street (芝麻街凱仕蘭) teaching contract begin?
A1: July 1st, 2017
A1：106年7月1日
2、凱仕蘭的經理們在僱用我之前是否知道我在加拿大度過了將近三年的監獄和精神病院？
Q2. Did Kidsland (凱仕蘭) managers know that I spent almost three years in prison and in
psychiatric incarceration in Canada
before they hired me?
A2: Yes
A2：是的
3、他們是否進行了犯罪記錄檢查？
3. Did they do a criminal record check?
A3:
No. I told them I will fail (not pass)
the check. So they told me not to do it.
A3：不。我告訴他們我會失敗（不會通過）檢查。所以他們告訴我不要這樣做。
4、你能證明嗎？
4. Can you prove it?
A4：Yes
A4：是的
PDF:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1vb59TuptmoRxA4B9gXIfGLQ_Ht3dtMox/view?usp=sharing
5、你什麼時候告訴他們的？
Q5. When did you tell them?
A5: My wife Lindsay (蕭帆琇) and I (Rene, 瑞內) told Teaching Department Manager
Denise (徐乙彤) and General Manager Clare
(江佩樺) on 20 May 2017.
A5：106年5月20日，我的妻子蕭帆琇和我（Rene，瑞內）告訴教學部經理徐乙彤和總經理江佩樺（克萊爾）。
6、我能證明經理們真的知道嗎？
Q6. Can I prove that the managers
really knew it?
A6: Yes, they really knew. The prosecutors also know. I have the meeting and subsequent phone conversations
audio-recorded in case they lied about it later.
A6：是的，他們真的知道。檢察官也知道。我對會議和隨後的電話交談進行了錄音，以防他們以後撒謊。
7、109年你上過民事法庭，是怎麼回事？
Q7. You went to Civil Court in 2018. What was the case about?
A7: I told LAF that Kidsland (凱仕蘭) managers tricked me. First they accepted my situation in Canada. But the situation requires a lot of
advertisement to fix. So they hired me
and they knew that I need advertisement, and I want advertisement, and I am
going to tell people that I was wrongly imprisoned in Canada. After a few months of teaching, the managers
told me not to tell anyone about my situation in Canada. That caused me a lot of mental stress. I had a mental breakdown on 20 Jan 2018. I didn't hit anyone or hurt anyone. It wasn't anything like that. I just started telling people about what
happened to me in Canada. Then the school said they fired me because I
didn't submit a criminal record check, and because I commited "bad
behaviour". The only "bad
behaviour" was telling clients about what happened to me in Canada. But I don't think that was bad. Actually, I believe the clients had a right
to know. And, the fact that I wasn't
allowed to complain that the school managers asked me to hide my past, I
believe that's a violation of R.O.C. Constitution Article 16.
A7：我告訴LAF，凱仕蘭的經理們欺騙了我。首先他們接受了我在加拿大的情況。但這種情況需要大量廣告才能解決。所以他們僱傭了我，他們知道我需要廣告，我想要廣告，我要告訴人們我在加拿大被錯誤地監禁。經過幾個月的教學，經理告訴我不要告訴任何人我在加拿大的情況。這給我帶來了很大的心理壓力。我在107年1月20日精神崩潰。我沒有打任何人或傷害任何人。它不是那樣的。我剛剛開始告訴人們我在加拿大發生的事情。然後學校說他們解雇了我，因為我沒有提交犯罪記錄檢查，並且因為我犯了“不良行為”。唯一的“不良行為”是告訴客戶我在加拿大發生的事情。但我不認為那是壞事。事實上，我相信客戶有知情權。而且，不允許我抱怨學校經理要求我隱瞞我的過去這一事實，我認為這違反了中華民國。憲法第16條。
8、凱仕蘭有沒有告訴台南法官羅鬱棣，他們從來不知道你的精神病入獄？
Q8. Did Kidsland (凱仕蘭) tell Tainan
judge Luo (羅郁棣) that they never knew about your
psychiatric imprisonment?
A8: Yes, they lied in court on 26 Nov
2018. And not a little lie. A major fabrication. Case file: 臺南區民事法院107年勞訴字第60號
A8：是的，他們於107年11月26日在法庭上撒謊。而且不是一點謊言。一個重大的製造。案卷：台南區民事法院107年勞訴字第60號
9、林宏帆律師知不知道你在加拿大坐牢，在精神病院待了快三年？
10. Did lawyer Scott (林泓帆) know that you were in prison in Canada, and spent almost three
years in mental hospitals?
A9: Yes.
A9：是的。
10、你能證明律師知道嗎？
Q10. Can you prove the lawyer knew?
A10: Yes. In court on 26 Nov 2018, I told the lawyer
and the judge that Kidsland (凱仕蘭) managers are lying. The judge didn't believe it, so the judge
prepared a follow-up court hearing to accept evidence. The follow-up hearing was on 24 Dec
2018. Lawyer Scott (林泓帆) represented me. It was his job to help me give the evidence
to the judge. I was not self-represented
on 26 Nov 2018 and I was not self-represented on 24 Dec 2018. It would be perjury if Scott (林泓帆) claims not to know. Additionally, I'd been talking about it right
from the start. That was also why he
focused his questions on 26 Nov 2018 about my Canadian psychiatric incarceration.
A10：是的。107年11月26日在法庭上，我告訴律師和法官凱仕蘭的管理人員在撒謊。法官不相信，於是法官準備了後續的庭審接受證據。後續聽證會於107年12月24日舉行，律師林宏帆代表我。他的工作是幫助我向法官提供證據。我在107年11月26日沒有自我辯護，我在107年12月24日沒有自我辯護。如果林宏帆聲稱不知道，那將是偽證。此外，我從一開始就一直在談論它。這也是為什麼他將問題集中在107年11月26日關於我在加拿大精神病院監禁的問題。
11、林宏帆是否於107年12月24日向法院提起訴訟？
Q11. Did Scott (林泓帆) petition the court on 24 Dec 2018?
A11: I don't think so. Scott (林泓帆) isn't very assertive. It was
all in Chinese.
A11：我不這麼認為。 林宏帆不是很自信。都是中文的。
12、如果真正的問題是作偽證，你為什麼要就心理評估提起訴訟？
Q12. Why did you file litigation about a mental
assessment if the real problem is the perjury?
A12: I awoke from a dream at 1 am on
23 July 2021. The dream showed me that
if I begin litigation about perjury, then the judge and LAF can help Scott (林泓帆), and the original problem
persists. So I thought about it, and I
realized that if I prove that Kidsland (凱仕蘭) denied me a mental assessment, then Scott (林泓帆) has no defence because a severely mentally ill person cannot be
expected to argue in court, and I have a history of severe mental illness. Since people now generally accept that I am
severely mentally ill, therefore, at the very least, according to the Mental
Health Act, I had a right to a mental assessment before the school stopped
providing Healthcare benefit. That's also
in Criminal Code Article 294, I believe.
A12：110年7月23日凌晨1點我從夢中醒來。夢告訴我，如果我開始做偽證訴訟，那麼法官和LAF可以幫助林泓帆，原來的問題仍然存在。所以我想了想，我意識到如果我證明凱仕蘭拒絕了我的心理評估，那麼林宏帆就沒有任何辯護了，因為一個嚴重的精神病患者不能指望在法庭上辯論，我有嚴重精神疾病史。由於現在人們普遍接受我患有嚴重的精神病，因此，至少，根據《心理健康法》，在學校停止提供醫療保健福利之前，我有權進行心理評估。我相信，這也在《刑法》第294條中。
13、你為什麼要起訴林宏帆？
Q13. Why are you suing Scott (林泓帆)?
A13: The lawyer didn't do his
job. The Civil Court judge ruled that
the school lawfully terminated the contract without accepting that the
contract's condition required me to advertise my Canadian mental history (since
a severely mentally ill person cannot be allowed to stay overnight with young
children in a hotel room during a school trip, and the school let me do that on
14 Aug 2017). Now the same Kidsland (凱仕蘭) managers believe they can lie in
Criminal Court and send me back to Canada (If I am convicted of extortion, the
crime is serious, so I will probably be deported after jail--the National
Immigration Agency told me that, two separate times.). The managers already convinced the judge once. And Scott (林泓帆) is representing me again, and he's still not doing his job! He told me I will probably lose the Criminal
lawsuit and go to jail. Scott (林泓帆) didn't submit my requests to have a
criminal investigation of the evidence.
So I asked LAF to give me a new lawyer, but LAF (the Legal Aid
Foundation) refused. LAF said Scott (林泓帆) didn't do anything wrong. So I need to prove that Scott (林泓帆) isn't doing his job. That's why I sued Scott (林泓帆).
Why should I go to jail just because a lawyer isn't doing his job?
A13：律師沒有做好他的工作。民事法庭法官裁定學校合法終止合同，但不接受合同條件要求我公佈我在加拿大的精神病史（因為嚴重精神病患者不能在學校旅行期間與年幼的孩子在酒店房間過夜，學校讓我在106年8月14日這樣做）。現在同樣的凱仕蘭經理認為他們可以在刑事法庭上撒謊，把我送回加拿大（如果我被定為敲詐勒索罪嚴重，所以我可能會在坐牢後被驅逐出境——移民局告訴我，兩個不同的時間。）。經理們已經說服了法官一次。而林宏帆又來代表我了，他的工作還沒有完成！他告訴我，我可能會在刑事訴訟中敗訴並進監獄。林宏帆沒有提交我對證據進行刑事調查的請求。所以我要求LAF給我一個新的律師，但LAF（法律援助基金會）拒絕了。LAF說林宏帆沒有做錯任何事。所以我需要證明林宏帆沒有做他的工作。這就是我起訴林宏帆的原因。為什麼我要因為律師不工作而入獄？
14、你討厭林宏帆嗎？
Q14. Do you hate Scott (林泓帆)?
A14: No, he's actually a nice
guy. Not many people can tolerate
me. I have a very strong mind. Scott (林泓帆) is one of the few people who are patient. But Scott (林泓帆) was criminally negligent, and I really need someone who will do an
honest job more than I need someone just to listen to me complain. We're trying to fix the problem, and not
watch it continue. Listening to me complain
about it isn't going to help us fix the problem. And I need money. Since LAF gave a lot of money to Scott (林泓帆) to represent me in two other Civil
lawsuits, and Scott (林泓帆) didn't submit adequate
evidence to the judge in both lawsuits.
It's unfair to other clients if Scott (林泓帆) pursues judicial friendships instead of client rights.
A14：不，他其實是個好人。沒有多少人能容忍我。我有一個非常堅強的頭腦。林宏帆是少數有耐心的人之一。但是林宏帆犯了刑事過失，我真的需要一個誠實的人，而不是一個聽我抱怨的人。我們正在努力解決問題，而不是眼睜睜地看著它繼續下去。聽我抱怨它不會幫助我們解決問題。而且我需要錢。由於LAF在另外兩起民事訴訟中給了林宏帆很多錢來代表我，林宏帆在兩起訴訟中都沒有向法官提交足夠的證據。林宏帆追求司法友誼而不追求委託人權利，對其他委託人不公平。
Question
11, 26 July 2021:
110年7月26日，問題11，LAF：在您強迫我繼續使用故意刑事疏忽的律師後，您是否會允許利益衝突？
26
July 2021, Question 11, LAF: are you going to allow the conflict of interest
after you forced me to keep using an intentionally criminally negligent lawyer?
PDF:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QIxjXEjPKaJ2AxrttPUfbw1NGe8M6fMe/view?usp=sharing
Folder
of Questions:
http://lafq.rene.guru
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/16Fe312mkOJKGVFQQA67mWmxDeqgmXbqs?usp=sharing
2021年7月15日至2021年8月6日的電子郵件提供了更多見解：
Email from 15 July 2021 to 6 Aug 2021 gives
more insight:
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/16ntIKN6zlcV-7fwIiBM4j9mOCickLb9q?usp=sharing
Next Page 11: http://p11.rene.guru
====
Upholding the Republic Of China
Constitution
LuciferChristForWorldPeace (at
that) gmail.com
#rene.guru | www.MiracleU.org | http://talk2dream.com
End
of page.
