I think you guys are getting into a very grey area of Taiwan or Asia in general when it comes to adultery and the enforcement of the law.
Should the judge be held to a higher standard of enforcement. If the judge ran a red light, which is a common traffic infraction in Taipei, should he had been held to a higher standard.
well, if he runs a red light, then he brakes the law - public offense.
If he lands a fist in his wife - that might be public offense (not sure here)
braking the law only depends on wheter there is a charge or not -> If it is not a public offense, only the person who is offended is entilted to decide if he broke the law or not.
Well, according to the latest reports, it seams that it is all very gray, and thay the media might have jumped conclusions again (not the first, not the last)
I read the China Post’s account of Justice Cheng and Mrs. Wang, with statements by politicians, etc. It was not enlightening. It left a very bad taste in my mouth, which was not helped by the details involving Ms. Wang’s urgently “running bowels.”
I’m not surprised that Taiwan still has traditional adultery laws on the books - I would be surprised if the public still supported these laws and wanted them enforced. If they do, then so be it. On the other hand, if this kind of behavior is routinely tolerated or ignored, and the law rarely enforced, doesn’t it raise questions when a case jumps into the headlines?
In particular the questions “Why is this case being pursued? On who’s behalf? Is it in the public interest?”
I had the impression that adultery cases were only prosecuted upon complaints by a spouse. Which doesn’t necessarily mean it’s in the public’s interest, but at least in that case there is a party claiming to be an actual victim of the act. (Also, acting on such complaints arguably offers some ‘protection’ to a wife, in a country where divorce and child custody laws seem to be unfavorable to women.)
If this case wasn’t initiated by the wife, then who? Why? I’m sure there could be other possible justifications. Such as a judge abusing his position to benefit a sexual partner. Or flagrant public misbehavior, etc. Maybe this was clear in the Chinese coverage…
I just don’t like to think that this kind of bomb can be detonated against anyone for some private or political motive, with no repercussions…
[quote=“ac_dropout”]I think you guys are getting into a very grey area of Taiwan or Asia in general when it comes to adultery and the enforcement of the law.
Should the judge be held to a higher standard of enforcement. If the judge ran a red light, which is a common traffic infraction in Taipei, should he had been held to a higher standard.[/quote]
Things aren’t that gray, or shouldn’t be. I don’t think there’s such a thing as a “higher standard of enforcement” If the judge ran a red light, he’d still only get the mandated fine, and no more. People could try shaming him in the press, but somehow I don’t think it would make the cover of the Apple Daily…
Certain people CAN be held to higher standards than the general public, but this should be set forth in policies or regulations somewhere. There was an example in this case. Someone commented that being alone in a hotel room with Ms. Wang already violated a rule for judges, whether there was adultery or not. Similarly, in the US there are rules that government officials avoid the appearance of corruption. So, for example, they shouldn’t be seen out partying with people who later win some big government contract, etc.
Let him hang. One less green judge in office.
Dr. Jeckel and Mr. Hyde or what a difference a day can make.
Yesterday morning every paper had a nice big photo of the femme fatale looking all pretty and professional with her green outfit and frizzy upscale hairdo.
This morning the front page features this ragged out dog, (to put it in horsemen’s terms: the poor nag looks like she was ridden hard and put away wet) yacking about her privacy.
I will grant the locals one thing, they can do melodrama well. Too bad I do not have a t.v.; I am sure I am missing a lot.
On a more serious note, it turns out that this whole caper is not going to end up costing Mo the Mauler a dime. Because he did the right thing and resigned, the JY is going to arrange things so he gets full pension and all the perks and bennies.
Yours in photo funnies,
Brian
[quote=“brianlkennedy”]she was ridden hard and put away wet
[/quote]
The “put away wet” description is probably true given the judge’s story about her “running bowels.”
Ridden hard? Not so sure about that.
I thought the title for the Taipei Times article on page 2 today was especially appropriate – “The story of the man who blew his career in a motel.”
The story also mentions that the judge’s son has a penchant for wearing skirts and make-up.
Natch. Justice being done and being seen to be done.
Not only should his resignation be rejected and he be fired on the spot, he should be arrested for the crime of adultery, tried, and sentenced. Although I agree with AN Other poster above that it’s a pretty grey area as to who can bring a prosecution. If it really is a “crime” then it should be the State, but I am aware the line between criminal and civil procedings here is a bit blurred.
Notice he blamed society and the media in his “apology”? Notice also that he blatantly lied to the public about his actions on the day in question? “My tart had the shits so we went to a love hotel”??? Is that the best you can do after spending your life on the bench? Were you asleep? I’ve heard better excuses from snivelling little toe-rags brought up in front of a 10am magistrate for half-inching some UHU and a plackky bag from Mrs Miggins the Newsagents! A fucking JUDGE OF THE SUPREME COURT FOR JESUS’ SAKE!!! I had better excuses for looking up girls’ skirts when I was five!
Hah! No wonder people are pissed off. “All right! Arrest society!” as the Python sketch goes. Judge Pantsdown screws a slapper, lies about it, breaking the law in the process, and it’s my fault! HAHAHA!
Bring it on! Humiliate the bastard!
[quote=“ShrimpCrackers”]Exactly, look at all this corruption and idiocy. The CCP better invade soon and remove all these people so we can have a peaceful fascist government that actually knows something about economic growth and prosperity for all Han.
Honestly speaking, he should be thrown to the wolves.[/quote]
LOL, you are hardcore, man.
I may have got my facts about the “terms and conditions” of Mo the Maulers departure wrong. It looks like he may have given up his pension and bennies as part of the deal. But the guy who was telling me this was quick to add; “Brian it does not make him any difference because the guy is a USD (U.S. dollars) multimillionare so his stinking judge pension is meaningless to him anyway”.
I often wonder what was really going through these guys minds. If Mo the Mauler had come to me for “man to man locker room advice”; and said Brian, how should I do it, I am really hot for this bitch with the big hair and the American mail order MBA
Why is this guy so reviled? Was he already unpopular? Is the resentment for him personally or judges in general? Why isn’t resignation and humiliation enough?
Again, why the hard line against Cheng? Because he’s a judge? Because he’s “green”? Because you hate adultery? I’m just wondering why people are coming so unglued over this. Surely it can’t surprise anyone in Taiwan that a judge might have a mistress?
His excuse was pretty laughable. It sure seems like a lle. But I wouldn’t be so categorical about it, since you don’t really know with 100% certainty what actually happened. That’s tabloid justice.
Wouldn’t an adultery investigation and trial be a ridiculous and degrading spectacle to force on society? Actually, if “CSI Taipei” didn’t swoop in to that motel room right away, will there even be any evidence? Did the prosecutor get a warrant to search Ms. Wang’s vagina? It would be pathetic if they couldn’t even prove the case…
Then again, these clowns seem destined to trip up. While the Judge elaborated on the “I was just helping a friend with diarrhea” story today, Ms.Wang apparently denied she was there at all.
[quote] Judge Pantsdown screws a slapper, lies about it, breaking the law in the process, and it’s my fault! HAHAHA!
Bring it on! Humiliate the bastard![/quote]
It’s not your fault. But you sure seem overly obsessed with the matter…
Why is this guy so reviled? Was he already unpopular? Is the resentment for him personally or judges in general? Why isn’t resignation and humiliation enough?
Again, why the hard line against Cheng? Because he’s a judge? Because he’s “green”? Because you hate adultery? I’m just wondering why people are coming so unglued over this. Surely it can’t surprise anyone in Taiwan that a judge might have a mistress?
His excuse was pretty laughable. It sure seems like a lle. But I wouldn’t be so categorical about it, since you don’t really know with 100% certainty what actually happened. That’s tabloid justice.
Wouldn’t an adultery investigation and trial be a ridiculous and degrading spectacle to force on society? Actually, if “CSI Taipei” didn’t swoop in to that motel room right away, will there even be any evidence? Did the prosecutor get a warrant to search Ms. Wang’s vagina? It would be pathetic if they couldn’t even prove the case…
Then again, these clowns seem destined to trip up. While the Judge elaborated on the “I was just helping a friend with diarrhea” story today, Ms.Wang apparently denied she was there at all.
[quote] Judge Pantsdown screws a slapper, lies about it, breaking the law in the process, and it’s my fault! HAHAHA!
Bring it on! Humiliate the bastard![/quote]
It’s not your fault. But you sure seem overly obsessed with the matter…[/quote]
It depends what sort of a society you want to live in. If you want to live in one where judges routinely tell blatant lies to the public, get caught telling barefaced lies, and then blame the newspapers for exposing those lies, then that’s fine. There is no need for you to get worked up about this case at all.
If you’re happy paying taxes to see them handed on a platter to corrupt officials and distributed amongst big businessmen without a hope in hell of legal intervention, then you don’t need to worry about judges committiing criminal offences (adultery), or lying to cover their criminality up (perverting the course of justice - a judge!).
if it’s OK with you that the Judicial Yuan takes no interest whatsoever in the concept of fairness, equality before the law, or justice, then you’d find all the fuss here a bit odd. But you’d be in a global minority. Most people do want honest judges. Maybe it’s a bit much to ask that they don’t have affairs (I don’t give a shit who this soon-to-be-dead millionaire fucks), but if my taxes are paying for these people to break the law, lie to cover it up, and then blame the media, then I am going to be pissed off.
Are you aware of the full story? Are you aware of the fact that he stated he was not using that car on the day in question? (Lie#1) Are you aware that he stated that he was at home at the time he was actually in the love hotel with his slapper? (Lie#2) Are you aware that he said that Miss Wang was an old friend of the family but in fact that they have met only 4 times? (Lie#3) And so on. Everything he says is a lie. A provable demonstrable lie. That is why he must hang.
This case is a metaphor for pretty much everything that is wrong with Taiwan. In a nutshell. This case may indeed bring down the government. In fact, if you listen closely, you can actually hear the very fabric of society started to go at the edges…
Actually, you’re right. What the fuck do I care about this? Everyone on the island knows the coppers are bent, the judges are bent, and the politicians would sell their grannies for an extra sixpence! I must be the only one in Taiwan naive enough to think the purpose of the government is something other than taking money from the poor and distributing it to the rich! Hmmm. Right. Off to lunch.
Brian, are you sure she has a pseudo-MBA? I ask this because the newspapers describe here as an ‘assistant professor’. It would be extremely hard for someone with only an MBA to hold this position. It’s posible that she was hired so long ago that an MBA was enough.
Hi Scott, given your interest in educational issues, you maybe in a better position to decide what is and is not legit. So have a look here:
preston.edu/accreditation.html
at Preston U
I never defended the guy - once his behavior was exposed it became impossible for him to continue as a judge and he quickly resigned. I have no problem with that.
OK, honesty is better than dishonesty. But the dishonesty here apparently had nothing to do with his actions as a judge! It’s hard for me to equate this with a judge who subverts justice through legal decisions affected by bribery, political pressure or some other influence. A judge who puts an innocent person in jail or lets the guilty go free seems infinitely worse (as a judge, not as a person) than one who has an adulterous affair.
No! The English accounts seemed incomplete. That’s why I said I was confused! That’s why I was asking questions!
To be the devil’s advocate for a minute, I see a lot more “assuming” than “proving” or “demonstrating.” Has anyone demonstrated exactly what they did in that room? Can you prove that Ms. Wang didn’t have diarhhea?
This seems unhinged! The charges here DO NOT prove corruption, a bent judiciary, or favoritism toward the rich (though Cheng may well be guilty of those too, for all I know.) I see a guy lying in a pathetic effort to deny very embarassing public disclosures of his illicit behavior in what most people consider a very personal part of life.
should judges not be held to a higher standard than the rest of the populace? on all counts? if not, then why the hell should i accept that they can (and are legally obligated to), if circumstances warrant, be able to judge me on anything.
the people who are put in/elected to the position of judge are few and far between. there’s a reason for that - they are supposed to be “better” somehow … and they are supposed to be impartial - judging only based on the law. whether or not you think what he did was wrong, compound it with his lies about “not having gone out that day” and “not having met with the girl that day”, among others (seen repeatedly on the news). you must have seen the video footage, unless you didn’t turn on the tube for a week or so.
the fact is, he has shown a potential for dishonesty - if this becomes commonplace, people lose respect for the law and what it stands for, especially if it happens at the highest levels. (see policing in general in taiwan - numerous threads on this around here). your arguments leads in the direction that he can do anything dishonest as long as it’s not directly related to his job - at what point is it possible to lose sight of where that line exists?
The fact is that it was a setup. As Johnny Neihu pointed out today, the reporter is closely connected to the PFP – his brother was/is PFP spokesman. There’s more going on here than meets the eye.
[quote]So, he will not be charged with adultery because:
(a) he’s a judge, and they are immune from prosecution
(b) he’s rich, and rich people are above the law (one law for the poor, many laws for the rich)
(c) he’s already resigned, and that’s punishment enough for breaking the law
(d) what law?
(e) what do you expect? He’s a judge! Do as I say, not as I do![/quote]
As I recall, Taiwan’s adultery laws are strict. I think to actually get charged with criminal adultery, you have to get caught in the act.
Vorkosigan
And most likely a specific act at that. Here’s a humdinger of a story from November 2002.
[quote=“Taipei Times”]During a meeting last week, a judge from the Shihlin District Court proposed a question whether oral sex should be regarded as committing adultery.
The judge raised a case where a woman had oral sex at her residence in Neihu with a man who she knew was married and was caught in bed by the man’s wife. The judge asked his colleagues if the act constituted adultery…
The decision showed that 49 out of 60 meeting participants believed that oral sex should not be regarded as intercourse.
“These 60 participants were representatives from different courts and law firms. Since there is no law that clearly states whether oral sex is a form of intercourse, judges still possess full authorization to make their own decisions during trials,” Tsai said.
“Whatever decision these participants came up with during the meeting will only be a reference for judges when they handle similar cases in the future,” Tsai said.
A Taipei judge who wished to remain anonymous told the Taipei Times that the meeting’s decision will actually complicate judges’ work…
“If I understand their decision correctly, it seems to me that an adultery case will be dismissed right away if there is not a sufficient witness, evidence such as a used condom or both if defendants admit that they have only had oral sex, even if they did have intercourse,” he said.[/quote]
Yes, I remember when this penetrating but rather messy and sticky issue was the talk of the judicial community. Without fail in all of my classes I was asked about what range of sexual acts constituted intercourse under California law. The white board had some interesting vocabulary on it during those classes:
Oral sex
Anal sex
Straight intercourse
Hand jobs
Deviant acts
Sodomy
Jizz
President Bill Clinton
They were interesting classes to teach.
Yours in forensic sex law
Brian