讀後心得

Reporter Yang Peiqi reports that the chairman of the People's Party, 柯文哲, is involved in the Jinghua City scandal. The Taipei District Court held a hearing on the 25th, and former director of the Urban Development Bureau, 黃景茂, was summoned to court. He emphasized his innocence and accused prosecutor 林俊言 of inappropriate pressure, revealing that the confession documents related to other defendants were unsigned. 黃景茂 stated that he chose not to plead guilty to uphold the dignity of civil servants. The Northern District Prosecutor's Office responded, emphasizing that there were no illegal activities during the interrogation process. This case has attracted widespread attention, with other defendants also mentioning 林俊言.

The chairman of the People's Party, 柯文哲, is involved in the 京華城 corruption case. The Taipei District Court held a hearing on the 25th, where the former director of the Taipei Urban Development Bureau, 黃景茂, was summoned. 黃景茂 pointed out that during the interrogation process, the prosecutor mentioned that the former chairman of the Urban Planning Committee, 彭振聲, and the former chief engineer of the Urban Development Bureau, 邵琇珮, had both pleaded guilty, and presented a document that was not signed. He chose not to plead guilty to uphold the dignity of civil servants. In response, the Northern District Prosecutor's Office stated that the prosecutor suggested the record for identification purposes during the interrogation, and there was no improper questioning or illegal conduct. So far, in the proceedings of the Northern Court, the handling prosecutor, 林俊言, has become the focus, as both the detained chairman of the 威京 Group and 柯文哲 himself have named him in court and accused him of improperly pressuring them to plead guilty. 黃景茂 is the third defendant to make such an accusation. During the court hearing, 黃景茂 mentioned that on October 11, 2024, the prosecutor informed him that 彭振聲 and 邵琇珮 had pleaded guilty, and presented two documents, but those documents did not bear the signatures of both individuals. Since he comes from a background as a civil servant, he chose not to plead guilty in order to defend the dignity of civil servants. However, information indicates that the document seen by 黃景茂 was not the original record but rather a printed version of a computer file. The Northern District Prosecutor's Office later responded to the media, stating that the prosecutor had suggested the record for identification during the interrogation and did not engage in illegal or improper questioning. At that time, 黃景茂 expressed doubts about the guilty pleas of 彭振聲 and 邵琇珮, but since the original record was not at hand, the prosecutor referred to the electronic files of the two individuals' records, and 黃景茂 and his lawyer did not dispute this.

• The prosecutor's transparent reasoning: suggesting records for identification, no illegal conduct.
• 黃景茂's resistance: choosing not to plead guilty for the dignity of civil servants.
• Case focus: 林俊言 has become the center of discussion.
• Numerous doubts: questions about the validity and source of the evidence documents.