Curtis W. Diggs Jr. vs 國立臺北護理健康大學: Court Decision Pages 17 - End

Curtis W. Diggs Jr. vs 國立臺北護理健康大學: Court Decision Pages 15 -16

Curtis W. Diggs Jr. vs 國立臺北護理健康大學: Court Decision Pages 13 -14

  A couple days ago I got the original court decision documents thanks to my friend. I'm still waiting for my boxes of belongings from Taiwan to be delivered to me and then I'll have my scanner to scan all the pages and post better images of the decision.

  Meanwhile, my friend is gradually typing up the court decision as well as some other docs in Word so I can get rough translations of them into English. I'm searching for some human help to get clearer and more accurate English translations to share with everyone. If you can help - ideally several people to translate one or two pages each as I know it is time-consuming - please contact me at my email: jugger3naut@live.com. It is to everyone's benefit if I can share all or most of the relevant documents here in English. For now, you see what I've been seeing for almost 4 years of this saga.

Curtis W. Diggs Jr. vs 國立臺北護理健康大學: Court Decision Pages 11 - 12

Curtis W. Diggs Jr. vs 國立臺北護理健康大學: Court Decision Pages 9 - 10

Curtis W. Diggs Jr. vs 國立臺北護理健康大學: Court Decision Pages 7 - 8

Curtis W. Diggs Jr. vs 國立臺北護理健康大學: Court Decision Pages 5 - 6

Curtis W. Diggs Jr. vs 國立臺北護理健康大學: Court Decision Pages 3 - 4

A Copy of the Court Decision...Finally!

  My friend in Taiwan finally got a copy of the court decision a few days ago after a verbal tussle with the Beitou District Police over whether or not she was authorized to pick up the document on my behalf from their office. Before I left Taiwan I had filed an official pleading with the court stating that I would be leaving Taiwan and my friend had my authorization to receive the court's decision.   

  Even after that, the court still could not manage to do things correctly - first sending the decision to the address where I no longer lived, and then not notifying the Beitou police that my friend had permission to receive the document. So much unprofessionalism among Taiwan's judicial, law enforcement (what an oxymoron!) and government officials.

  The court decision is 18 pages long, so I will post it gradually, a couple pages at a time over the next several days. It is a faxed copy that was scanned by my friend so it's a bit rough. Later when I get the original document I'll scan it myself and re-post the better images.

  For now I don't have much to say about the decision because I've only gotten a very general translation of some key points from my friend - the most key point being that the court ruled against me in my lawsuit on all points. When I can get a more detailed translation I'll be able to comment better on the judges' arguments, problems, etc. Another point my friend shared was that NOWHERE does the decision mention that "several witnesses saw me touch the accuser". It's either a fabrication of those who spread the decision to the media or just plain bad, inaccurate, sensationalized reporting by Taiwan's media.

  Here are the first two pages of the Taipei District Court's decision:

 

Recollections For the Court of the Events of June 4, 2007

  At the court hearing in April of 2009, just days before I moved to Thailand for a new job, the judge asked me and Alice Yang to each submit a report about what happened on June 4, 2007, at the National Taipei University of Science & Technology. He specified our reports should detail what, where, and the time of our activities before, during, and after the time of the alleged touch. I had already noted this information shortly after I first heard of Alice's false allegation while it was still fresh in my mind.

  Whereas my report was very detailed and supported by the photos, video and MRT Easy Card records, the accuser's report (according to my friend's translation from Chinese to English) was very light on relevant details and had no supporting evidence...basically just a shorter rehash of one of the several versions of her story that she told the court and the Gender Equity committee earlier.

  Here is my report:

Events of June 4, 2007

1. Approximately 9:15 a.m., I called Ms. Lin Liju, one of the NTCN staff in charge of NTCN’s outdoor booth at the activity, to tell her I wasn’t feeling well and I would not arrive at 1000 as scheduled. I told her I would be at the National Taipei University of Science & Technology (NTUST) about 1100.
2. I arrived at the exit of Chunghsiao-Hsinsheng MRT station at 10:58. (see Easy Card record attachment) and at the entrance of NTUST near 11:05. I called Ms. Lin Liju to ask where the nursing college (NTCN) booth was since I had never been to NTUST before. I arrived at the NTCN booth sometime between 11:05 and 11:10.
3. Sometime between 11:30 and 11:40 lunchboxes arrived at our booth and after I got mine I sat down near one of the other NTCN staff, Ms. Cherry, but by myself. Shortly after, Ms. Alice Yang, the accuser, came over to me and asked if she could eat lunch with me. I said okay. While I was eating lunch, she was very talkative and asking me what were my plans for 2008. Jokingly, I told her maybe I was going to get married. She was very curious about this topic and asked me who I was marrying and when. I told her I wasn’t sure because I had not yet met the woman I would marry but if I was lucky enough to find one maybe I’d get married. She asked me if I wanted to marry a Taiwanese woman and I said it didn’t matter if she were from Taiwan, the Philippines, Thailand, etc.  I said maybe I would marry, then divorce and marry again later. She tried to continue asking me questions but because it appeared she didn’t know I was joking, I told her I was just kidding and I wasn’t really planning on marrying so soon. Shortly after I said this our conversation stopped.

4. Sometime between 12 and 12:15 p.m. the NTCN president, Dr. Tsai, other NTCN administrators & staff and some other people I did not recognize walked near our booth and stopped. I went out of the booth and the president called me over and asked me what we were doing and then suggested I and the students be more active in distributing drinks and carrot cake to the people walking by and near our booth. So, I went back inside our booth and told Ms. Alice Yang - in the view of the president, Dr. Tsai, Ms. Cherry, et al – what the president said and immediately I, Alice and the other students started taking the drinks & cake out to people nearby.  I remember I took some cake & drink to one of the African exchange students who had just finished doing a Chinese traditional dance performance with other African exchange students at the stage near our booth. I talked to her a few minutes to find out where she was from and how they had learned that Chinese dance. Alice Yang also gave some drink & cake to one of the dancers.
5. Around 12:30 to 12:40 one of the NTCN Center for General Education staff, Ms. May Hsu, came by the NTCN booth and took digital photos & video (see attached CDs of photos & video, including times of photos & video contained in the file information) of staff, students and me working at the booth. The photos & video show Ms. Alice Yang smiling, talking, laughing with me and standing very close behind me. These photos and videos were taken AFTER the time (see Item #4) Alice accuses me of touching her.  During my time at the booth on June 4 I never touched any of the students or staff on their waist or behind – nobody – and at no time did anything unusual happen. Alice, nor any of the other students, never said anything that she was touched by anybody.
6. Very soon after the photos and video were taken, I walked to another building far from our booth to another NTCN booth inside the building. I talked to some of the students working at the booth and one of my English-teaching colleagues, Ms. Melody Yang. I took some photos with some students and a balloon nurse-figure (see attached photo files, including times of the photos included in the file information) at the booth, got my weight and height checked by some nursing students, got a free gift from them, then went to a nearby booth operated by NTUST students featuring cacti (a plant native to southwest America) and asked them to save one cactus I picked out for me because they would be giving the cacti as free gifts at 1:30. I asked my colleague Melody Yang to please take my cactus to NTCN and put it in my office because I had to leave NTUST at 1 p.m. to go to the Bei men post office before I went back to NTCN to get ready for my 3:30 class.
7. On my way out of the building, around 12:50, I saw some aboriginal dancers sitting in the auditorium and I stopped to talk to them a few minutes. I think they were studying in Keelung. They wanted to contact me, so I hurried back to the outside NTCN booth where my bag was to get my name card and hurried back to the auditorium to give the dancers my card.
8. About 1:05 p.m. I returned to the outside NTCN booth to pick up my bag and I left NTUST and went to the Chunghsiao-Hsinsheng MRT station, arriving at the platform around 1:12 and arriving at Taipei MRT station exit at 1:21. After going to the Bei men post office, I took the MRT to Shihpai MRT station, arriving there at the exit at 2:03 p.m. (see Easy Card record attachment). I walked to NTCN and had a class at 3:30.

Early Documentation of the Nursing University's Lies, Deception and Concealment

  The following document is the Gender Equity in Education committee's investigation report (dated August 6, 2007) following their interviews with me, the accuser Alice Yang, and 5 so-called "witnesses". In fact, only one of these witnesses (國立臺北護理健康大學) designated "A") testified to having been at the nursing university ( booth during the alleged touch. The others include the accuser's mentor who she first reported her allegation to, one of my Taiwanese colleagues at that time who claimed that I had been "overly friendly" to her and touched her on her hand once, and 2 others who were also not present at the booth.

  Amazingly, neither of the other 2 students nor the 2 nursing university staff (who I often worked with during my staff hours) who were at the booth before, during and after the alleged touch were included as witnesses by the investigation committee. They were also totally disregarded by the Taipei District Court. Instead, the three judges relied almost entirely on the Gender Equity committee's biased and incomplete investigation report, the committee's decision, and the words of the accuser, witness A, and the nursing university in court - without any evidence - as the basis of the court's decision. 

  Here is the report: Gender Equity Committee Sexual Harassment Investigation Report

The Email That Started This Nightmare & Illegally Exposed My Name

  Another of the chief culprits in this conspiracy and fraud is Dr. Shiow-luan Tsai (主任 蔡秀鸞 教授), a professor and dean of the nursing department at the National Taipei University of Nursing and Health Sciences (國立臺北護理健康大學). I had already been alerted by another of the Taiwanese faculty a few months earlier of Dr. Tsai's efforts to force me out of the school by the end of the 2007 academic year, but the professor assured me that the she and other faculty members had defeated Dr. Tsai's attempts and my job was safe. Well...it was until almost the end of the semester!
  This email includes a copy of Alice Yang's statement to her school mentor about what she alleged happened on June 4, 2007, and is the first of many versions of her story.

                                                         The Email

Documenting Changes in The Accuser's and Witness' Statements

  Here are some rough notes I prepared about the continual changes in testimony of Alice Yang and her friend the "witness" in advance of the September 2010 court hearing. I also submitted these to the judge on April 8 along with my Final Statement. I have never been able to present these, the photos or my Final Statement orally in court as a result of the judges' repeated refusal and slick maneuvering to ensure I would not be able to explain my evidence.

1.     Change the time of the alleged touch at least 3 times. Changed the position I stood, who I talked to, which hand I used to put around her waist, etc.

2.     Witness says in original statement she was shocked and surprised by seeing this, Alice said she felt uncomfortable yet didn’t say anything until later to Witness A. Witness A also said she and Alice talked that they should be more careful not to let strangers touch them. Yes, on July 7 have photos of her with strangers putting their arms around her waist and she around theirs. In court in June 2010, Witness A changed her story and said I talked directly to Alice and she saw that everything looked normal so she didn’t say anything at the time.

3.     In her statement to her NTCN mentor on June 6, 2007, Alice Yang said after I allegedly stretched my right arm around and put my right hand on her waist and then allegedly said “Alice I have a good idea. We can take these food out” that she immediately walked away from me and took cake and drinks out to people outside the NTCN booth. However, in her later statement to the investigation committee and court she said I had my hand around her waist for one minute before she walked away.

4.     Exact quote from transcript of July 6, 2007, interview by NTCN investigation committee: “…Alice went to the witness said ‘I didn’t feel quite comfortable,’ and then student replied ‘Did Curtis put his hand around your waist’ (revised by interrogator to ‘Did Curtis hold you?’) However, witness later changed her story to she was “sure” she saw me put my hand around Alice’s waist for one minute. She was not sure she saw me touch Alice, yet later she claims she was sure she saw me touch Alice.

5.    There is no validity to Alice’s claim of sexual harassment. It lacks any kind of common sense to say that out of nowhere, with no reason or motive or prior action, that suddenly I put my arm around her waist. Even if I had touched her, IT WOULD NOT qualify as sexual harassment. If I had touched her as she described, there are many things it could qualify as other than sexual harassment – carelessness, accident, innocent display of friendliness toward one of my former students, but NOT sexual harassment. There were no prior actions by me toward Alice, only by Alice toward me, we had a very normal student-teacher relationship and I had not even talked to Alice for over 3 months prior to the period near the June 4 activity.

My Final Statement to the Court

  Here is most of the content of my Final Statement to the court. It was originally ready to be presented both orally and in writing to the previous judge in September 2010, but he did not allow me the chance. 

  Because the new judge neglected to tell me to be prepared for oral debate at the final hearing on April 7, I did not have the Final Statement and new evidence with me to present. I ended up having to postpone my Taiwan departure that same evening in order to prepare this, another document and the photos you see again to submit to the court before leaving Taiwan. This delay caused me to overstay my visa by one day and upon my departure on April 8 I had to pay a fine plus in the future I must apply for a visa to enter Taiwan unless my appeal to the Ministry of the Interior is accepted.  
  A lot of unnecessary trouble caused by the callousness and unprofessional behavior of the previous attorney, the Legal Aid Foundation and the court.

                                            Final Statement to the Court 

1.         If I had really touched Alice Yang as alleged, I had a LEGAL and HUMAN RIGHT at the moment or soon after to know from her that she felt uncomfortable by something she thought I did, not 2 weeks later by telephone from the nursing college. If she thought she had really been touched by me, then I had a right to know so that I could have reasonable and proper opportunity to dispute and reject her claims and with many witnesses around also the chance to question them immediately to confirm the falsity of Alice Yang’s allegation…before everyone  was gone and my fair and rightful chance to clear this matter immediately was robbed by Alice and the nursing college’s plot to defame and damage me.

2.         By failing to speak to me or a third party at the time she alleges I touched her, she denied me my LEGAL and HUMAN RIGHTS to respond and object to her accusation in a timely manner that would have allowed me to clear the matter or to take reasonable measures to protect my innocence and rights by discussing the matter with Alice Yang and others present at the time and place of the alleged incident. But, because NO SUCH TOUCH actually happened, Alice Yang and her classmate instead waited at least 2 days to report this false accusation so that my chance to respond to and dispute such an accusation were severely diminished and compromised. By doing this, it allowed Alice, her classmate, and the nursing college to create their story, obscure the actual facts and events of that day, to prepare the “investigation” in such a way as to ensure the result they desired, before informing me of the accusation and after such time that it would be more difficult for me to defend the truth and myself. 

3.         Alice Yang conspired with Witness A, and perhaps others, to delay reporting this fraudulent accusation until after the activity was long over in order to severely diminish my opportunities to provide timely and unequivocal evidence to defend myself from this false allegation. There were many other witnesses present, plus video cameras and other means available from which I could immediately disprove any attempt by Alice to falsely accuse me of touching her.  This amounts to obstruction of justice. We were in a public, not private, place where there were countless potential witnesses (besides the ones set up by NTCN), video cameras, security cameras, digital cameras, etc that would have provided further evidence of my innocence had the Alice Yang or the witness spoken up at the event AND the nursing college not further obstructed justice. Alice Yang waited 2 days to report her false accusation. The only reason I knew about it one week later was because a sympathetic colleague had already heard about the accusation from others at NTCN and she felt I had no idea what was going on. NTCN obstructed justice by purposely avoiding my attempts to talk to the president and Dr. Tsai find out exactly what the accusation was AND by not notifying about the accusation until three weeks after it was reported. In addition, when I got the phone call from the counseling center asking me to meet with them and unnamed others they refused for over 5 minutes to tell me the purpose of the meeting. From the start of this whole sham the nursing college made every attempt to obstruct justice, including tampering with witnesses to prevent them from telling me or the investigation committee anything that supported my innocence.

4.         The college president and other administrators  purposely failed to acknowledge the existence of the accusation against me for 3 weeks from the time Alice Yang reported it, including avoiding my attempts to speak to them about the matter from the first time I heard about it on June 11. They were also part of the conspiracy to diminish my opportunities to fairly and properly defend myself from this false accusation while at the same time coordinating their unjust “investigation” so as to ensure it would result in the only conclusion they wanted – guilty – despite the weight of evidence that no such sexual harassment happened.

5.         In addition, I was told by one of my witnesses (an employee of the nursing college) that she was told by the college president not to discuss Alice Yang’s accusation with me and that all staff & faculty were directed by the president not to talk to me about the accusation. Employees caught talking to me about this were subject to blacklisting or possible termination if they were contract employees.

6.        The same employee also told me that a) she was approached by Alice Yang and Alice said to her that she believed the employee (Ms. Lin Liju) supported me because she worked with me. Later, when Ms. Lin was questioned by the investigation committee, she said after giving the members testimony favorable to my innocence they told her “you’re just saying that because you work with Curtis and you support him.” Both the committee members and the college president (and possibly Dr. Tsai) intimidated my witnesses (another was also an employee and good friend of Ms. Lin) and others to obstruct proof of my innocence – tampering with witnesses.

7.         As a human being, no matter a man or woman, I have the right to be informed if anyone thinks I did something to them that made them feel uncomfortable or more. Nothing from me occurred on that day or previously to lead to any conclusion that I intended to or did sexually harass Alice Yang. However, I have provided evidence and testimony that it was Alice Yang who made overtures to me by chat messages, by emails and by her actions on June 4 prior to the time of her accusation.

   What about my feelings? Nobody asked me or considered my feelings about Alice Yang and the false accusation that I touched her. For what reason(s) would I touch Alice Yang and sexually harass her, in front of hundreds of people all around us? Alice Yang, women, is not the only person who has feelings in this matter. She was just one of many students I taught at NTCN and I had no special friendship or interest in her and no reason to touch her.  In fact, I made it a point to avoid her whenever possible because of her overtures in her emails and chat messages and unnatural enthusiasm to talk to me after I arrived at the June 4 activity. As a student in my English class I had already observed some strange behavior in her and avoidance of her by classmates, so I already suspected something different and abnormal about her. The only reason I was even present at the activity and in the same area as Alice was because I was asked by NTCN to spend some time at their booth as a representative of the English group. 

Of Concealment, Deception and Ignoring the Evidence

  These photos, plus the video and my MRT travel records are tangible and consistent physical proof that there was no reasonable possibility for me to have put my arm around the accuser's waist - no matter before, during the time, or after the photos were taken. 
  Some of the crucial pieces of evidence the photos show are the time (contained in the file information by right clicking on the photo and clicking "Details" and on my watch); witnesses; my, the accuser and the witness' positions, and the area surrounding the nursing university booth. In addition, there were more photos and other video taken during the June 4 activity that were hidden away and prevented by certain parties from being revealed that would have further supported my innocence. 
  In essence, Alice Yang and the nursing university's false allegation of sexual harassment has always been predicated on concealment, deception, unsubstantiated hearsay and outright lies. What they have done to me is far more heinous and dangerous than anything I've been accused of by them. 
  The accuser, the nursing university (國立臺北護理健康大學), and the Gender Equity committee that handled the sham investigation have NEVER produced any photos, video, or other tangible evidence that supports the accuser's story or the witnesses hearsay testimony.  That the court would accept the accuser, the witness', and the nursing university's unsubstantiated lies over much more factual, tangible, and reasonable physical evidence shows the magnitude of prejudice, inability to judge facts from fiction, and even corruption widely known and prevalent in Taiwan's judiciary.

The Invisible "Touch" - Where Is It?

  Including this third photo of the June 4, 2007, activity nowhere can I be seen touching the accuser and you can also see how wide open the area is inside and around all sides of the nursing university (國立臺北護理健康大學) booth.  

  Where is this "phantom" hand that Alice Yang claims was stretched around her larger-than-average waist for one minute?

  Where is the look of shock and discomfort on her face? Where is the look of surprise on the witness' face she alleges she had when she saw this invisible touch?

  Why is it that neither of the other 2 students, neither of the 2 staff out of the photo, and none of the many people walking in front of, in back of, and to the sides of the booth saw anything inappropriate happen or the expressions of the accuser or the witness indicating something was wrong?

  How is it that out of all this, there is only one "witness" and she has changed the time of the alleged incident and the circumstances three times - all coinciding with the same changes made by Alice?

Coming Around Again

  So there is no confusion with any other innocent person unfortunate enough to have the English name Alice Yang, her Chinese name is 楊雅惠.

  Here is another photo from the June 4, 2007, exhibition at the National Taipei University of Science & Technology, with the accuser clearly standing quite closely behind me.

To Appeal Or Not To Appeal...Still A Question

  My Taiwanese friend still has not received the official decision - 13 days after decision day. 

  She called the court clerk on May 2 to find out what happened. The clerk said they sent the decision to my former address - despite the fact that on March 31 my friend went with me to the court building and we filed an official pleading telling the court to send the decision to my friend, at her address, because I would not be in Taiwan.

  It appears to be more gamesmanship by the court to hinder the chances I have to file an appeal. I have 30 days from the date on the official decision to file an appeal, and by sending it to my old address where I can't receive it they are burning up my 30 days.

  I'm still consulting with some people to decide whether or not to appeal, but before making a final decision I've got to know clearly what the court's decision says.

What Goes Around Comes Around...Starting...Now!

  Witness the face of the inhuman beast (3rd from left, next to me, holding the cake), the pathological liar, the sociopath known by her English name "Alice Yang". She wishes someone would touch her on her "super-size me" waist!

  This is one of a series of photos taken during the third (and last) time period she and the "witness" (standing to my left) claim I touched Alice on her waist. There is also a video taken during this time. 

  The first time period Alice alleged I touched her was before these photos were taken. After I submitted these photos and the video as evidence to the gender equity investigation committee, suddenly the time changed to much later in the afternoon...until I submitted Easy Card MRT records showing I had already left the technology university campus at least 1 hour before the new time she alleged.

And Another Two Things...

 Two places in particular that have intrigued me where the case decision appeared were on government websites. That's right - government websites!

  Why are stories about a case that is closed to the public appearing on government websites? Even more intriguing is the story that appeared on the government-funded Broadcasting Corporation of China website on April 28 was mysteriously gone on April 29 when I checked the link again. Why its hasty disappearance?!

  Another government website the story appears on is the Council of Taiwanese Chambers of Commerce in Vietnam. Now...why on earth would the CTCVN want or need to run a story about alleged sexual harassment at a university in Taiwan - a case not even open to the public? Both stories even have the audacity to publish my Chinese name - another blatant violation of Taiwan's confidentiality laws that are supposed to prohibit the revealing of either party's name in sexual harassment or sexual assault cases.

  Here's a cached copy of the story that disappeared from the BCC website (http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:MaRpXOwo29sJ:www.bcc.com.tw/news/newsview.asp%3Fcde%3D1469759+%E6%9F%AF%E8%B5%A4%E5%AD%90&cd=17&hl=en&ct=clnk&client=firefox-a&source=www.google.com):

台北護理學院先前傳出外籍老師對女學生性騷擾案，而這名美籍老師最後遭到學校解聘。但老師卻認為，被害女學生捏造事實，害他失去工作，因此提出求償。 法院傳喚當時在場的其他學生作證後，認定老師性騷擾女學生的可能性很高，學校解聘合理，因此駁回老師的訴訟。全案可再上訴。
(潘千詩報導)
判決書指出，美籍英文老師「柯赤子」， 原本在台北護理學院任教。3年多前，他被一名女學生指控，說他疑似在學校舉辦的博覽會上，摟住女學生的腰，並在女學生耳邊說悄悄話，涉及性騷擾。事情爆發 後，校方評估這名美籍教師不適任，因此不再續聘將他解雇。但老師卻認為，女學生當時沒有喊叫、也沒有報警，根本就是捏造事實。而校方還揭露案情，造成他名 譽損失，因此，他向女學生、校長、學校連帶求償1年薪資，還有10萬元的精神撫慰金，除此之外還要求登報道歉。
法院審理時，多名學生都表示，當時 確實看到老師的異常行為，法官因此採信證人說法，認為老師很可能有性騷擾女學生。至於在揭露案情的部分，法官指出，基於維護學生與校園的安全，校長在教師 評議委員會上揭露案情，本來就沒有違法，而校方做出解聘的決定，並沒有不合理。因此，法官最後駁回美籍教師的訴訟.

Here's the link to the story on the CTCVN website: http://www.ctcvn.org/show.aspx?&newsid=5094326&option=society

How Does A Case Not Open to the Public Become Widely Reported in Taiwan?

  After finding out the court decision was being reported in Taiwan’s media even before I had gotten it, I went to the Judicial Yuan Laws and Regulations website (http://jirs.judicial.gov.tw/FJUD/) where information about cases can be accessed. Here is what it showed for the court’s decision in my case:

臺灣台北地方法院 裁判書 -- 民事類

【裁判字號】 97,訴,2631 【裁判日期】 1000421 【裁判案由】 侵權行為損害賠償 【裁判全文】  【97,訴,2631】經程式自動判定為依法不得公開之案件，如非屬此類案件，   請至本院[司法信箱]投書，本院將儘速辦理。    Rough English translation: The program automatically determined to be the case  according to law shall not be disclosed, if not to be such a case, go to the Court [of Justice mail], write a letter, the Court will be handle as soon as possible.

  Details about the case and the decision are not available to the public according the Judicial Yuan site, so how did select – and incorrect – information about it end up appearing in several of Taiwan’s media? None of those media contacted me for any information, and several times over the years I have contacted them with updates and expressing my willingness to discuss the facts.  Absolutely NO balance, impartiality, or effort on their part to do even a sliver of good investigative, factual reporting. It’s been very clear throughout this ordeal that both the government and the media in Taiwan have a very pronounced anti-foreigner bias.

  Think about in your own countries what happens when a foreigner reports some kind of crime, abuse, or violation against them. How do lawyers, the courts, human rights groups, and the media treat their cases? What have you seen happen in Taiwan with other foreigners besides myself?

News Flash! Court Decision Leaked to Taiwan's Press With Inaccurate Information

  April 21 was “decision day” in my civil lawsuit against the National Taipei University of Nursing and Health Sciences (國立臺北護理健康大學). I haven't yet gotten the Taipei District Court's official decision, but apparently the plaintiffs have already taken it upon themselves to distribute their own "press releases" to Taiwan media with select and incorrect information skewed to suit their publicity objectives.

  The China Post, in possibly another sorry example of how certain of Taiwan's media are for sale to anyone willing to pay for media coverage, on April 29 carried a poorly-written story (with some glaring inaccuracies) about the court's decision in my civil lawsuit . I wrote a comment about the story on early Friday morning, including recommending to the paper that they contact me to get their facts straight, but until now the comment has not appeared on their website.

   Over the past more than 3 years, I've written editorials, letters to the editor, and posted comments on related stories on The China Post website and almost none of them have ever made it to print and none have appeared in the paper edition either.

   Quite disturbing indeed when a newspaper stifles news and comments that apparently don't fit their particular world, political or editorial views – or aren’t paid for. It is sad indeed if true that The China Post is among those publications in Taiwan that belongs to the "pay for news publication" system that has developed into yet another black mark on the island’s so-called “free press” and “democracy” in recent years. 
  The most glaring error in their story is the part about "several witnesses...". In fact, 5 witnesses saw nothing happen during any of the ever-changing times the accuser claims she was "touched on the waist". Only one classmate of the accuser claims she saw something happen - also changing the time, place and circumstances multiple times. No proof she was even where claims she was at the time she said she was there, and absolutely NO EVIDENCE ever produced by the nursing university that the accuser was touched, let alone by me.
  Adding to the school's manipulation of the case, the nursing university-controlled gender equity committee excluded the testimony of all 5 witnesses that was favorable to me in their investigation and report! The Taipei district court also ignored this significant fact explained in the legal briefs of my former attorneys. 

  You can read the China Post story here:  Court rejects teacher's claim of lost reputation
  Here are the comments I submitted to the paper's website soon after reading the article: 

"I am the American teacher featured in this poorly written and inaccurate story.
As one example of your inaccurate information, there were not "several" witnesses who saw me touch anyone. Instead, there were 5 witnesses who saw NOTHING happen and 1 so-called 'witness' who changed the time and place multiple times in a perjurous attempt to help the school and the accuser.
If you want to get your facts straight and write a real, well-written story, please contact me at jugger3naut@live.com"

  Here are stories about the decision in the Chinese-language press:

http://news.chinatimes.com/society/130503/132011042800984.html   
http://news.chinatimes.com/realtime/110105/112011042800983.html 
http://news.pchome.com.tw/society/nownews/20110428/index-13039762900178862002.html
http://news.msn.com.tw/news2150633.aspx 
http://tw.news.yahoo.com/article/url/d/a/110428/1/2qlve.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
http://www.ctcvn.org/show.aspx?&newsid=5094326&option=society
http://dailynews.sina.com/gb/tw/twlocal/bcc/20110427/23402407064.html

  If any of you find other stories about the decision or any aspect of this case, please send the links to me at my live.com email address and I'll post them.