Dear Ombudsman Mr Wang Chien-Shien:
Your letter sent on May 16, 2013 had been received today. The Judicial Yuan shall be impeached, because the libel criminal court had convicted a witness thirty years ago of libel today, using the same facts very witness testified in court as the convicted evidence.
Ms Liao Yu-Wen was Mr Liao Chen-Han's daughter because Mr Liao raped Ms Chiu Shu-Chen in 1983 to have the daughter. The Hong Kong Women and Children Protecting Organization and governmental officer in 1983 came to Taiwan to assist the twelve years old Ms Chiu Shu-Chen with her infant to sue Mr Liao Chen-Han a rape case to make the infant Liao Yu-Wen registered to be a Hong-Kong born of United Kingdom nationalist, with the required information of her mother and father's name. The police and district law courts were investigating the adolescent gang rape case of victim Ms Huang and the eleven years old victim Ms Chiu Shu-Chen of underage raped case, the criminal court was to summon the twelve years old underage privy Mr David Chang, me, to be present in court to testify the rape case and the gang rape case. But privy David Chang had a United Nations Child Abuse Account to refuse the court sommon by the proxy custodian as privy David Chang was underage. Therefore the law court was to summon underage privy David Chang's mother Mrs Wu Yu-Shing to present in court as the proxy of underage Mr David Chang, through her served public elementary school teachers and pricipal's office to require Mrs Wu to present in court. The privy David Chang was underage and not yet matured to be with capability to participate in the gang rape of victim Ms Huang and the rape case of 11 years old underage victim Ms Chiu Shu-Chen raped by Mr Liao Chen-han. For this the United Nations Children Protection Account had filed a testifying procedure proving it was not yet potent for the underage privy Mr David Chang and to clarify that it was not yet matured enough to be logically legal or proper to be alleged as the rape case or gang rape suspect, and that the underage child Mr David Chang in 1983 was to be summoned by the law court as the witness, not as the suspect to Ms Chiu Shu-Chen's rape case against Mr Liao Chen-han.
Therefore, as to the Case No. 101 Yi 2318 Libel case with the legal consisting element void, that Ms Liao Yu-Wen was Mr Liao Chen-han's daughter for sure to consider that 1983 Ms Chiu Shu-Chen sued against Mr Liao Chen-Han for a rape case, it was Mr Liao Chen-Han to rape Ms Chiu Shu-Chen to be pregnant to have their daughter Ms Liao Yu-Wen, and thirty years ago of the same jurisdiction to summon the twelve years old underage privy Mr David Chang as witness but the witness privy was underage to have his mother to be proxy to present in court. For this context, the libel court of 2012 New Taipei District Court Case No. 101 Yi 2318 Libel case, was to be violating civil rights to make the witness convicted, using the same facts of 1983 rape case testified in court to let the summoned witness testified but indicted and convicted, with the same evidence testified for the rape case thirty years ago to convict him a custodial for one year sentence.
http://chaokai60.blogspot.tw/2013/05/20130521.html
留言列表
