On Friday, former New Party lawmaker Elmer Feng (
The verdict handed down by the Shihlin District Court has been welcomed as belated justice by the Taiwan International Workers Association (TIWA) which had helped the rape victim report the crime committed against her. In response, Feng held a press conference claiming not only his innocence but also that the verdict is the result of "political persecution."
Feng alleges that the strongest piece of evidence proving his innocence is a signed statement and supposed video confession of the victim both made in the presence of an attorney after she returned to Philippines. It supposedly overturns the statements that she gave earlier to the police in Taiwan, and she allegedly denies the rape ever took place.
While Feng may be able to fool some members of the public with this song and dance about the alleged confessions of his victim, anyone who is slightly familiar with the law knows that the legal inadmissibility of this kind of hearsay is due entirely to its lack of credibility and trustworthiness. Article 159 of the Criminal Litigation Code specifically excludes the admissibility of hearsay as evidence. The underlying logic is that statements given in court are more credible. The written statement and video confession of Feng's are classic examples of hearsay. The serious lack of credibility and trustworthiness of these two pieces of "evidence" explains precisely why hearsay is, as a matter of principal, excluded from a court of law.
First and foremost, Feng gave NT$800,000 (US$24,928) in settlement money to his victim before she abruptly left Taiwan. Then there is the hard-to-miss gap social status and power between Feng and the victim. Feng is not only a former legislator, but he is known for his active and enthusiastic participation in cross-strait affairs.
The victim -- as a foreign laborer -- belongs to the most marginalized group of Taiwan's foreign community. It is reasonable to believe that the victim felt intimidated by Feng's influence and social status and therefore was pressured into overturning her prior statement. As wisely pointed out by the court, the signed statement and video confession could not explain why the semen found in the victim matched Feng's DNA.
The only question then left was whether the hearsay falls within the five exceptions listed in Article 159. Unfortunately for Feng, since these exceptions deal mostly with statements given outside of court but during an investigation by individuals such as a judge, prosecutor, the police, or other members of the judicial and legal branches, they are inapplicable to the so-called "evidence" raised by Feng. On the other hand, the statements given by the victim to the police did qualify for admission. It is hard to believe that Feng's attorney would be incompetent to the point of not understanding the simple legal principles outlined above.
Under the circumstances, why does Feng continue to protest the inadmissibility of the "evidence" in question? Obviously most of the public may not understand the law too well. Crying political persecution may win Feng a measure of public support and bolster his chances of a political comeback.
On Monday, the day before Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) departed on her visit to China, the party released a promotional video titled “Only with peace can we ‘lie flat’” to highlight its desire to have peace across the Taiwan Strait. However, its use of the expression “lie flat” (tang ping, 躺平) drew sarcastic comments, with critics saying it sounded as if the party was “bowing down” to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Amid the controversy over the opposition parties blocking proposed defense budgets, Cheng departed for China after receiving an invitation from the CCP, with a meeting with
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) is leading a delegation to China through Sunday. She is expected to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing tomorrow. That date coincides with the anniversary of the signing of the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), which marked a cornerstone of Taiwan-US relations. Staging their meeting on this date makes it clear that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) intends to challenge the US and demonstrate its “authority” over Taiwan. Since the US severed official diplomatic relations with Taiwan in 1979, it has relied on the TRA as a legal basis for all
Taiwan ranks second globally in terms of share of population with a higher-education degree, with about 60 percent of Taiwanese holding a post-secondary or graduate degree, a survey by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development showed. The findings are consistent with Ministry of the Interior data, which showed that as of the end of last year, 10.602 million Taiwanese had completed post-secondary education or higher. Among them, the number of women with graduate degrees was 786,000, an increase of 48.1 percent over the past decade and a faster rate of growth than among men. A highly educated population brings clear advantages.
In the opening remarks of her meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in the Great Hall of the People in Beijing on Friday, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) framed her visit as a historic occasion. In his own remarks, Xi had also emphasized the history of the relationship between the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Where they differed was that Cheng’s account, while flawed by its omissions, at least partially corresponded to reality. The meeting was certainly historic, albeit not in the way that Cheng and Xi were signaling, and not from the perspective
RSS