In the US and Canada, many states/provinces post court dockets online for the public to review (they are public documents, after all). Does Taiwan do the same thing?
Not sure what a “Docket” is, but generally lots of documents from courts seem to get published. See for example here: Spanish Surfer Stabbed by Fishermen in Kenting
This is exactly what I’m after. Thank you!
The reason why I ask is that DPP windbag J. Michael Cole says he’s being sued for defamation. I want to see for what.
That’s the case, but I’d like to see court documents
You want to view the dossier? You can ask the court for permission, but I’m not sure they’ll grant it to you if you’re not involved in the suit. Iirc there’s a list of criteria for that somewhere.
By default, hearings are open to the public, in case you want to sit and watch. A hearing for defamation might not be, though.
The judgement will eventually be posted online.
Mods and Administrator(s), if this violates some kind of rule, my apologies, and go ahead and delete (not that you need my permission for that).
I found something, but I’m not sure it’s the precise case you’re looking for. The URL to the particular case itself–the one in the URL box above the case–won’t actually link to that case.
I used this URL to the court website because so far, it allows the use of Google Translate in the Chrome browser (it may allow the same or something similar for other browsers, but I don’t know enough about that):
I highlighted “Taiwan Taipei District Court.” I clicked “Civil.”
I left “Judgment Number,” etc., blank, except that I left the phrase “Commonly Used Characters” (常用字別) in the square where (I think) I found it.
For date range, I put “107 01 01 ~ 107 05 15.”
For “Full text search words,” I put in cole.
This appears to be the introductory portion of the case I found (again, I’m not sure it’s what you’re looking for):
The case which is referenced immediately above seemed to mention the article linked below (but I’m not sure exactly why–I don’t know Chinese):
Exactly! Thank you!
Oh, I see.
The Taipei District Court rejected the suit because of concerns over whether they had the right foreigner. The High Court said yes you have the right foreigner. Then the District Court said there’s no case here anyway.
The claim was not defamation but that the two parties had already reached a settlement for the offending article to be retracted and an apology to be issued. The District Court said there was no settlement, just emails discussing the possibility of a settlement.
This seems to be the introductory portion of a related Taipei District Court judgment (I guess this is the one that @yyy summarized):
This seems to be the introductory portion of a related High Court judgment (I guess this is the one that @yyy summarized):
While you certainly have a point, you better not let Mr Cole see this. People have been prosecuted for less.
That tells you everything you need to know about Mr Cole and his editorial practices as well as the editorial practices of the websites/newspapers/blogs he associates with. His recent affiliation with the University of Nottingham does not make him a better journalist, nor does it make him a scholar. He remains a commercial provider of tailor-made content for the DPP and their affiliated outlets.
Judgments in the Judicial Yuan database are public information. Also, Mr Cole is a public persona who exposes himself in media frequently. I would be more than shocked to find out that discussing his legal troubles on the basis of facts sought from public information would be a violation of forum rule. On the other hand, I would not be surprised considering the censorship practices and DPP-affinity often displayed around here.
Spicy, very spicy.
Frankly, I’m not very worried about Mr. Dogs being prosecuted for that.
As for privacy concerns, this website does not exist for the purpose of smearing people. Our policy specifies not disclosing personal information about members, even when that information is publicly available. I interpret the spirit of this policy as extending to people in general, not just members.
That said, discussion of newsworthy persons is generally in the public interest and therefore permissible, and Mr. Cole’s case is newsworthy.
(If he’s grievously offended by the word windbag, I will reconsider my decision.)
That tells you everything you need to know about Mr Cole and his editorial practices as well as the editorial practices of the websites/newspapers/blogs he associates with.
Not sure what you mean here.
His recent affiliation with the University of Nottingham does not make him a better journalist, nor does it make him a scholar. He remains a commercial provider of tailor-made content for the DPP and their affiliated outlets.
Can you prove this?
That’s quite easy to prove. Just take DPP-mouthpiece “Thinking Taiwan” as an example.
Thinking Taiwan, a product of Dr. Tsai Ing-wen’s Thinking Taiwan Foundation, is the nation’s premier source of nonpartisan analysis and commentary about politics, society and culture in Taiwan and the region. With all-original material in English, Thinking Taiwan brings together established scholars and emerging thinkers, and endeavors to give a voice to Taiwan’s leaders of tomorrow.
And then this “premier source of non-partisan analysis and commentary” suddenly suspended its activity just when it was no longer necessary to flood the Internet with tailor-made paid pro-DPP content.
Following Dr. Tsai’s election to the Office of the President last January, and as part of TTF’s overall post election reorganizational plan, the English section of Thinking Taiwan (www.thinking-taiwan.com) website will be suspended effective May 20, 2016.
And who is/was the editor-in-chief? Michael J Cole! See here.
Your investigative research skills sir are masterful. Congratulations on discovering this heretofore unknown fact!
Wow, I didn’t realize English language propaganda was crucial to the DPP’s 2016 electoral campaign.
And that still doesn’t explain how the court’s initial failure to confirm the defendant’s identity tells us what we need to know about the defendant, but anyway, thank you for telling us a little about him.
You asked me whether I could point to any sources that can confirm my assertion that Mr Cole provides tailor-made propaganda content to DPP front organizations. That I did. I did not claim that his services contributed to the election outcome. However, the notice on the website states Tsai Ing-wen’s victory as a reason for suspending the project - kind of odd for a self-declared “source of non-partisan analysis”. Mr Cole is no scholar and no journalist, but a paid writer in the service of political organizations and that’s all there is to it. There is no shame in that, however there is shame in denying it and pretending he isn’t.
I do agree that it’s odd.
I’m skeptical about undecided anglophone ABC’s being a crucial source of votes, but I’ll leave that for people to discuss in the TP forum.
I still don’t know how the court’s incompetence re the identity of foreigners is supposed to enlighten us about this particular foreigner, but I’ll just leave it.