No Evidence, Motive or Credibility Needed! All You Need Is a A 'Witness'

  One of the most vexing aspects of this judicial ordeal has been the court's reluctance or inability to rely on appropriate investigation, hard evidence and some common sense when hearing this case. The court has been fixated on the nursing college having one "witness" who claims to have seen me touch the accuser, ignoring all the contradictory physical and documentary evidence that shows there was very little to no chance that I could have or would have touched her.

  In addition, the accuser, witness and nursing college have conveniently changed various aspects of their testimony more than 3 times after I presented evidence refuting their previous claims. Apparently, in Taiwan courts the judge will allow certain parties to repeatedly alter the time, place, position, etc in order to favor one side and/or hinder the other. 

  When I asked my attorney about this situation in my case he candidly replied that "the judge doesn't think the time, place or position (of the accuser, myself and the witness) are important...just the witness says she saw me touch the accuser."  Apparently, nor are the numerous other items of evidence - photos, video, and time records - I've presented in support of my innocence important either.

  Here are some examples of this serious problem unfairly hindering my case:

• The accuser and NTCN first said the time of the alleged touch was about 12 p.m. when I was interrogated by the investigation committee on July 6, 2007. After I presented video and photo evidence showing everything between the accuser and I was normal and we were talking between 12:30 and 12:37 p.m., the accuser and NTCN changed the time to between 2 and 3 p.m at the district court hearing on November 25, 2008.
• Next, when I presented evidence from my Easy Card record that showed I had left National Taipei University of Science and Technology near 1 p.m., then the accuser and NTCN changed the time again, this time to between 12:30 and 12:40 p.m in their oral debate for the court on March 26, 2009.
• The accuser’s first statement to NTCN about her accusation, on June 6, 2007, she claimed that I came into the booth area from the front, stood close to her on her left side, and whispered something in her ear while touching her on the waist with my right hand for just a few seconds, then she immediately walked out to give cakes and drinks to guests.
• Just a few weeks later, her story to the Gender Equity Committee investigators changed to I touched her for one minute before she walked away. The alleged witness had a different story: She said I put my hand around the accuser’s waist for one minute while my head was turned the other direction talking to someone else. The accuser also changed her statement about what I said to her – the first time on June 6 she said I told her “Alice, I have a good idea. We can take these food out,” but at the November 25, 2008, hearing she changed her statement and said I said “The activity is almost finished, please take the cake out to guests,” also meaning it was a much later time than 12 p.m. – closer to the 2 to 3 p.m. time she claimed I touched her in the same testimony.
• Then, on the witness stand at the court hearing on August 9, 2010, the witness story changed again, this time she claimed that I was standing on the accuser’s right side, I reached around and touched her waist with my left hand for one minute while talking to the accuser. The witness claimed she was standing behind us when she allegedly saw this.
• In addition, the accuser and the nursing college have never established any motive, reason or intention for me to touch the accuser. They simply just claim that out of nowhere, suddenly, I put my hand around the waist of someone who I had no contact with for many months, someone who as a former student of mine showed signs of mental illness in my classes and I was also cautious about because of her attempts to email and chat with me in an unusually friendly way. In fact, more than once while I was behind inside the NTCN booth area it was the accuser who initiated conversation with me, including asking to sit next to me and talk while I was eating lunch by myself. I had no reason or motive to touch the accuser, and there were always at least three people inside the booth and hundreds of people walking all around the area at all times who would have seen anything happening if I had really touched anyone.