東詐騙檔案
分享

房東糾紛事件:
法律程式與相關事件之檔案時間紀錄
宣告與救濟權利:本頁所呈現之資料為臺灣司法及行政機關向本人發出之正式檔案與通訊。基於透明、教育與人權倡議之目的,依據《公民與政治權利國際公約》(ICCPR)第 9、14、19 與 26 條,本人以善意公開此等資料。相關個人識別資訊已於適當處遮蔽。本資料發布並非為誹謗或傷害任何個人,而是透過合法透明方式尋求問責。
我在青少年時期來到臺灣,並在此度過大部分成年歲月。我建立了學校,印製印有「Taiwan is not part of China」的T恤,甚至幾乎放棄加拿大護照,準備將臺灣作為永久家園。我將全部的時間、積蓄與情感投入這片土地與人民之中。
然而,隨後因租賃糾紛升級為多年重疊的法律程式、大量法律檔案往來,以及遠超任何合理人預期的後果,導致我原有生活全面崩解。結果包括事業毀損、長期壓力、與我協助撫養之孩子分離——最終為避免入獄而離開我仍視為家的臺灣。
本頁為公開檔案庫:依時間排列之檔案紀錄,供記者、法律觀察者、人權倡議者,以及任何希望直接檢視檔案紀錄者參考。若有解釋性內容,皆為基於下述檔案與程式所提出之意見。
2020
- 法律郵件 — 2020 年 4 月 22 日
- 法律即時 — 2020 年 4 月 22 日
- 給 Langland 的付款證明 — 2020 年 10 月 15 日
- 公司存摺 — 2020 年 11 月 11 日
2021
- 房東威脅 — 2021 年 5 月 27 日
- 玉山銀行舊存摺 — 2021 年 6 月 16 日
- 法律郵件 — 2021 年 7 月 7 日
- 法律郵件 — 2021 年 7 月 14 日
- COVID 政府郵件 — 2021 年 7 月 26 日
- 警察刑事紀錄證明 — 2021 年 9 月 3 日
- COVID-19 檢測 — 2021 年 9 月 10 日
- 臺中地方檢察署郵件 — 2021 年 10 月 9 日
- 法律郵件 — 2021 年 10 月 15 日
- 醫療相關郵件 — 2021 年 11 月 25 日
- 法律郵件 — 2021 年 12 月 15 日
- 公司存摺 — 2021 年 9 月 25 日
2022
- 法律郵件 — 2022 年 1 月 26 日
- 銀行檔案 — 2022 年 3 月 4 日
- 荒謬偏高的水費帳單 — 2022 年 3 月 8 日
- 法律郵件 — 2022 年 3 月 4 日
- 法律即時 — 2022 年 4 月 22 日
2023
- 公司銀行狀態 — 2023 年 4 月 18 日
- 法律郵件 — 2023 年 6 月 1 日
- 法律扶助基金會郵件 — 2023 年 6 月 8 日
- 精神病性症狀之醫療證明 — 2023 年 7 月 5 日
- 法律扶助基金會臺中分會 — 2023 年 7 月 29 日
- 法律扶助基金會臺中分會 — 2023 年(13th,檔名原樣)
- 法律扶助郵件 — 2023 年 8 月 18 日
- 宣誓書 — 2023 年 9 月 26 日
- 法律郵件 — 2023 年 9 月 26 日
- 法律郵件 — 2023 年 10 月 11 日
- 更多法律郵件 — 2023 年 10 月 11 日
- 法律郵件 — 2021 年 9 月 6 日(引用)
- 法律郵件 — 2023 年 9 月 26 日(另一版本)
2024
- 法律郵件 — 2024 年 1 月 15 日
- 法律即時 — 2024 年 1 月 15 日
- 存摺 — 2024 年 3 月 6 日
- 法律郵件 — 2024 年 3 月 1 日
- 法律郵件 — 2024 年 3 月 14 日
- Legal Nail — 2024 年 3 月 14 日(檔名原樣)
- 2024 年 3 月 27 日(郵件)
- 法律郵件 — 2024 年 5 月 22 日
- 法律郵件 — 2024 年 8 月 16 日(第一部分)
- 法律郵件 — 2024 年 8 月 16 日(第二部分)
- 法律郵件 — 2024 年 6 月 21 日
- 法院來函 — 2024 年 6 月 6 日
- 致法官的信 — 2024 年 6 月 13 日
- 致法官的信 — 2024 年 6 月 18 日
- 法律郵件 — 2024 年 8 月 1 日
- Lionel — 2024 年 7 月 18 日
- 法律扶助基金會郵件 — 2024 年 7 月 31 日
- 國家人權相關郵件 — 2024 年 9 月 19 日
- 更多法律扶助郵件 — 2024 年 9 月 24 日(合併檔)
- 法律扶助基金會臺中分會 — 2024 年 9 月 6 日
- 向高等法院提出第二次上訴 — 2024 年 7 月 16 日
- 第二次上訴理由
- 第二次上訴理由(公開版)
- 上訴理由(第三次)
- 法律郵件 — 2024 年 9 月 20 日(兩份)
- 法律郵件 — 2024 年 10 月 15 日
- 法律郵件 — 2024 年 10 月 17 日(臺中地檢署 2)
- 臺中地方檢察署(3)
- 臺中地方檢察署(主檔)
- 法律郵件 — 2024 年 10 月 22 日
- 法律郵件 — 2024 年 10 月 28 日
- 法律郵件 — 2024 年 11 月 1 日
- 郵件 — 2024 年 11 月(圖片 1)
- 郵件 — 2024 年 11 月(圖片 2)
- 信封 — 2024 年 11 月(圖片)
- 法律郵件 — 2024 年 11 月 28 日
- 法律郵件 — 2024 年 11 月 28 日(副本)
- 法律郵件 — 2024 年 12 月 5 日
- 法律郵件 — 2024 年 12 月 5 日(2)
- 法律郵件 — 2024 年 5 月 27 日(檔名變體)
- 法律郵件 — 2024 年 5 月 10 日(替代檔)
- 法律郵件 — 2024 年 5 月 10 日
2025
其他/未標日期
- 自 2009 年合作之會計師 — 終止我的客戶身分
- 無罪聲請/聲請無罪判決
- 加拿大外交部(GAC)與 Ross Cline
- Re: 加拿大外交部(GAC)與 Ross Cline — 後續(因郵件故障改用替代信箱)
- 法律扶助基金會 — 臺中分會(主檔)
- 法律扶助拒絕通知 — 2024 年 8 月 23 日
- 國立臺中科技大學
- RESEAU_DE
- 臺灣最高法院 — 最終通知(圖片)
- 租賃契約
- 臺灣行政/聯絡紀錄
- 信件(圖片)
- 第四次上訴之證明(圖片)
- 完整陳述書
- 時間軸
- 緊急案件提交 — 檢方說法矛盾/正當程式失靈
- 致總統的陳情(圖片)
- 致法律扶助的信
關鍵證據 — 建議先從這裡看
音訊紀錄 — 臺灣房東糾紛案件
法律與倫理說明:本頁分享之錄音與檔案係基於公共利益公開,用以記錄官方紀錄中所呈現的不一致、程式疑慮及正當法律程式問題。本人已盡最大努力確保資料準確且未經修改。與案件無關之個人資料已盡可能遮蔽。本資料發布並非為騷擾、誹謗或危害任何人,而是在多年申訴與請求審查後所進行之紀錄行為。相關資料係於本人直接參與之程式中錄製,並於臺灣境外依言論自由與公共利益報導之保障下公開。
每則紀錄包含簡短背景說明、可播放之音訊檔案,以及可下載連結,以利儲存與透明公開。
我發布這些資料,是因為我仍深切關心臺灣,也相信紀錄本身具有重要意義——尤其是在正式管道未能充分回應或更正相關問題的情況下。
其中一個能反映整體經驗氛圍的事件:在高等法院辦事時,書記官要求我——一名書面中文能力有限的外國人——手寫我無法合理確認正確性的內容。無論是疏忽或其他原因,這種情況令人感到受辱。若無錄音與檔案,這類經驗難以傳達。
此處所呈現僅為全部紀錄的一部分。隨著案件發展,可能持續以相同紀錄方式發布更多資料。
臺灣臺中地方法院 — 2023 年 8 月 14 日
本錄音記錄了 2023 年 8 月 14 日於臺中地方法院的一場庭期/開庭過程。
整場程式反覆回到同一個問題:「Cline 先生,你為什麼要張貼租賃契約?」焦點長時間固定在「張貼」這個行為本身,而非其周邊脈絡——包括促使我張貼的疑似違約情況,以及我當時提出的人身安全疑慮。
在錄音中,我說明契約中的重要條款(包括鐵捲門/安全相關狀況)未被處理,而我在調解嘗試失敗後,才張貼契約以記錄爭議。我也提及一通我認為出自房東丈夫的威脅電話,以及該威脅在程式中被視為次要、而非對我的安全與當下心境屬於核心的因素。
以我聽來,這場庭期呈現了一種反覆出現的模式:狹隘的程式框架、對脈絡的有限回應,以及一種看似不願以外國被告能夠真正理解並有效回應的方式,去衡量彼此相互競爭的證據。
這段音訊聽起來可能重複,但它反映了同一議題如何跨越多年被反覆回訪——以及脈絡如何一再被淡化。
與律師對話 — 2023 年 9 月 28 日
本錄音記錄了我與一位臺灣律師於 2023 年 9 月 28 日的一段長時間通話。
我聯絡這位律師,是希望聘請私聘律師獨立檢視卷證與程式。通話中,他說明瞭在案件已經牽涉法律扶助後,實務與職業上的限制,並建議我改尋另一位法扶律師,而不是轉換到私聘代理。
對我而言,這通電話凸顯了我反覆遭遇的結構性問題:即便我願意付費尋求外部獨立審視,要取得「有意義的、真正獨立」法律協助的途徑,仍顯得有限且不確定。
回頭聽得出來,我當時已非常疲憊,但仍在重複同一個基本訴求:希望有人仔細看過檔案紀錄,包括程式問題與表面上的不一致之處。
我起訴 Bella — 2023 年 11 月 14 日
本錄音記錄了我嘗試就疑似詐欺相關事項,對前房東(此處稱為「Bella」)提出告訴/程式時的一段出庭過程。
在那個階段,我沒有代理人,也在缺乏實質語言支援的情況下處理程式要求。我的目的很明確:請求法院檢視爭議的根本問題,包括導致我張貼契約的情境,以及我所通報的疑似威脅。
在錄音中,可以聽到程式如何轉向表格、技術性要求與程式門檻,而不是對核心爭點的評估。對我而言,那是讓我開始難以相信制度真的能在平等基礎上,為外國申訴人提供有效救濟的時刻之一。
這不是一段「戲劇性」錄音——但它是檔案與音訊脈絡的一部分,呈現爭議如何隨時間擴大,而真正的解決卻始終難以達成。
臺灣移民署來電 — 2023 年 11 月 23 日
本錄音記錄了 2023 年 11 月 23 日臺灣移民機關的一通來電。
當移民機關聯絡外籍居留者時,往往伴隨明顯壓力。在這通電話中,我的擔憂非常清楚:我在臺灣生活多年、合法設籍/登記,並經營正當事業。然而,電話的語氣與內容強化了我的感受:我被當作一個「案件檔案」而非一個正面臨法律風險升高的當事人。
就脈絡而言,這段錄音之所以重要,是因為移民機關的接觸與刑事程式可能交織,並以多種方式提高非公民的脆弱性——尤其在語言障礙與程式複雜度已存在的情況下。
2024 年 3 月 27 日 — 開庭(和解討論)
本錄音(約 17 分鐘)記錄了一場法院再次提出和解的庭期。
現場有翻譯,程式語氣也相對禮貌。然而,內容凸顯了一個反覆出現的問題:當一方的立場不是「可協商的妥協」,而是「非此即彼」的要求時,和解並非真正有意義的選項。
這段音訊可作為簡單示例,呈現程式如何反覆回到「和解提示」,但未能化解根本僵局。
2024 年 4 月 8 日 — 法院來電與「協商」問題
本錄音記錄了 2024 年 4 月 8 日一通法院書記官來電,轉述法官反覆要求我與房東「協商」的意思。
在通話中,我說明協商已多次失敗,且房東的要求金額並不現實可行。這通電話也呈現我經常遭遇的程式困惑:多個庭期日期被安排得非常接近,但每一次庭期的目的與性質對我而言並不清楚。
這點之所以重要,是因為當被告無法可靠地理解排程、目的或程式狀態——尤其又跨越語言障礙時——有效參與程式將變得極其困難。
法院語音留言 — 2024 年 4 月 17 日
這段短錄音(約兩分多鐘)為 2024 年 4 月 17 日臺中高等法院的一通語音留言。
來電者詢問我是否願意與對方進行調解。就脈絡而言,這通留言顯示即使衝突已延宕甚久、且多次嘗試均無法達成任何可行條件,系統仍持續推動調解。
對讀者而言,這段留言雖小,卻具有指標性:禮貌的語氣與例行的程式用語,覆蓋在一場早已升級並造成嚴重個人與法律後果的爭議之上。
法院現場錄音 — 2024 年 4 月 17 日
本錄音(約 1 小時 55 分)記錄了法院中一個漫長的開庭日。
其中相當一部分再次回到同一個核心框架:聚焦在「張貼契約」本身,而非其原因、周邊爭議,或我反覆提出的證據與程式問題。
我描述了維修嘗試如何讓狀況更糟,也說明在一個以書面中文主導紀錄的制度中,檔案化記錄如何成為我唯一可靠、可傳達事實脈絡的方法。
即使某些段落聽起來節奏緩慢,它仍是案件實際運作方式的紀錄之一——以及我為何逐漸無法相信自己是在平等條件下接受公平評估。
2024 年 5 月 16 日 — 開庭(音訊背景脈絡)
本錄音對應我於 2024 年 5 月 16 日的一次出庭——此為多個與同一基礎指控相關的程式之一。
在錄音及其周邊紀錄中,我反覆提出程式疑慮:與同一次短暫張貼相關的事項被分別在不同軌道追訴;語言障礙實質影響我回應的能力;以及能夠支援我立場的脈絡(對我而言屬於洗冤或減輕責任的重要因素)並未以一致、可理解且公平的方式被衡量。
我也描述關鍵細節——包括與威脅電話相關之人物身分——如何以中文紀錄方式形成,而我在當時無法有意義地核對其正確性。這是語言可近性如何在現實中影響正當程式的一個最清楚例子之一,而不只是理論問題。
另外也值得一提:現場有一位口譯員以專業且善意的態度協助。即使整體程式令人感到失靈,個別人員仍可能保持正直與良善。
法院內 — 2024 年 6 月 18 日
本錄音來自我於 2024 年 6 月 18 日的一次出庭。
程式再次看似把焦點收斂到「張貼契約」這個行為,而非全面、具脈絡的評估——包括我認為重要的證人證詞,以及我行為當下的心理狀態。
錄音也呈現個別專業(包括口譯協助)與更廣泛程式走向之間的對比:在我看來,某些程式決定削弱了公平性。
對觀察者而言,這次庭期的重要性不在於某個單一「瞬間」,而在於它重複了多年所見的模式:狹窄指控的反覆,與對脈絡性證據的持續淡化。
與黃先生通話 — 2024 年 10 月 22 日
本錄音與我在收到一份與最高法院相關的通知後,與黃先生的通話有關;該通知在送達方式上引發了對正式性與安全通訊的基本疑問。
在通話與其周邊脈絡中,關鍵不只是紙本檔案——而是更大的疑慮:整體程式變得僵化、形式化,並與外國被告所承受的真實後果脫節。
我公開這段錄音,是因為它反映了我反覆遭遇的情況:溝通方式預設當事人具備流利語言能力、法律素養與同等救濟可近性——但這些預設往往不符合許多外國人在臺灣法律體系中的真實經驗。
2025 年 2 月 19 日 — 移民機關來電
本錄音錄於 2025 年 2 月 19 日晚間,當時我人在加拿大新不倫瑞克省(New Brunswick),卻接到臺灣移民機關一通出乎意料的電話。
在通話中,承辦人員談及「社會勞動」與「入監」之間的選項。我說明為何在我的處境下,這些選項並不像真正有意義的替代方案:包括基礎爭議本身、整體程式歷程,以及此前已經造成的嚴重後果。
這段錄音的重要性在於,它呈現移民機關的聯絡如何可能跨越國境追隨當事人——而制度期待也可能在情境改變後仍維持不變,即便後續官方函文可能對某些因素有所不同程度的承認或呈現。
這是紀錄中的又一個片段,說明我為何認為本案結果與基礎行為不相稱——以及我為何請求獨立審視與矯正。
3 則留言
ROSS CLINE – PERSONA NON GRATTA IN TAIWAN
You need to stop and face reality, because right now you are completely detached from how the system you are attacking actually works.
WHAT YOU ARE DEMANDING IS NOT JUST UNREALISTIC — IT IS FUNDAMENTALLY IMPOSSIBLE.
You are asking for:
1. a personal apology from the President, a public apology from the judiciary for the “fuck up,”
2. 2 MILLION NTD (2,000,000 NTD) IN COMPENSATION,
3. criminal punishment for your former landlord,
4. and a reversal of your situation outside the legal system.
NONE OF THESE DEMANDS HAVE ANY LEGAL BASIS. NONE OF THEM ARE WITHIN THE POWER OF THE PEOPLE YOU ARE ADDRESSING.
The President cannot intervene in court decisions. The President cannot overturn your case. The President cannot order compensation. The President cannot issue apologies on behalf of judges. These are basic principles of any democratic system.
THE FACT THAT YOU CONTINUE TO INSIST ON THIS SHOWS THAT YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE SYSTEM YOU ARE CRITICIZING.
Your demand for a judicial apology is equally disconnected from reality.
COURTS DO NOT APOLOGIZE. EVER.
If there is an error, it is addressed through appeals or legal review — not public admissions of wrongdoing because someone demands it.
Your demand for 2 MILLION NTD (2,000,000 NTD) is not compensation — it is a number you chose.
PERSONAL FRUSTRATION DOES NOT CREATE LEGAL ENTITLEMENT.
Now address the central issue you continue to avoid:
YOU WERE CHARGED AND CONVICTED BECAUSE YOU PUBLISHED YOUR RENTAL CONTRACT ONLINE, INCLUDING YOUR LANDLORD’S PERSONAL INFORMATION. THAT IS NOT A MINOR DETAIL. THAT IS THE ENTIRE BASIS OF THE CASE.
Under Taiwan’s personal data protection laws, publicly exposing another individual’s private information is a serious offense.
THE LAW DOES NOT PERMIT YOU TO HANDLE DISPUTES BY PUBLISHING SOMEONE ELSE’S PERSONAL DATA ONLINE.
You have acknowledged that you engaged in the conduct that led to your conviction.
THIS IS NOT A WRONGFUL CONVICTION. THIS IS A LAWFUL CONSEQUENCE OF A CRIME YOU DO NOT DISPUTE.
Your characterization of your situation as “exile” is inaccurate.
YOU WERE NOT EXILED. YOU WERE SENTENCED UNDER THE LAW AND CHOSE TO LEAVE.
Your allegations of racism are also contradicted by your own documented behavior.
YOU HAVE USED RACIST LANGUAGE, MADE DEGRADING REMARKS, DIRECTED HOMOPHOBIC COMMENTS, AND PUBLICLY MOCKED INDIVIDUALS IN A DEHUMANIZING WAY. THESE COMMENTS ARE DOCUMENTED IN YOUR RECORDINGS AND VIDEOS PUBLISHED ON YOUR WEBSITE (ILEARN.TW).
THESE EXPLOSIVE COMMENTS INCLUDES:
1. “I WORKED LIKE A NIGGER FOR 15 YEARS”
2. “SHIT-HOLE COUNTRY”
3. “THIRLD WORLD BANANA REPUBLIC SHITHOLE”
4. “SOMEONE WITH A TURBAN IN HIS HEAD FROM SOME SHITHOLE COUNTRY IS DRIVING A TAXI FOR SHITHOLE MONEY”
5. “THEY ARE ALL GAYS AND THAT’S HOW THEY LEARNED THEIR ENGLISH, THEY LEARN ENGLISH IN A GAY SAUNA AT TAIPEI, HI I’M A BOTTOM, FIRST THING THEY LEARNED TO SAY, TOTAL BOTTOM, HUNGRY BOTTOM”
You have also directed abusive language toward government personnel, including officials of the National Immigration Agency.
THIS BEHAVIOR DESTROYS YOUR CREDIBILITY.
Additionally, your public statements — including extreme claims suggesting geopolitical consequences involving Canada and Taiwan — further undermine the seriousness of your position.
It must also be clearly stated that the individuals involved in this matter — including Bella, Paul, and Bella’s husband — are exceptional, honest, outstanding, remarkable, extraordinary, distinguished, superior, elite, unparalleled Taiwanese individuals who were directly affected by your actions, and now they’re just VICTIMS of your BLATANT CRIMES.
THEY ARE NOT PERPETRATORS. THEY ARE THE PARTIES WHOSE PERSONAL DATA YOU EXPOSED. THEY ARE THE VICTIMS OF YOUR CRIMINAL CONDUCT. This is the reason the legal system treats such conduct seriously. THE HARM IS REAL, AND IT AFFECTS REAL PEOPLE.
You are not being taken seriously because your claims are unsupported.
YOU ARE NOT BEING IGNORED BECAUSE YOUR CASE IS COMPLEX. YOU ARE BEING IGNORED BECAUSE WHAT YOU ARE ASKING FOR DOES NOT EXIST WITHIN THE LEGAL SYSTEM.
Escalating this matter through websites, social media, public accusations, and appeals to international attention does not strengthen your position.
IT ONLY CONFIRMS THAT YOU ARE NOT ENGAGING IN A CREDIBLE OR LAWFUL WAY. At this point, you are not presenting a legal argument.
YOU ARE REPEATING DEMANDS THAT CANNOT BE FULFILLED. Nothing you are asking for will occur. NOT THE PRESIDENTIAL APOLOGY. NOT THE JUDICIAL APOLOGY. NOT THE 2 MILLION NTD (2,000,000 NTD) NOT THE INTERVENTION. NOT THE PUNISHMENT YOU ARE TRYING TO ASSIGN TO OTHERS.
If you continue on this path, the outcome will remain unchanged.
YOU WILL CONTINUE TO ESCALATE, AND YOU WILL CONTINUE TO RECEIVE NO RESPONSE.
If you intend to pursue any realistic resolution, you must stop this approach and engage through proper legal mechanisms.
OTHERWISE, YOU ARE CHOOSING TO REMAIN IN A POSITION THAT HAS NO POSSIBILITY OF PRODUCING THE OUTCOME YOU ARE DEMANDING.
Please understand that you do not belong in Taiwan. You are a criminal with a criminal record. You refused to pay a fine, go to jail, or complete community service. You are not welcome here anymore. You are also a very poor example of an English teacher in Taiwan—unprofessional, irresponsible, and promoting conspiracy theories and irrational ideas. No child should ever be exposed to someone like you. You and your boyfriend, Patrick, who is a Taiwanese citizen, are a shameful example. As a Taiwanese citizen, he has supported you in all this craziness, and he should be held accountable (revoke his Taiwanese citizenship) for supporting someone like you.
STAY IN CANADA, WHERE YOU BELONG, AND NEVER COME BACK TO TAIWAN.
ROSS CLINE – PERSONA NON GRATTA IN TAIWAN You need to stop and face reality, because right now you are completely detached from how the system you are attacking actually works. WHAT YOU ARE DEMANDING IS NOT JUST UNREALISTIC — IT IS FUNDAMENTALLY IMPOSSIBLE. You are asking for: a personal apology from the President, a public apology from the judiciary for the “fuck up,” 2 MILLION NTD (2,000,000 NTD) IN COMPENSATION, criminal punishment for your former landlord, and a reversal of your situation outside the legal system. NONE OF THESE DEMANDS HAVE ANY LEGAL BASIS. NONE OF THEM ARE WITHIN THE POWER OF THE PEOPLE YOU ARE ADDRESSING. The President cannot intervene in court decisions. The President cannot overturn your case. The President cannot order compensation. The President cannot issue apologies on behalf of judges. These are basic principles of any democratic system. THE FACT THAT YOU CONTINUE TO INSIST ON THIS SHOWS THAT YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE SYSTEM YOU ARE CRITICIZING. Your demand for a judicial apology is equally disconnected from reality. COURTS DO NOT APOLOGIZE. EVER. If there is an error, it is addressed through appeals or legal review — not public admissions of wrongdoing because someone demands it. Your demand for 2 MILLION NTD (2,000,000 NTD) is not compensation — it is a number you chose. PERSONAL FRUSTRATION DOES NOT CREATE LEGAL ENTITLEMENT. Now address the central issue you continue to avoid: YOU WERE CHARGED AND CONVICTED BECAUSE YOU PUBLISHED YOUR RENTAL CONTRACT ONLINE, INCLUDING YOUR LANDLORD’S PERSONAL INFORMATION. THAT IS NOT A MINOR DETAIL. THAT IS THE ENTIRE BASIS OF THE CASE. Under Taiwan’s personal data protection laws, publicly exposing another individual’s private information is a serious offense. THE LAW DOES NOT PERMIT YOU TO HANDLE DISPUTES BY PUBLISHING SOMEONE ELSE’S PERSONAL DATA ONLINE. You have acknowledged that you engaged in the conduct that led to your conviction. THIS IS NOT A WRONGFUL CONVICTION. THIS IS A LAWFUL CONSEQUENCE OF A CRIME YOU DO NOT DISPUTE. Your characterization of your situation as “exile” is inaccurate. YOU WERE NOT EXILED. YOU WERE SENTENCED UNDER THE LAW AND CHOSE TO LEAVE. Your allegations of racism are also contradicted by your own documented behavior. YOU HAVE USED RACIST LANGUAGE, MADE DEGRADING REMARKS, DIRECTED HOMOPHOBIC COMMENTS, AND PUBLICLY MOCKED INDIVIDUALS IN A DEHUMANIZING WAY. THESE COMMENTS ARE DOCUMENTED IN YOUR RECORDINGS AND VIDEOS PUBLISHED ON YOUR WEBSITE (ILEARN.TW). THIS EXPLOSIVE COMMENTS INCLUDES: “I WORK LIKE A NIGGER FOR 15 YEARS” “SHIT-HOLE COUNTRY” “THIRLD WORLD BANANA REPUBLIC SHITHOLE” “SOMEONE WITH A TURBAN IN HIS HEAD FROM SOME SHITHOLE COUNTRY IS DRIVING A TAXI FOR SHITHOLE MONEY” “THEY ARE ALL GAYS AND THAT’S HOW THEY LEARNED THEIR ENGLISH, THEY LEARN ENGLISH IN A GAY SAUNA AT TAIPEI, HI I’M A BOTTOM, FIRST THING THEY LEARNED TO SAY, TOTAL BOTTOM, HUNGRY BOTTOM” You have also directed abusive language toward government personnel, including officials of the National Immigration Agency. THIS BEHAVIOR DESTROYS YOUR CREDIBILITY. Additionally, your public statements — including extreme claims suggesting geopolitical consequences involving Canada and Taiwan — further undermine the seriousness of your position. It must also be clearly stated that the individuals involved in this matter — including Bella, Paul, and Bella’s husband — are exceptional, honest, outstanding, remarkable, extraordinary, distinguished, superior, elite, unparalleled Taiwanese individuals who were directly affected by your actions, and now they’re just VICTIMS of your BLATANT CRIMES. THEY ARE NOT PERPETRATORS. THEY ARE THE PARTIES WHOSE PERSONAL DATA YOU EXPOSED. THEY ARE THE VICTIMS OF YOUR CRIMINAL CONDUCT. This is the reason the legal system treats such conduct seriously. THE HARM IS REAL, AND IT AFFECTS REAL PEOPLE. You are not being taken seriously because your claims are unsupported. YOU ARE NOT BEING IGNORED BECAUSE YOUR CASE IS COMPLEX. YOU ARE BEING IGNORED BECAUSE WHAT YOU ARE ASKING FOR DOES NOT EXIST WITHIN THE LEGAL SYSTEM. Escalating this matter through websites, social media, public accusations, and appeals to international attention does not strengthen your position. IT ONLY CONFIRMS THAT YOU ARE NOT ENGAGING IN A CREDIBLE OR LAWFUL WAY. At this point, you are not presenting a legal argument. YOU ARE REPEATING DEMANDS THAT CANNOT BE FULFILLED. Nothing you are asking for will occur. NOT THE PRESIDENTIAL APOLOGY. NOT THE JUDICIAL APOLOGY. NOT THE 2 MILLION NTD (2,000,000 NTD) NOT THE INTERVENTION. NOT THE PUNISHMENT YOU ARE TRYING TO ASSIGN TO OTHERS. If you continue on this path, the outcome will remain unchanged. YOU WILL CONTINUE TO ESCALATE, AND YOU WILL CONTINUE TO RECEIVE NO RESPONSE. If you intend to pursue any realistic resolution, you must stop this approach and engage through proper legal mechanisms. OTHERWISE, YOU ARE CHOOSING TO REMAIN IN A POSITION THAT HAS NO POSSIBILITY OF PRODUCING THE OUTCOME YOU ARE DEMANDING. Please understand that you do not belong in Taiwan. You are a criminal with a criminal record. You refused to pay a fine, go to jail, or complete community service. You are not welcome here anymore. You are also a very poor example of an English teacher in Taiwan—unprofessional, irresponsible, and promoting conspiracy theories and irrational ideas. No child should ever be exposed to someone like you. You and your boyfriend, Patrick, who is a Taiwanese citizen, are a shameful example. As a Taiwanese citizen, he has supported you in all this craziness, and he should be held accountable (revoke his Taiwanese citizenship) for supporting someone like you. STAY IN CANADA, WHERE YOU BELONG, AND NEVER COME BACK TO TAIWAN.
You need to understand, very clearly, where you actually stand — because right now you are operating completely outside of reality.
What you are asking for is not just unlikely, it is fundamentally impossible within the legal and political system you are dealing with.
You are demanding:
- a personal apology from the President,
- a public apology from the judiciary,
- and 2 million NTD in compensation.
None of these are things you are entitled to, and none of these are things the President has the power to grant.
The President of Taiwan cannot override courts, cannot reopen your case, cannot order compensation, and cannot issue apologies on behalf of the judiciary. That would violate the most basic principle of a democratic system: separation of powers. The fact that you keep directing your demands at the President shows a complete misunderstanding of how the system actually works.
Your demand for a “judicial apology for the fuck up” is equally unrealistic. Courts do not apologize for decisions. If there is an error, it is addressed through appeals and legal review — not public apologies. That is how every rule-of-law system functions.
Your request for 2 million NTD as an “incentive” or compensation is not grounded in any legal basis. Compensation is only awarded when a court or legal process determines that a wrongful conviction or state liability exists. You have not demonstrated that. You are simply assigning a number to your personal frustration and calling it fair. That is not how compensation works.
You also admit that you committed the act that led to the charge. That means this is not a case of innocence — it is a case of disagreement with the outcome. You are trying to turn a legal consequence into a human-rights violation without establishing that the law was applied incorrectly.
You were not exiled. You were sentenced under the law and chose to leave rather than face the consequences. Reframing that decision as “exile” does not change reality — it only weakens your credibility.
At this point, your approach is not helping you. Public campaigns, demands for apologies, and attempts to pressure political figures will not produce the outcome you want. They will only make your claims less credible and ensure that no serious authority engages with you.
Right now, you are not pursuing a solution. You are escalating a situation in a way that guarantees it cannot be resolved on your terms.
If you want any chance of moving forward, you need to stop this entirely and return to realistic legal channels. Otherwise, nothing will change — no matter how many letters you send, how much attention you try to generate, or how strongly you believe you are right.