ZAIN DEAN CONVICTED KILLER ON THE LAM

[HEADHONCHO11]

Re: Zain Dean conviction--fatal hit & run case PART IV


The media situation alone along with police comments would have resulted in a mistrial in the UK.

You wouldn't have even gotten to the evidence bit. Having read the Chinese link above, this is exactly the angle they are pushing.

[REPLICANT]

Re: Zain Dean conviction--fatal hit & run case PART IV

The media situation alone along with police comments would have resulted in a mistrial in the UK.

You wouldn't have even gotten to the evidence bit. Having read the Chinese link above, this is exactly the angle they are pushing.

Nope the media is not on trial here. Also even in the UK jurors are advised not to look into media reports. Not that there was any jury as ZD had a trial by judge, which is also a given right in the UK.

Even in the UK ZD still has the issue to prove he was not driving given that the KTV has an alibi witnessed both on video and by other people. He simply was back at the KTV several minutes prior to ZD's car accident. So as the court asked ZD, if you were not driving then who was? ZD. No answer from ZD. No accusation it was someone else. nada zip SFA.

ZD is guilty and any jury would have a probable reason to find he is guilty by more than any reasonable doubt. ZD claims there is another driver but can offer no proof. No witness ever saw this. Can you trust ZD who was so drunk he cant remember anything to now say the only thing he can remember it must have been someone else he cannot identity?

[HEADHONCHO11]

I'm sorry but what you are saying is that the timeline as indicated by the witnesses doesn't matter? And yet the difference of minutes is crucial in placing people in different locations as we know. Timelines are everything along with positive identification of individuals involved. There is no reason at all to believe the KTV driver would be more honest than Dean (not that I'm saying he did it..I just don't get it why Dean's tale including it's discrepancies is the focus and the driver's case is allowed 'discrepancies' as if that is normal somehow)

They don't seem to have checked phone records either. Very very shoddy work by the police at the minimum. REMEMBER A HIT & RUN WAS REPORTED IMMEDIATELY THAT NIGHT! There are only two conclusions as to why they didn't gather evidence in a timely manner..massive incompetence or massive corruption. It is the police who have failed to do their job and left yawning gaps to deal with.

[DR SPOCK]

I'm sorry but what you are saying is that the timeline as indicated by the witnesses doesn't matter? And yet the difference of minutes is crucial in placing people in different locations as we know. Timelines are everything along with positive identification of individuals involved. There is no reason at all to believe the KTV driver would be more honest than Dean (not that I'm saying he did it..I just don't get it why Dean's tale including it's discrepancies is the focus and the driver's case is allowed 'discrepancies' as if that is normal somehow)

They don't seem to have checked phone records either. Very very shoddy work by the police at the minimum. REMEMBER A HIT & RUN WAS REPORTED IMMEDIATELY THAT NIGHT! There are only two conclusions as to why they didn't gather evidence in a timely manner..massive incompetence or massive corruption. It is the police who have failed to do their job and left yawning gaps to deal with.

The police have personal witnesses and video placing the KTV driver back at the KTV at 4:56am. Are you suggesting that all these people are lying? You have to be if you claim ZD is innocent.

The accident occurred around 5.04am several kilometeres away from the KTV. Are you suggesting that the KTV driver was driving the car, took Mr ZD even closer to his house before getting out yet managed to return before 4:56am. Well please explain how that is possible? It is not up to the police to get video evidence if they have an alibi for the KTV driver and Mr Dean has no alibi as to how he wasnt driving if the KTV driver was already back at the KTV. MR Dean admits booting the driver out of his car. So drunk who can really believe he clearly remembers where that was. After all he can't remember anything else. Except now he claims it wasnt the guy who admits driving him home it was someone else. A figment of his drunken imagination. Why did ZD's lawyer do nothing for obtain these video evidences he claims are missing. The police do have some, of ZD's car just prior to the accident but certainly a still pic on Chunghsiao East Rd just before the accident, but after 4:56am.

There is no corruption. That's just blowing smoke. You claim corruption, please name and shame the people you know are corrupt in this case. Put up or shut up.

Is there incompetence? Maybe you claim so but the police did check videos and many do not film the road only entry ways to buildings. That is stated in the court report.
ZD is the one claiming "missing evidence" but has no proof of such claim. The police investigated a man who claimed he never drove home that night. The KTV driver also held and interrogated. When the tapes of ZD driving into his apartment arrived then ZD's story of not driving home fell apart. The KTV's tapes show the KTV driver to be telling the truth. Then when the police discover ZD took his car to be trashed, of course they ask why didn't you ask the KTV to pay if you didn't drive it? Erh um because my KTV loving business interested person told me not to ask? ZD tried to hide the evidence and that is daming. Even though they couldn't prove his GF knew it had been in a fatal accident, ZD played his GF for a fool saying it must have hit a lamp post or something. Not likey he would say hey hon, a totalled a guy and my car on the ay home drunk from a KTV.

Remember ZD also said he refused to tell the wreckers he drove home smashed from a KTV so as not to arouse their interest when they asked about the damage to the car. ZD drove the car only a few hours after the accident to the wreckers, not the next day as he wrote on his statement.

After discussing this with my wife, I came to the conclusion that the driver must have hit a lamp post or suchlike, as it had been raining etc., and based on what Mr A had said to my wife, I decided to take the car out to the repair shop I normally go to, near my house, and a place I’d been getting my cars over the years repaired time after time. After all, I had been trying to ‘win over’ Mr A and hopefully have him invest in my company, the last thing I wanted to do was to make a mountain out of a molehill.
This repair shop only has one slot for vehicles, so other cars waiting to be repaired must be parked outside on the public road. The owner of the repair shop (Mr M) asked me what had caused this, I said I didn’t know (not wanting to tell him that I had been to a hostess bar, etc).

Why did ZD and his lawyer not go and try to get that video evidence? Why did they not request phone records from the phone companies? Ask yourself that? They expected that evidence tracking to be done by other people. The police have a man with an alibi. The other person has no alibi apart from I'm too drunk to remember so it can't be me cause you don't have me on video. ZD didn't request it because he knew it would not be helpful to him.

Then this BS from ZD. No office ever testified this took place. In fact the court wrote this about ZD's claims

The witness Da Huan Fan, who was the deputy head of the Dun Hua police station of Da An police of Taipei central Police and who kept accompany the defendant in recording evidence, did not speak directly with the defendant, and did not recall there was any other foreign affairs police officer on the scene

ZD wrote

At the police station, I wasn’t asked to give a statement, but now the driver was. After an hour or so, the officer who was questioning the driver came out and said “good news for you” as he patted me on the back, “the drivers confessed to what happened, what he’s stated supports what you’ve said” [paraphrased from Mandarin Chinese]. This was a huge relief for me, and the officers who had been with me to the KTV to pick up the driver also seemed relieved. Officer F, even went as far as saying to the other uniformed police present, “see I told you it wasn’t Dean, I’ve been doing police work for many years, and I have good instincts. When the driver had gotten into the van, I had sat next to him, and I noticed his legs had been shaking, he had been very nervous’.

So why did not Chens lawyer ask this so called police officer to state what ZD claims he said in court? Because it never took place.

[REPLICANT]

Postby Feiren » Today, 19:43

It is interesting to compare this case comment with the discussion here... http://ukscblog.com/case-comment-kapri- ... 3-uksc-48/

It seems that one way Dean could resist extradition would be to prove systematic corruption in Taiwan. I think this means that he would not have to show that the particular police and judges involved in this case were corrupt. There have been some highly publicized cases of corrupt judges in the past few years and even more involving the police. I'm not sure if that would rise to the systematic level apparently required. Also his witnesses so far don't seem to be providing much credible.

In any event, the case comment shows how complex this area of law is and how little any of us here understand about it.

The Scottish judge already gave ZD the opportunity to address the issue of corruption. He asked ZD to name the police and judges that are corrupt in his case. As usual ZD had no reply. The judge admonished the council for ZD saying that to bring up issues of corruption without evidence to back it up is without merit.

What you should say is that so far nothing of ZD's claims have had any credibility so far. Also ZD is not facing a new trial he has had 2 trials and been found guilty at both. SO unlike other links you gave ZS isn't being retried for anything. ZD has to offer clear evidence that his case does not meet European standards. Saying there is missing video will not help him as he cannot prove there is any missing video. Its just a claim he makes.

ZD had plenty of opportunity to address his claims and the courts in Taiwan also dismissed his claim of police and judicial corruption. As usual his claims were tested and found to be without merit. No police officers handling his case were ever indicted for anything. Same for claims about missing video evidence the court here already examined those claims. Again FAIL by ZD and his lawyer here.

Whatever happens, if ZD winds his appeal the ROC Government will simply lodge an appeal against that and if ZD loses his appeal he will also most likely try to continue other avenues of appeal. Either way he will be staying in a free Bed and breakfast facility for years to come as he would be a flight risk if released before the extradition process is complete. Any time served in the UK will not be credited here if is he extradited.

Also as he lost his civil case he will be stewed rabbit for the rest of his life. They will chase him for any money he earns to be garnished from his salary.

Anyways Judge K will most likely make his decisions known today UK time to extend trial

[REPLICANT]

“…It should be remembered that s 27(4) of the Act, dealing with new evidence, refers to evidence at the appeal ‘that was not available at the extradition hearing’. The word ‘available’ makes it plain that, whilst I would not consider that the requirements of Ladd v Marshall [1954] 1 WLR 1489, had to be met where not only the liberty of the individual, but also

matters relating to human rights are in issue, nonetheless the court will require to be persuaded that there is some good reason for the material not having been made available to the District Judge. And where there could be any suggestion of the Appellant ‘keeping his powder dry’ he must expect the court to view any application to rely on such evidence with some scepticism…”

[However] even for defendants, the court will not readily admit fresh evidence which they should have adduced before the District Judge, and which is tendered to try to repair holes which should have been plugged before the District Judge, simply because it has a human rights label attached to it. The threshold remains high. The court must still be satisfied that the evidence would have resulted in the judge deciding the relevant question differently, so that he would not have ordered the defendant’s discharge.

In short, the fresh evidence must be decisive.”

Very high standards are made for appeals like ZD's to be made. He must provide conclusive evidence and so far, none of that has happened. Also you links only provide to the ruling on the extradition act of 1989.

The new extradition act of 2003 is quite different. I'd say for ZD read it and weep.

[VAIN DEAN]

Its not fair. The fat lady did not get to sing at my trial over judical abuses in Taiwan. I don't know why Judge K, ( SHERIFF KENNETH MACIVER ) I call him Special K as we so close now, doesn't like the smell of Lindas tesitmony. She hasn't even given it.

I suspect the judge was taking a call from the white warrior who threatened to make the 2/28 white terror come to Scotland. She has been stood up yet again.

Woe is me. But Mr Chen my lawyer got a good grilling by the judge. So what it to be? He loves me, he loves me not, he loves me, he loves me not.

I have to rot a little bit longer to know if all you guys will be singing this. Another hearing date on 12 March.



http://www.appledaily.com.tw/realtimene ... E%E9%B3%A5

[serial killer on parole]

Its not fair. The fat lady did not get to sing at my trial over judical abuses in Taiwan. I don't know why Judge K, I call him Special K as we so close now, doesn't like the smell of Lindas tesitmony. She hasn't even given it.

I suspect the judge was taking a call from the white warrior who threatened to make the white terror come to Scotland. She has been stood up yet again.

Woe is me. But Mr Chen my lawyer got a good grilling by the judge. So what it to be? He loves me, he loves me not, he loves me, he loves me not.

I have to rot a little bit longer to know if all you guys will be singing this. Another hearing date on 12 March.

So Linda Arrigo has been declared persona non grata at the court. Well so much for her testimony. Sitting at home, properly dressed and made up waiting for an online date with judge. All for naught. Maybe the judge saw her video where she claimed ZD didn't need to come back to Taiwan to face jail before and decided her testimony not warranted after stirring up public resentment.

Maybe the white warrior did speak to the judge. Who is this guy the white warrior?

Well we can be patient Zain. Be wishing you a safe trip back to the country you call home. Taiwan.

The court just needs time to digest the spiel from your lawyer Chen and to listen to rebuttal from Taiwan's lawyers perhaps.

[THE GINGER MINGE]

All this blather in these ZD threads is missing much of that sentiment. All the conjecture seems quite oblivious to the fate of the unfortunate victim of the collosally compounded crime(s) in question.

What does anyone know of the poor chap, and his family?

[MAOMAN]

What does anyone know of the poor chap, and his family?

It's not really important. DEAD IS DEAD