Upholding the Republic Of
International Trade Laws require
accurate interpretation. MiracleU starts on Page 1.
擁護中華民國憲法：國際貿易法需要準確解釋，MiracleU從第1頁開始。
http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/06/page0012.html
Page 12. "Illusions are untrue."
~A Course In Miracles
www.MiracleU.org TPRO Pages
_page0012 | updated 4 Sept 2021, by
Rene Helmerichs
This page: http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/06/page0012.html
lists Criminal
Investigations related to the story at http://p1.rene.guru
Notice to prosecutors investigating this case: everything I submit to
you is completely public. This is the
only assurance that I have that you will do your job because, if you do not
adequately investigate this matter and truly sentence these judges to, at the
very least, the total amount of time that I have had to be in jail over false
accusations, then I will continue to pursue this matter until the entirely
reputation of the Taiwan government is destroyed. And that's not something either of us want! So I am politely asking you to do your job
and stop treating your friends with favouritism. Stop making me receive your punishments on
account of your personal friendships.
What this Defendant has done violates the very foundation of law! Help me fix it, or get out of the way, but
don't stop me or you'll find yourself on their side against me. Thank you.
+13 more individual submissions of Criminal Code Article 169 offences
@KLSS (should happen this month)
tpro0013_draft
Criminal Code Articles 125, 134+296, 339 @TPRO
The Defendant is a public prosecutor who accepted public money to
uphold the law but, instead of investigating allegations of serious criminal
fraud at
The Defendant prosecutor knew the cram school managers committed
fraud because the prosecutor listened to the cram school managers confirm
understanding that the teacher is not lawfully allowed to be a teacher
according to Taiwan's laws.
Specifically, the teacher is a "Severe Patient" (「嚴重病人」) according to Item 4 of Article 3 of
the Mental Health Act 《精神衛生法》. 《兒童及少年福利與權益保障法》 第81條之1條和第49條第15款 doesn't permit a "Severe Patient" (「嚴重病人」) to be a responsible person in
schools with respect to the development of a child's mind. The cram school managers had to conceal the
teacher's illegitimate teaching qualifications from the clients. The clients paid tuition to the school under
the false pretence. The school managers
deliberately deceived the clients in order to maximize the school's revenue.
Over the course of a two-year criminal trial to follow-up the
accusations of the cram school managers.
The Defendant never investigated the cram school managers. The teacher protested continually, but the
Defendant refused to investigate.
Finally, on 24 Aug 2021, the Defendant succeed in closing the case. The Defendant caused the teacher to be
convicted of intimidation and defamation for trying to save the reputation of
the cram school. The teacher had
politely tried to spare his friend's reputation, because the teacher does care
about the managers, and the managers and teacher were friends. But the Defendant refused to consider that
the teacher had an benevolent motive at all.
Instead, the Defendant acted with extreme prejudice and only malfeasance
in office. The Defendant caused the
teacher to be sentenced to imprisonment without allowing the teacher to defend
himself, without assisting the teacher to receive a public defender or lawyer,
without allowing the teacher to cross-examine witnesses favourable to the
teacher's defense, and without allowing the teacher to have any motions or
appeals receive fair hearing at all.
This constitutes several offences, among which are offences of
Criminal Code Article 125 "Malfeasance In Office", Article 296
"Offences against Freedom" and Article 339 "Criminal
Fraud". The Defendants accepted
payment of services under false pretences.
Additionally, according to Criminal Code Article 134, the sentences of
Article 296 and 339-4 should be increased up to one-half, because the Defendant
is a public servant.
Related to:
Nothing else YET.
tpro0012_draft
Criminal Code Articles 134+339, @LEE, CNPC... fraud, involve mental
health act
The Defendant (one psychiatrist) receives public money with the
contract to uphold the Constitution Of The Republic Of China. The Defendant unconstitutionally denied the
patient a court-requested assessment of mental health on the grounds that the
patient refused to stop believing that the patient's source of thinking
originates in a non-material Spirit.
When the patient attempted to inform the doctor of the patient's right
to religious freedom, the doctor clarified that a different doctor would
perform the actual assessment of thinking, but that hospital protocol required
patient to believe that thinking originates in the physical body and not an
eternal sentience such as the Christian "God" or Muslim
"Allah". In this case, the
patient was also a "Severe Patient" (「嚴重病人」) as defined in Item 4 of Article 3 of the Mental Health Act 《精神衛生法》.
Nine psychiatrists previously stated that the patient absolutely
requires medication to maintain a mentally healthy state, and, in case of
relapse, should not stop taking medication.
Article 1 of the Mental Health Act 《精神衛生法》 guarantees the patient's right to mental health, yet the Defendants
intentionally denied the patient the right to an assessment of mental health on
the sole grounds that the patient wouldn't stop believing in God as the source
of health. This constitutes an offence
of Criminal Code Article 339-4, Aggravated Fraud, because there are at least
three Defendants, and with a sentence increased up to one-half, because the
Defendant is also a public servant.
Furthermore, this is currently prevalent all over
Defendant (Three): 1‧Psychiatrist 李俊宏（LEE Chun-Hung）、2‧Dean 吳文正（WU Wen-Zheng）、3‧林研究助理（06_279_5019分機1554，04670@cnpc.mohw.gov.tw），http://p15.rene.guru
tlaw0004, www.MiracleU.work：http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/08/tlaw0004.html
yuan0003, Investigate CNPC, PDF: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1GWXxfYdff2OyLngU3TETubjHxH4kzRK3/view?usp=sharing
FYI 20210531_transcript:https://drive.google.com/file/d/1qwn6QL_1opYhkMnz5JCWhi1aivTeWldM/view?usp=sharing
tpro0011_draft
Criminal Code Articles 134+169, 339-4 @ZHOU about mental assessment
The Defendant receives public money.
The Defendant (three judges) had a legal contract to assist a
"Severe Patient" (「嚴重病人」) (me), but they did not
help me to ensure that the Constitution Article 13 right of religious freedom
is upheld during the mental assessment. That
is, I'm a "Severe Patient" according to Item 4 of Article 3 of the Mental
Health Act 《精神衛生法》. The Defendant did not allow me to have an
assessment of mental health. The
Defendant false claimed that I didn't cooperate during the assessment. Therefore, the Defendant received public
funds under false pretences, and in directly opposition of the intention of the
public funding. Namely, public funds are
given to ensure that the rights of the public are upheld, and not
violated. This constitutes an offence of
Criminal Code Article 339-4, aggravated fraud because the Defendants accepted
payment of services under false pretences and at least three people are
involved. Additionally, the sentence
should be increased up to one-half, because the Defendant is also a public
servant.
Defendant (Three): 1‧Judge 周宛瑩（ZHOU Wan-Ying）、2‧Judge 蕭雅毓（XIAO Ya-Yu）、3‧Judge 李俊彬（LEE Jun-Bin），http://p23.rene.guru
Relates to:
yuan0003, Investigate CNPC, PDF: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1GWXxfYdff2OyLngU3TETubjHxH4kzRK3/view?usp=sharing
yuan0006, 13 July 2021 Missing Statements, PDF: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1qyEkFhd-iLnfZsV73ZorWzW9GT01tv_o/view?usp=sharing
tpro0003, Courtroom Interpretation: http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/07/tlaw0003.html
tpro0010_draft
Criminal Code Articles 134+339-4 @ZHOU about courtroom interpretation
The Defendant is three judges who receive public money to uphold the
law, yet they intentionally violated Article 99 of the "Code Of Criminal
Procedure" (《刑事訴訟法》) when they required a
foreigner who is deaf, dumb and illiterate with respect to Chinese to pay a
private interpreter to receive a translation of the spoken statements of the
Criminal trial of 13 July 2021. The
Defendant specifically denied the foreigner the use of the court interpreter on
28 July 2021. The Defendant wouldn't
allow the foreigner to receive a printed English version of the Chinese
indictment which the court interpreter had prepared. The Defendant also stopped the court
interpreter from reading the English translation of the indictment to the
foreigner so that the foreigner (the Defendant in the Criminal proceedings) did
not receive a copy of the accusations in a language that the English-speaking
foreigner understands. Thereby did the
Defendant also contravene Item 1 of Article 95 of the "Code Of Criminal
Procedure" (《刑事訴訟法》). The Defendant receives public money to uphold
the law, and the law does not allow judges to leave a person completely
defenceless without any ability to communicate!
This constitutes several offences, among which is the offence of
Criminal Code Article 339-4 "Aggravated Fraud". The Criminal Fraud is aggravated because the
Defendant accepted payment of services under false pretences and at least three
people are involved. Additionally,
according to Criminal Code Article 134, the sentences of Article 339-4 should
be increased up to one-half, because the Defendant is a public servant.
Relates to:
yuan0005, Ability to Verify Statements, PDF: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rwpuErjKmVzTVsh9Avz3xEEoCpVM3_ky/view?usp=sharing
yuan0006, 13 July 2021 Missing Statements, PDF: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1qyEkFhd-iLnfZsV73ZorWzW9GT01tv_o/view?usp=sharing
tlaw0003, Courtroom Interpretation: http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/07/tlaw0003.html
tpro0009_draft
Criminal Code Articles 128, 134+296, 339-4 @ZHOU about lawyer
The Defendant is three judges who receive public money to uphold the
law, yet they intentionally violated Item 5 of Article 31 of the "Code Of
Criminal Procedure" (《刑事訴訟法》) when the Defendant did
not appoint a public defender 【案號：108年度易字第1170號】. Rene (瑞內) was the Defendant of the Criminal Proceedings which had three trial
dates: 13 July 2021, 28 July 2021, and 11 Aug 2021. On 13 July 2021, the Defendant read 瑞內 the three rights stipulated in
Article 95 of the "Code Of Criminal Procedure" (《刑事訴訟法》).
瑞內 specifically notified the
Defendant that 瑞內 requires the assistance of
a lawyer or public defender. On 28 July
2021, contrary to Item 1 of Article 95, the Defendant did not read 瑞內 the three rights stipulated in
Article 95. Also on 28 July 2021, 瑞內's Legal Aid Foundation lawyer
terminated the relationship. On 28 July
2021, 瑞內 lost his legal
council. 瑞內 refused to begin new courtroom proceedings without a lawyer present.
On 11 Aug 2021, the third day of the
trial, the Defendant again contravened Item 1 of Article 95 of the "Code
Of Criminal Procedure" (《刑事訴訟法》) because the Defendant did
not inform 瑞內 of the three rights
stipulated in Items 2 to 4. The
Defendant required 瑞內 cross-examine the
prosecutor's witness without a lawyer or public defender, and in a language
which 瑞內 does not understand. On 11 Aug 2021, 瑞內 protested against the extreme fraudulence of the Defendants. 瑞內 left the courtroom. But the Defendant insisted to break the law
even more! The Defendant is well aware
that 瑞內 is deaf, mute, and
illiterate with respect to Chinese language, and that 瑞內 is a low-income wage earner who sternly requested the assistance of
a lawyer, yet on 24 Aug 2021, the Defendant ruled that 瑞內 is guilty of all accusations.
瑞內 never received right of
Article 96 of the "Code Of Criminal Procedure" (《刑事訴訟法》), the right to give an
explanation. Instead, the Defendant
didn't allow 瑞內 to have a lawyer, didn't
allow 瑞內 to give any explanation
whatsoever, didn't allow 瑞內 to defend himself against
the accusations, and decided that 瑞內 is guilty.
This constitutes several offences, among which are offences of
Criminal Code Article 128 "Malfeasance In Office", Article 296 "Offences
against Freedom" and Article 339-4 "Aggravated Fraud". The Criminal Fraud is aggravated because the
Defendants accepted payment of services under false pretences and at least
three people are involved. Additionally,
according to Criminal Code Article 134, the sentences of Article 296 and 339-4 should
be increased up to one-half, because the Defendant is a public servant.
Defendant (Three): 1‧Judge 周宛瑩（ZHOU Wan-Ying）、2‧Judge 蕭雅毓（XIAO Ya-Yu）、3‧Judge 李俊彬（LEE Jun-Bin），http://p23.rene.guru
Relates to:
yuan0007, Dismiss Case, PDF: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1p53rkP2MTMK299s_pqpLTq9k0f7t5Wk_/view?usp=sharing
yuan0004, Disqualify Judges, PDF: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1sNRgZZ98vzH57yvwy2jO-Qu3lJGSIZi0/view?usp=sharing
tlaw0005, Criminal Retrial: http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/08/tlaw0005.html
tpro0008_draftt
Criminal Code Articles 339-4 @KLSS
The Defendants hired a teacher knowing the teacher is a "Severe
Patient", therein is an implied agreement to ensure the teacher can
restore his reputation and not remain a "Severe Patient" (「嚴重病人」).
The agreement is stipulated in 《勞動基準法》第1、5及71條 because we all must adhere to the law, and 《兒童及少年福利與權益保障法》 第81條之1條和第49條第15款 doesn't permit a
"Severe Patient" (「嚴重病人」) to be a responsible
person in schools with respect to the development of a child's mind. 「嚴重病人」 is defined in Item 4 of
Article 3 of Taiwan's Mental Health Act 《精神衛生法》. The Defendant received phone
calls just hours after the teacher began an international petition to restore
his reputation. The Defendants required
the teacher not to disclose the teacher's past to anyone attending the Defendant's
place of business. In an ensuing
Defendant (Three): 1‧General Manager 江佩樺（CHIANG Clare）、2‧Teaching Dept. Manager 徐乙彤（XU Denise）、3‧ESL Prog. Manager 黃姿瑜（HUANG Stacy），http://p7.rene.guru
Related to:
EVERYTHING. This is the start
of everything.
tpro0007 at
Criminal Code 339-4 Aggravated Fraud @TLAF @SCOT
Procuratorate case number, 案號：
The Defendant is a legal professional who knowingly violated the
client's rights, continually over three years.
Public money is exchanged under false pretences. This constitutes an offence of Criminal Code Article
339-4, aggravated fraud because at least three people are involved.
Tracking: http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/08/tpro0007.html
Defendant (at least three): ？‧Two wouldn't give their
names、3‧Lawyer 林泓帆（LIN Scott）
Begun 31 Aug 2021, PDF: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lgDzF3cnIyZxJ4ayDhqkS7UOe6BI2UE7/view?usp=sharing
Relates to Civil litigation:
tlaw0002, No Assessment Damages: http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/07/tlaw0002.html
(I feel like I have to revisit this or stick onto this one to impress
its seriousness)
tpro0006 at
Criminal Code 339-4 Aggravated Fraud @CJCU
Procuratorate case number, 案號：
The Defendant (a translation department) took the right of ownership
of the meaning of English statements when the Defendant submitted false
translations to court. Since the Tainan
District Court and I paid the Defendants in two separate contracts, public and
private money was exchanged under false pretences. This constitutes an offence of Criminal Code
Article 339-4, aggravated fraud because the entire English translation
department is involved.
Tracking: http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/08/tpro0006.html
Defendant (Fourteen): 1‧Manager 陳凱惠（CHEN Kai-Hui），2‧Principal 李泳龍（LEE Alex）、3‧‧Dept Dean 藍月素（LAN Yu-Su）、4‧Prof 董大暉（DONG Da-Hui）、5‧Prof熊彬杉（HSIUNG Pin-Shan）、6‧Prof李盈瑩（LEE Ying-Ying）、7‧Prof 陳孟琳（CHEN Meng-Lin）、8‧Prof 劉康怡（LIU Kang-Yi）、9‧Prof 吳宜錚（WU Sally）、10‧Prof LEE Marsh Steven（馬強）、11‧Prof 高煥麗（KAO Huan-Li）、12‧Prof 陳亮秀（CHEN Liang-Hsiu）、13‧Prof 陳采體（CHEN Tsai-Ti）、14‧Prof 邱東龍（CHIU Andrew）
Begun 31 Aug 2021, PDF: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1kJBXNhbZfYz3kUSfwC8R5F4w804yGHoU/view?usp=sharing
Relates to litigation:
tlaw0001, Correction Assistance: http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/07/tlaw0001.html
tpro0002, Crime Code 168 Perjury: http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/06/tpro0002.html
tpro0005 at
Criminal Code 169 False Accusations @KLSS
Procuratorate case number, 案號：
The Defendant (three senior managers of a large cram school) gave
knowingly false testimony in
Tracking: http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/08/tpro0005.html
Defendant (Three): 1‧General Manager 江佩樺（CHIANG Clare）、2‧Teaching Dept. Manager 徐乙彤（XU Denise）、3‧ESL Prog. Manager 黃姿瑜（HUANG Stacy），http://p7.rene.guru
Begun 20 Aug 2021, PDF: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1m9K37jGWNPy4utVUGR_mgsm0Z0AmuXXJ/view?usp=sharing
Relates to:
tlaw0006, Civil Retrial: http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/08/tlaw0006.html
tlaw0005, Criminal Retrial: http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/08/tlaw0005.html
tpro0001, Crime Code 168 Perjury: http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/06/tpro0001.html
tpro0004, Crime Code 294 Abandonment: http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/07/tpro0004.html
tpro0004 at
Criminal Code 294 Abandonment @KLSS
Procuratorate case number, 案號：
The Defendant (three senior managers of a large cram school) abandoned
the teacher when the Defendant prevented the teacher (me) from receiving an
assessment of mental health. The
Defendant knew the teacher is a "Severe Patient" (「嚴重病人」).
「嚴重病人」 is defined in Item 4 of
Article 3 of Taiwan's Mental Health Act 《精神衛生法》. 《兒童及少年福利與權益保障法》 第81條之1條和第49條第15款 doesn't permit a
"Severe Patient" (「嚴重病人」) to be a responsible
person in schools with respect to the development of a child's mind. An assessment of mental health was
obligatory. The Defendant made the agreement
on 23 Jan 2018. In court, the Defendant
claimed to terminate the Health Insurance and the employment of the teacher on
25 Jan 2018. This constitutes an offence
of Criminal Code Article 294, abandonment, because they had a duty to support a
helpless person and actively prevented a knowingly mentally ill person from
receiving an obligatory assessment of mental health.
Tracking: http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/08/tpro0004.html
Defendant (Three): 1‧General Manager 江佩樺（CHIANG Clare）、2‧Teaching Dept. Manager 徐乙彤（XU Denise）、3‧ESL Prog. Manager 黃姿瑜（HUANG Stacy），http://p7.rene.guru
Begun 20 Aug 2021, PDF: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1m8SdwrfvGRnGOWTScKtBA7AdFT2VT-Pb/view?usp=sharing
Relates to:
Civil litigation upcoming
tlaw0006, Civil Retrial: http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/08/tlaw0006.html
tlaw0005, Criminal Retrial: http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/08/tlaw0005.html
tpro0001, Crime Code 168 Perjury: http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/06/tpro0001.html
tpro0005, Crime Code 169 False Accusations: http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/08/tpro0005.html
tpro0003 at
Criminal Code 294 Abandonment @ZHOU @CNPC
Procuratorate case number, 案號：
About: The Defendant (three judges and a psychiatrist) had a legal
contract to assist a "Severe Patient" (「嚴重病人」) (me), but they did not provide assistance necessary for the
patient's survival. That is, I'm a
"Severe Patient" according to Item 4 of Article 3 of the Mental
Health Act 《精神衛生法》. The Defendant did not allow me to have an
assessment of mental health and thereby causing me to remain depended on my
wife (because nine psychiatrists previously asserted that the patient cannot
function independently without medication).
This constitutes an offence of Criminal Code Article 294, Criminal Abandonment,
because the Defendant had a duty to support a helpless person.
Flipside: The Defendant had a legal contract to help me uphold the
law, but they did not help me to ensure that the Constitution Article 13 right
of religious freedom is upheld during the mental assessment. In the first case it was abandonment, in the
second it is fraud. I'll submit an
investigation of aggravated fraud in the near future.
Tracking: http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/08/tpro0003.html
Defendant (Four): 1‧Judge 周宛瑩（ZHOU Wan-Ying）、2‧Judge 蕭雅毓（XIAO Ya-Yu）、3‧Judge 李俊彬（LEE Jun-Bin），http://p23.rene.guru、4‧Psychiatrist 李俊宏（LEE Chun-Hung），http://p15.rene.guru
Begun 16 Aug 2021, PDF: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ni3693ok8KSxgnbU96ZKiEvcls--AjmF/view?usp=sharing
Relates to:
tlaw0004, www.MiracleU.work：http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/08/tlaw0004.html
yuan0003, Investigate CNPC, PDF: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1GWXxfYdff2OyLngU3TETubjHxH4kzRK3/view?usp=sharing
FYI 20210531_transcript:https://drive.google.com/file/d/1qwn6QL_1opYhkMnz5JCWhi1aivTeWldM/view?usp=sharing
tpro0002 at
Criminal Code 168 Perjury @CJCU
Procuratorate case number, 案號：
About: The Defendant submitted false translations to the Tainan
District Court on 9 December 2020, throughout December 2020 and January 2021,
and again on 8 July 2021, with the intention to cause me to receive criminal
punishment, and which did occur on 24 Aug 2021.
This constitutes an offence of Criminal Code Article 168, Perjury. It's related to tpro0006, investigation
requests of Articles 169 False Accusation, 294 Abandonment, and 339-4
Aggravated Fraud.
Tracking: http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/06/tpro0002.html
Defendant (One): 1‧Prof 吳宜錚（WU Sally），http://p13.rene.guru
Begun 25 June 2021, PDF: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1TOmgIvbsQj353eh02k6P1fZavYVCRew5/view?usp=sharing
Relates to:
tlaw0001, Correction Assistance: http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/07/tlaw0001.html
tpro0006, Crime Code 339 Fraud: http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/08/tpro0006.html
FYI Sally: http://sally.talk2dream.com
tpro0001 at
Criminal Code 168 Perjury @KLSS
Procuratorate case number, 案號：
About: Cram school managers lied in Civil court on 26 Nov 2018. They told the judge they never knew about my
three years of psychiatric incarceration in
Tracking: http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/06/tpro0001.html
Defendant (Three): 1‧General Manager 江佩樺（CHIANG Clare）、2‧Teaching Dept. Manager 徐乙彤（XU Denise）、3‧ESL Prog. Manager 黃姿瑜（HUANG Stacy），http://p7.rene.guru
Begun 7 June 2021, PDF: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1vb59TuptmoRxA4B9gXIfGLQ_Ht3dtMox/view?usp=sharing
Relates to:
tlaw0006, Civil Retrial: http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/08/tlaw0006.html
tlaw0005, Criminal Retrial: http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/08/tlaw0005.html
tpro0004, Crime Code 294 Abandonment: http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/07/tpro0004.html
tpro0005, Crime Code 169 False Accusations: http://reneguru.blogspot.com/2021/08/tpro0005.html
00 at
There were over a dozen separate complaints in 2018 and 2019. They were made at multiple courts in
Most early filings were against Kidsland, some were against
None were heard. However,
since the foundation of all of these complaints is an argument about the legal
definition of the word "mind", which originated in Canada, there is
no way to end the argument in Taiwan except with agreement to revisit the
argument in Canada.
With a fully public record on the internet, we're going to find out
whether the
Next Page 13: http://p13.rene.guru
====
Upholding the Republic Of
www.MiracleU.org
| www.MiracleU.work | http://talk2dream.com
End
of page.
