Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Serious Discrepancies Between Reported News Statements Of Officials And Indictment By Prosecutor In Tosa Case
Serious Discrepancies Between Reported News Statements Of Officials And Indictment By Prosecutor In Tosa Case
Serious Discrepancies Between Reported News Statements Of Officials And Indictment By Prosecutor In Tosa Case
Serious Discrepancies Between Reported News Statements Of Officials And Indictment By Prosecutor In Tosa Case
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Serious Discrepancies Between Reported News Statements Of Officials And Indictment By Prosecutor In Tosa Case

351

Published on

Mystery of the Missing ? Chief Engineer

Mystery of the Missing ? Chief Engineer

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
351
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  1. SERIOUS DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN REPORTED NEWS STATEMENTS OF OFFICIALS AND INDICTMENT BY PROSECUTOR IN TOSA CASE Ser. Reported News Indictment Remarks 1 MOFA Pages 10 to 11: 1. “Mayday” was sent out at about confirms “The fact that Captain 2351 hours 16 April 2009 - how is it sinking of Ho Hsi-Chuan of the possible that the Coast Guard’s Taiwanese fishing boat Shin Tomg Maritime Patrol Directorate General fishing vessel Chyuan No. 86 sent out a received it only at 0038 hours or 0047 Mayday by way of http://www.taip hours on 17 April 2009? What was wireless radio at the eitimes.com/Ne happening from 2351 hours 16 April moment when the ws/front/archive accident happened” 2009 to 0047 hours 17 April 2009? s/2009/04/18/20 Was Fishery Communications Radio 03441397 Page 13: Station of the Su-Ao District unable Jenny W. Hsu “Important reporting to contact Coastguard? and Jimmy records of Fishing Boats, Chuang kept by the Fishery 2. Prosecutor has said the time of first STAFF Communications Radio distress call was 0000 hours on 17 REPORTERS, Station of the Su-Ao April, by Fishery Communications Taipei Times District Fishermen Radio Station, not even a hint to the Saturday, Apr Association, at 00:00 on English media in Taiwan after filing 18, 2009, Page April 17, 2009. The fact of the Indictment? that the fishing boat Shin 1: Tomg Chyuan No. 86 was 3. Assume for a moment that the hit and overturned by Hansen Hsu, TOSA at the aforesaid vessel capsized at 0000 hours near to spokesman for time and place.” incident location 25° 46.232'N 123° the Coast 05.186'E. Location of recovery of Guard’s Page 6: vessel is 25 50’N 123 08’E, a good Maritime Patrol “At 00:47, April 17, the 4.54 nautical miles away (at its 6 Directorate Coastal Patrol knots full speed) a full 40 minutes General, said Directorate General away. This may point to capsize of "Coast Guard (under the Coast Guard fishing vessel only around 0030 received news Administration of the hours. Possible scenario: since Shin of the incident Executive Yuan) received Tomg Chyuan No. 86 was closely at 12:38am the accident report, set followed at all times by Shin Tomg up an emergency yesterday" Chyuan No. 82 the 11 crew members response center, and were immediately rescued after promptly dispatched patrol cruiser Lien- capsize around 0030 hours 17 April Chiang of the Northern 2009. Thereafter (at 0038 hours) the Sector Flotilla, cruiser first distress call was sent out by Shin RB02 of the Keelung Tomg Chyuan No. 82 and received by Flotilla, and cruisers Coastguard (as finds a mention in The 6001 and 10023 of the China Post 18 April 2009) by 0038 Su-Ao Flotilla to the hours (as finds a mention in Taipei scene of the accident” Times 18 April 2009).
  2. 2 MOFA Page 6: 1. The sailors were rescued by Shin confirms “At 00:30 next Tomg Chyuan No. 82 at 0030 hours sinking of morning, the 11 according to Prosecutor but the boat Taiwanese sailors, namely Chen sank at 0043 hours according to fishing vessel Chi-Ming, Sun Shih- Association for East Asian Relations Jenny W. Hsu Chou, Trisukasih, Secretary-General Peter Tsai, 5 and Jimmy Magadia Arvin minutes after receipt of information Chuang Andaya, Tasiwan, of its “collision” at 0038 hours by the Taipei Times Magadia Fernando Coastguard as per reported statement Apr 18, 2009, Jrandaya, Rasiwan, of Hansen Hsu, spokesman for the Page 1: Asroni, Muktarudin, Coast Guard’s Maritime Patrol Adikin, and Directorate General. Did the fishing Association for Taufikurrohman were vessel take 13 minutes to sink after East Asian rescued by Shin Tomg the fishermen jumped off around Relations Chyuan No. 82 fishing 0030 hours or did it take 53 minutes Secretary- vessel in the vicinity of to sink after “collision” with the General Peter the scene of the Tosa? Tsai, "fishing accident” boat .... sank at 2. Shin Tomg Chyuan No. 78 fishing about 12:43am vessel and Shin Tomg Chyuan No. yesterday 82 fishing vessel were in the vicinity morning." of Shin Tomg Chyuan No. 86 fishing vessel, all 3 owned by Chen Wen-Li from 2350 hours 16 April 2009 till 0043 hours 17 April 2009. The Coastguard confirms no distress call was made by any of these three boats till 0038 hours 17 April 2009. 3. Coast guards Page 3: These facts make it almost certain searching for “two other vessels, that the first distress call was sent by crewmen from namely Taiwan Shin Tomg Chyuan No. 82 at 0038 capsized boat registered fishing boats hours on 17 April 2009 and was not The China Post, Shin Tomg Chyuan No. only picked up by Taiwan Coastguard April 18, 2009 82 (Target 1 for short) but also Japan NAVTEX and Japan “The accident, and Shin Tomg Chyuan Coastguard. It is practically which took No. 86 (Target 2 for incontrovertible proof that accident place ..shortly short), had been took place around 0038 hours 17 after midnight .. manually locked as April 2009 only and not at 2350 hours the result of a targets.” on 16 April 2009. Japan Coastguard collision reached the site 25 50’N 123 08’E at between … 0215 hours 17 April 2009 while Hsin Tung Taiwan Coastguard reached the site Chuan No. 82, 25 50’N 123 08’E at 0247 hours. The and a cargo prosecutor has alleged “collision” vessel, the took place at site 25° 46.232'N 123°
  3. officials said.” 05.186'E. 4 Three Page 4: 1. The 2nd Officer has reported that Panamanian “Shin Tomg Chyuan after taking evasive action at 2350 sailors indicted No. 86 was sucked by hours he observed the lights of the Jimmy Chuang the current created by fishing vessel (Shin Tomg Chyuan Taipei Times the trail left behind by No. 86) for upto 30 minutes after Jul 18, 2009, TOSA and then hit by 2350 hours 16 April 2009 and that it Page 2: the billows generated proceeded steadily away having Hsueh Chih-yu, by TOSA” passed Tosa at a distance of about 3 the prosecutor cables. in charge of the Page 13: investigation “The fact that the 2. This time difference also ties in said, “He did fishing boat Shin Tomg with the 4.54 nautical miles between not send any Chyuan No. 86 was hit alleged “collision” spot (25° SOS message and overturned by 46.232'N 123° 05.186'E) and the and did not stop TOSA at the aforesaid capsize spot. (25 50’N 123 08’E) [the vessel] to time and place (25° rescue the 46.232'N 123° 3. The timings of distress calls also Taiwanese 05.186'E)” ties in with the premise that a second fishermen incident occurred 40 minutes later whose boat was that caused capsize 30 minutes later hit and sunk by and sinking within about 13 minutes the Tosa." by 0043 hours 17 April 2009. 5 Three Page 14: Prosecution has shifted its stand on Panamanian “The Criminal Code, jurisdiction from territorial waters to sailors indicted Article 4 expressly Criminal Code Article 4.Decisions Jimmy Chuang provides: If the act or the regarding jurisdiction are to be taken outcome of a crime strictly in consonance with Criminal Taipei Times committed occurs within Procedure Code, Chapter II Jul 18, 2009, the territory of the JURISDICTION OF COURTS, Articles "Hualien .. 4 to 16 and not the Criminal Code Article Republic of China, the Chief place in which the crime 4. Taiwan Criminal Procedure Code Prosecutor is committed shall be Article 5, “If an offense is committed on Huang Yi-chun deemed the territory of a vessel or an aircraft of the Republic of said the three the Republic of China. China outside the territory of the Panamanian Victim Hsu Tsung-Wen Republic of China, the court of the place sailors would was killed inside a where the vessel is registered or from be punished Taiwanese vessel which the aircraft departed or landed according to because of a criminal act after the commission of the offense shall committed by these three also have jurisdiction.” This applies Taiwan’s defendants, and thus the onboard a vessel flying the flag of Criminal Code criminal act should be Taiwan and could not be extended to any because the vessel flying the flag of Panama upon the regarded as committed incident within the territory of the high seas. Surrounding circumstances of occurred in Republic of China illegal detention on high seas do not Taiwan’s pursuant to the Criminal inspire confidence that fair and proper territorial Code, Article 3, second decision on jurisdiction would be given waters." half.” under said Article 5 (in consonance with
  4. international law in the facts and circumstances of this case.) 6 Three Page 13: A number of well directed internet Panamanian “chief engineer Hsu searches failed to turn up even one news sailors indicted Tsung-Wen of the item on recovery of body of Chief Jimmy Chuang fishing boat Shin Tomg Engineer Hsu Tsung-Wen. In an article datelined 19 April 2009 "Investigation Taipei Times Chyuan No. 86 fell into turns up dirt on foreign-owned freight Jul 18, 2009: water and drowned ship" Taipei Times, Taiwan reported, when the said accident "Officials from the Maritime Patrol “Hsin Tung- happened. ” Directorate General under the Coast chuan 86 Guard Administration said a Japanese captain Ho Hsi- Page 16: diver combed the interior of the sunken chuan (何西川) “chief engineer Hsu ship on Friday evening but did not find and chief Tsung-Wen who was the missing men." After the Japanese engineer Hsu confined to the cabin diver who searched the vessel reported and drowned” that there were no bodies inside it the Chung-wen (許 vessel was finally recovered and brought 聰文) went Page 9: to port on 1 May 2009. In an article missing after datelined 6 May 2009 "CGA confirms “a task force of the the boat sank Panama vessel hit fishing boat" The Coast Guard China Post, Taiwan also did not report approximately Administration found 41km off the recovery of any body including that of the corpse of Hsu Chief Engineer Hsu Tsung-Wen from the Diaoyutai Tsung-Wen in the recovered vessel. In an article datelined islands and engine room 18 July 2009 "Three Panamanian sailors have been entrance.” indicted" Taipei Times, Taiwan reported presumed “Hsin Tung-chuan 86 ..chief engineer dead.” Hsu Chung-wen went missing after the boat sank .. presumed dead.” Out of the hat of the prosecutor now comes the report of the prosecutor that: (1) chief engineer .. fell into water and drowned when the said accident happened (Page 13) (2) chief engineer .. was confined to the cabin and drowned (Page 16) (3) a task force of the Coast Guard Administration found the corpse of Hsu Tsung-Wen in the engine room entrance!!! (Page 9)

×