The story of how the mother-daughter duo Teng Hsiang-mei (
Their ability to persist in claiming that the late Koo had fathered Chang over the past few months despite failing to establish that Chang was a blood relative in two court-supervised DNA tests only makes it more so.
Last week, during the final court hearing before a verdict is handed down on fraud and extortion charges, Teng suddenly and dramatically burst into tears and admitted that Chang is not Koo's daughter.
Teng made headline news once again, and sparked heated discussion over whether the pair should be able to negotiate a plea bargain.
The problem is that there is little admission of guilt here. In the absence of such an admission, how can there be a plea bargain? The key to whether Teng and Chang are guilty as charged is whether they knew that Koo and Chang were not related when they demanded hush money from Koo.
Teng did not say that she knew Chang's father was someone other than Koo during the prolonged period when she demanded and received money.
Her chest pounding and teary performance in court was at most a very reluctant and belated admission of what a series of accurate laboratory tests have shown to be the case. The truth of the matter is that the court would have reached the very same conclusion in the absence of her admission.
As for Chang, she was even less inclined to admit any wrongdoing. She said that she did not realize she was not Koo's daughter until last week when her mother admitted the fact. The degree of faith Chang demonstrated in her mother's words despite the contradictory DNA tests has been impressive.
This mother and daughter team originally said that the DNA results had been fabricated. At the time, some media outlets insisted the two were the subject of "judicial persecution" and influence-peddling by the Koo family.
It has parallels with the cries of judicial and political persecution by pan-blue politicians whenever they run afoul of the law.
On the other hand, it should also not be forgotten that when the news about Teng's claim that Koo had fathered Chang first broke, the media engaged in some wild speculation -- which in retrospect was seriously irresponsible reporting.
One reason cited by some members of the media for believing that Chang was Koo's daughter was that the two "looked very much alike." Photos of Koo, Chang and even Koo's other children were published in several daily newspapers and their facial features compared.
That is what some reporters call "investigative journalism."
The story of Teng and Chang is an important lesson for many in this society, including -- but definitely not limited to -- the media. However, as usual, it is highly unlikely that the media will learn anything from the case.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with