He actually had more than Adobe cs on his pc’s. Who pressured the judge?
The court of public opinion?
Was that case even in the news back then?
It was already discussed elsewhere on forumosa in connection with this case.
Prosecutors and media with agendas against brown foreigners. Who knew?
But, the plaintiffs were 3 us companies, no?
A little recap, using a few posts that I consider pertinent:
[quote=“maoman”]Today I heard three witnesses speak. The first witness was brought forth in handcuffs - he’s currently in jail serving time for another, unrelated offence. He was vague and rebuked by the judge for giving contradictory statements. He finally expressed in exasperation that he really didn’t remember the events of that night very clearly and didn’t want to be “in the middle of this”. The second witness, the alleged driver, was a slouching 20-something year old, with ripped jeans hanging halfway down his ass and long-ish Japanese pop star-style disheveled hair. He mumbled his way unconvincingly through his testimony, only to be rebuked by the judge to “get his story straight”. [/quote] forumosa.com/taiwan/viewtopi … 3#p1252503
[quote=“kitkat”]I went down today, and quite frankly the case by the state was hole-y beyond belief. The highlight of which was probably the point where the defence pointed out that one of the cctv shots submitted as ‘evidence’ of what was purportedly Mr Dean’s car at the point where the KTV driver claimed to have disembarked prior to the accident was not only clearly a non-datestamped digital camera photo, but also the car was in fact a Toyota, not a Mercedes…
There was also another great non-stamped ‘CCTV’ shot. In this one the CCTV camera (of which there was a separate shot showing the standard angled, well above head height set-up) appeared to have developed an amazing knack of dropping down to around the height of your average person and taking a perpendicular snap of the KTV driver, again supposedly just after the disembarkation on his walk back to the KTV, yet handlily standing stock still in the middle of the sidewalk looking directly at the ‘CCTV’. He may as well have made a peace sign while he was at it, it was so obviously posed. [/quote] forumosa.com/taiwan/viewtopi … 5#p1259325
[quote=“hansioux”] . . . the actual driver’s face cannot be seen on the footage.
. . . the driver’s face can’t be seen. . . .
. . . the driver’s face couldn’t be seen in the footage. . . .
If Zain Dean’s friend was telling the truth about the exchange between him and the KTV manager, then it would appear the KTV manager had a change of mind later about the driver’s identity.[/quote] forumosa.com/taiwan/viewtopi … 4#p1497764
[quote=“I”][quote=“hansioux”]
From the original document and the corresponding translation.
更難信證人卓俊呈、姬文宇、林瑋俊有何干冒偽證重責，僅為掩飾被告林克穎及其辯護人所指「某一代客停車人員」過失致死罪行可能。
Also, it was unlikely the other witnesses would submit false testimonies, “just to protect one substitute driver” as implied by the defendant and his attorney, risking the crime of perjury which may lead to 7 years imprisonment.[/quote]
Coming from a court, the text above is somewhat surprising.
Here is an English translation of Civil Code Article 188:
[quote]The employer shall be jointly liable to make compensation for any injury which the employee has wrongfully caused to the rights of another in the performance of his duties. However, the employer is not liable for the injury if he has exercised reasonable care in the selection of the employee, and in the supervision of the performance of his duties, or if the injury would have been occasioned notwithstanding the exercise of such reasonable care.
If compensation cannot be obtained according to the provision of the preceding paragraph, the court may, on the application of the injured person, take the financial conditions of the employer and the injured person into consideration, and order the employer to compensate for a part or the whole of the injury.
The employer who has made compensation as specified in the preceding paragraph may claim for reimbursement against the employee committed the wrongful act.[/quote]
–Civil Code of the Republic of China, Part (or in another version, Book) II, Obligations[/quote] forumosa.com/taiwan/viewtopi … 7#p1515987
As to the issue of whether Mr. Dean was driving the Mercedes when it hit Mr. Huang, my opinion is that there is a reasonable doubt.
Your opinion is exactly that, an opinion.
The case and the conduct of it was reviewed by a Scottish judge, and he found nothing amiss, and even agreed with the conclusions reached by the Taiwan judge.
If you want the opinion of a forumosan who was formerly called to the bar in the UK, then I suggest you read this:
[quote=“Omniloquacious”]If the times reported here are correct, it goes very strongly against Dean’s account of events. It says that the camera footage shows the victim on his motorbike appearing in Zhongxiao E. Rd. Section 4 at 5:04 AM, followed one minute later by a speeding Mercedes E320, presumed to be Dean’s, which struck and killed the victim two minutes later at 5:07.
After that, we have the film of Dean’s car entering the parking basement of his apartment building at 5:07 (impossible to reconcile with the accident having occurred at exactly the same time more than 3 km away, so one of these times must be awry; since the accident was reported at 5:06, we can reasonably assume that the times shown on the filmed sightings of the victim and the black Mercedes were slightly inaccurate, fast by one or two minutes), and of Dean entering the lift/elevator to go up to his flat/apartment at 5:14.
If the clock on the camera at the entrance to the building car park is wrong, that gives us just 7 minutes (or 9 minutes if we assume that the Zhongxiao E. Rd. Sec. 4 camera times were a couple of minutes fast) from the time of the accident to the time of Dean’s getting into the lift. Is it possible that, in just 7-9 minutes, he could have come to from a drunken stupor (long enough after the occurrence of the crash to be blissfully unaware it had happened), assess the situation of the driver and their whereabouts, make his decision about driving himself the rest of the way home, convey his wish for the driver to pull over and get out, and after the driver has done so (which wouldn’t be likely to happen in just a matter of seconds), move into the driving seat, drive the last 3 or so km to his apartment building, park the car, get out, lock the car, get to the lift, call it and get into it? And all of this with the slowed-down movement of someone so drunk he could hardly walk unaided (he himself has said that someone had to support his arm when he went to his car to start the fateful journey).
It strikes me as extremely unlikely, if not downright impossible. If the times on the films are anything but wildly inaccurate, it is hard to reach any other conclusion but that Dean did indeed eject the driver from his car before the accident, during the more than 15 minutes (from 4:50 to 5:06 or 5:07) that it took them to drive the 3+ km from the girlie bar to the crash point, rather than during the 3+ km between the crash point and his home.
Since this conclusion is supported by witness and video evidence, versus Dean having no witness or video evidence to rebut it, it seems entirely reasonable to me that he should have been convicted, and that the verdict cannot be impugned on any convincing grounds.
One other thing: Although there is no extradition agreement between the UK and Taiwan, Section 194 of the UK’s Extradition Act 2003 provides for the negotiation of a special arrangement for extradition of an individual with states with which no other extradition provisions exist. Therefore, it is quite reasonable for the authorities here to expect to be able to secure Dean’s extradition under the provisions of this section. If they set about it with sufficient competence, I should think they ought to have a good chance of success, given the gravity of the offences for which Dean has been convicted, the lack of any strong public policy argument as to why he should not be returned, and the exacerbating circumstances surrounding his flight from Taiwan, especially his admission that he stole a British passport and used it to commit a serious offence of identity fraud. If the powers-that-be decide against indicting him for these offences in the UK, at least they should make sure that he’s sent back to Taiwan to answer for his crimes here.
I would be a very, very worried man if I were in Mr. Dean’s shoes.[/quote]
[quote=“Ermintrude”]It was already discussed elsewhere on forumosa in connection with this case.
Prosecutors and media with agendas against brown foreigners. Who knew?[/quote]
But the copyright infringement case never made it into the media? He did a runner in order to avoid paying or go to jail, and then returned under another name. Even that did not make it into the news. After all, software piracy is a crime here, however not really newsworthy.
It was only when he later killed someone that he got any mentioning anywhere in the news.
That means that your conspiracy between media and the prosecutors kind of look… loony. Media did not give a rat’s backside about the first case until they reeled him in for the manslaughter one.
Because they appear obnoxious and I can’t understand why you are so involved - even to the point of reading and translating court transcripts.
So you get some kind of vindictive pleasure, by your own admission, in proving you are right? That’s a very sick way of thinking, Mr. He. And I may add here that you are not rubbing anything into my face.
[quote]2. I like to see justice being served, and look forward to change my signature to “Welcome back Zain”[/quote].
So do I. But there are far greater things to be chasing than this case, which is very, very small in the scheme of things here in Taiwan. Plus, the case was a shambles.
I will let it be known that Ioathe the legal system here in Taiwan. It consists of liars and cheats who hold a position of office and responsibility. If a prosecutor or judge told me the sky was blue I would run outside just to check.
Nice assumption, but you are wrong. I have never met the guy.
…what, like many recent court cases where people have been released because of flasified evidence, incomplete evidence or because of corruption here on the rock? The courts can’t be trusted, and public confidence in them is very, very low.
Are you going to tell me that their decision is not, at least in part, politically motivated? 2 tiny countries striving for or vying to maintain independence, slapping each other on the back in mutual recognition of each other? Come on.
Why not? You’re an excellent target who appears to have an extremely unhealthy obsession.
Are you telling me that a UK judge was under political pressure in a case with little consequence for Scotland?
Calling all Brits, is the UK legal system corrupt because Ermintrude says so?!?
Regarding to what I derive of pleasure, then the pleasure I will see is to see a convicted murderer in the prison cell he belongs to, now read Omni’s post I quoted earlier, he is a former UK barrister, and as far as I know, he’s not corrupt.
Copyright law is nasty and vindictive. You only have to go onto tech dirt to see what is going on these days. Ironic, seeing as the major players (Microsoft/Apple/Adobe) have all plagiarized the work of countless individuals and companies.
I have no qualms in admitting I have an illegal copy of CS5. My original copy was somehow corrupted, their customer service is shit and the problem was never resolved. A USB from a friend and I have never looked back. Go on. Sue me.
I don’t know anything about the UK’s legal system.
That’s fine. Except he is not a murderer, and you saying that he is, reinforces in my view that you seem to have a very, very unhealthy obsession with this case and with Mr. Dean. The act of murder requires some foresight and some planning. Drink driving and killing somebody does not constitute murder.
There are 100’s of murderers in Taiwan who have not been caught or have not been given justice. Why don’t you concentrate on some of those?
But the Taiwan courts are, and even you can not argue against that as it has been proven time and again.
Copyright law is nasty and vindictive. You only have to go onto tech dirt to see what is going on these days. Ironic, seeing as the major players (Microsoft/Apple/Adobe) have all plagiarized the work of countless individuals and companies.
I have no qualms in admitting I have an illegal copy of CS5. My original copy was somehow corrupted, their customer service is shit and the problem was never resolved. A USB from a friend and I have never looked back. Go on. Sue me.[/quote]
Please PM me your contact details so I can forward them to Adobe. 
Seriously, if you are a foreigner in China where they will throw everything at you if you get into trouble with a local, you really are running a risk.
My outlook recently broke down on my NB PC and I was headed abroad. My email provider told me that it was not their problem. I emailed Microsoft Taiwan and complained, Microsoft did a remote session within one hour and rescued my working holiday. No complaints about paying. Adobe - if you pester them long enough, they will help.
I don’t know anything about the UK’s legal system.
That’s fine. Except he is not a murderer, and you saying that he is, reinforces in my view that you seem to have a very, very unhealthy obsession with this case and with Mr. Dean. The act of murder requires some foresight and some planning. Drink driving and killing somebody does not constitute murder.
There are 100’s of murderers in Taiwan who have not been caught or have not been given justice. Why don’t you concentrate on some of those?
But the Taiwan courts are, and even you can not argue against that as it has been proven time and again.[/quote]
OK, killer, someone got killed. Improper choice of words.
If Zain had been able to raise any reasonable doubt regarding the corruption of the Taiwan court in the UK court, he would be free. He did not need to prove that the Taiwan court was corrupt, he needed to probe that there was a risk of interference from police/politicians/gangsters what have you not.
He was unable to do so, and all the evidence pointed against him.
Some Brits here must be able to educate Bernadette, I have always thought that the UK legal system ranked as one of the best in the world.
OK. I’ll call it quits now.
Thank you, Mr. He.
[quote=“Bernadette”]OK. I’ll call it quits now.
Thank you, Mr. He.[/quote]
You jumped the shark when you claimed that the Scottish legal system was corrupt as well.
My understanding was that he did indeed pay back then, and thus I have no idea what he could have avoided by “doing a runner”. But that’s not any kind of important point any more, anyway.
When media is claiming lots of things (some of which turn out untrue), and people on Forumosa are discussing in detail (with even the accused chiming in) about such a case, I believe simple curiosity about what actually happened and which reports/comments seem untrue might lead someone to read/translate the available primary sources on the process.
Thanks a lot, this satisfies my curiosity. So no selling of counterfeit / pirated software packages, but commercially using them. Done by all Taiwanese companies using Autodesk products that I know, but not excusable by this: If you make money using some software, pay for it. Taiwan could use some more convictions for this kind of stuff 
[quote=“Mr He”]If you want the opinion of a forumosan who was formerly called to the bar in the UK, then I suggest you read this:
[quote=“Omniloquacious”]If the times reported here are correct, it goes very strongly against Dean’s account of events. It says that the camera footage shows the victim on his motorbike appearing in Zhongxiao E. Rd. Section 4 at 5:04 AM, followed one minute later by a speeding Mercedes E320, presumed to be Dean’s, which struck and killed the victim two minutes later at 5:07.
After that, we have the film of Dean’s car entering the parking basement of his apartment building at 5:07 (impossible to reconcile with the accident having occurred at exactly the same time more than 3 km away, so one of these times must be awry; since the accident was reported at 5:06, we can reasonably assume that the times shown on the filmed sightings of the victim and the black Mercedes were slightly inaccurate, fast by one or two minutes), and of Dean entering the lift/elevator to go up to his flat/apartment at 5:14.
If the clock on the camera at the entrance to the building car park is wrong, that gives us just 7 minutes (or 9 minutes if we assume that the Zhongxiao E. Rd. Sec. 4 camera times were a couple of minutes fast) from the time of the accident to the time of Dean’s getting into the lift. Is it possible that, in just 7-9 minutes, he could have come to from a drunken stupor (long enough after the occurrence of the crash to be blissfully unaware it had happened), assess the situation of the driver and their whereabouts, make his decision about driving himself the rest of the way home, convey his wish for the driver to pull over and get out, and after the driver has done so (which wouldn’t be likely to happen in just a matter of seconds), move into the driving seat, drive the last 3 or so km to his apartment building, park the car, get out, lock the car, get to the lift, call it and get into it? And all of this with the slowed-down movement of someone so drunk he could hardly walk unaided (he himself has said that someone had to support his arm when he went to his car to start the fateful journey).
It strikes me as extremely unlikely, if not downright impossible. If the times on the films are anything but wildly inaccurate, it is hard to reach any other conclusion but that Dean did indeed eject the driver from his car before the accident, during the more than 15 minutes (from 4:50 to 5:06 or 5:07) that it took them to drive the 3+ km from the girlie bar to the crash point, rather than during the 3+ km between the crash point and his home.
Since this conclusion is supported by witness and video evidence, versus Dean having no witness or video evidence to rebut it, it seems entirely reasonable to me that he should have been convicted, and that the verdict cannot be impugned on any convincing grounds.
One other thing: Although there is no extradition agreement between the UK and Taiwan, Section 194 of the UK’s Extradition Act 2003 provides for the negotiation of a special arrangement for extradition of an individual with states with which no other extradition provisions exist. Therefore, it is quite reasonable for the authorities here to expect to be able to secure Dean’s extradition under the provisions of this section. If they set about it with sufficient competence, I should think they ought to have a good chance of success, given the gravity of the offences for which Dean has been convicted, the lack of any strong public policy argument as to why he should not be returned, and the exacerbating circumstances surrounding his flight from Taiwan, especially his admission that he stole a British passport and used it to commit a serious offence of identity fraud. If the powers-that-be decide against indicting him for these offences in the UK, at least they should make sure that he’s sent back to Taiwan to answer for his crimes here.
I would be a very, very worried man if I were in Mr. Dean’s shoes.[/quote][/quote]
When you referred to that Omniloquacious post on March 5 of this year, I responded with the following:
[quote][quote=“Mr He”]I know what nailed it for me:
http://flob.me/p1498653[/quote]
And yet: forumosa.com/taiwan/viewtopi … 5#p1498665
I’ve heard that rumor, too, but even if it’s true, I don’t think you should hold Omni accountable for his past. Perhaps he was led astray. Nobody’s perfect, and he seems to me to be a person of excellent character. So even if Omni has some lawyering in his past, I think he’s done a fine job of reforming himself since then.[/quote]
forumosa.com/taiwan/viewtopi … 9#p1586159
No, I said there may well be political sides which persuaded the outcome, which may have worked within the interpretation of the law.
But the law interpreting was done by a judge, no?
What you are saying is that the Scottish Judge got directives on a friendly and unofficial basis telling him what to mean, no? IE political interference, no?
You are weaving around like there is no tomorrow. The judge either judged based on his understanding of the merits of the case, or he judged based from what the politica sides told him would be within the law.
The latter would be a major government scandal in Scotland if true, you are here talking about both the judge and the “political sides” getting into some very deep shit. I take that Zain is important for you, but likely not for Scotland. Note, this is something the UK papers report on on page 22 if at all.