http://jyu6.blogspot.com/2005/10/blog-post.html]
Okay. Forget about the innocent kid pictures for the moment. The following wordy document, based on my November 29 response to a journalist inquiry, surely will sex you up, unless, of course, you are totally numb, blind, deaf, AND brain-dead.
*****
Summary of connections to Cecilia Zhang case
I wrote my report originally for the purpose of seeking public support for my own civil case. Since it is very long and with a lot of details, I will summarize here the connections between my civil case and Cecilia Zhang case.
In the lawsuit I filed with Supreme Court of BC in November 2002, my major grievances against the defendant were sabotage of my career and harassment, mostly of a sexual nature, which started in fall 1993 and culminated in an online robbery that cost me my last job. The online robbery occurred on Oct 20-24, 2000, exactly three years BEFORE Cecilia Zhang's abduction. (Of course, this timing coincident was not the only one between these two. But certainly it was the most obvious one.)
Why am I fasting?
In early 2001, I initiated a privacy request with the federal immigration department to try to get my personal file. I believe it contained information that was detrimental to the defendant. The government did the cover-up for the defendant by withholding my personal information from me. It was around that time (summer 2001) that the idea of a hunger strike first came to my mind, a time when I realized that the government was on their side and I felt extremely hopeless and depressed.
Later, when I realized that the government and police joined the defendant in bullying and harassing me, I knew that a hunger strike to draw public's attention and support was probably my only option.
Of course, now that I think there is a reasonable chance of a connection to the Cecilia Zhang case, the most important reason I am on a hunger strike is to make sure justice is done for Cecilia.
That's why I listed 8 issues on my website, with "Justice for Cecilia Zhang" on top of my list.
Motive in the Cecilia Zhang case
(Note: Motive was unknown in official police investigation.)
The defendant wanted "private justice". Over the years, they sent me numbers with implied monetary meanings, often in a bullying and harassing manner and often indicating gross violation of my privacy. They also sent me a number of woman agents in a sexual context.
When I informed them, in November 2002, my intention to sue them in court and/or to make my case public, they intens ified their harassment efforts (gay agent, telephone harassment, targeting people around me, etc).
By then, the defendant, together with the government, had almost complete control of my life. They made it virtually impossible for me to find a lawyer to pursue my case legally, as is evidenced by the fact that even my telephone conversations made from courthouse library were monitored. Their other major worry then was the expected fallout of my going public with my case. -- Thus, I think the primary motive for Cecilia Zhang's abduction was to create a headline in case I went public with my case on October 20, 2003. (I think hatred was also a factor in her abduction and murder.)
Looking back, the first indication of their "media strategy" to deal with the fallout of my going public was that, after the start of Iraq War in late March 2003, they virtually stopped their harassment activities for a few months. -- Their rationale was that, because of the intense media coverage of Iraq War, it would be very difficult for my story to get media attention.
(I also noticed from media report that incidentally, the woman tenant, through whom the only suspect Min Chen got to know Cecilia and her family, moved out of Cecilia's house in March 2003.-- The woman was never charged.)
Timings
I think the defendant knew that the most likely date I would pick to go public with my case was October 20, 2003. Indeed, if it were not for my depression, which made writing my report even more painstaking, I would have been able to finish my report and release it on that day.
Besides, there were intense harassing activities before that date (see my report), including a woman agent who was sent to me from China in early October 2003 - just a couple of weeks before Cecilia's abduction, probably with the cooperation of the immigration department.
Looking back, it is logical to think that it was after all those efforts failed, that Cecilia Zhang's abduction occurred.
The other intriguing timing coincident was that, within a week of my second news release over the Internet on July 18, Cecilia's case was in the news again due to the police's decision to make the (only) arrest, and there was another car break-in(s) - which I believe were bullying incidents involving police and targeted at me - in my apartment building. (On October 20, 2003, the day when Cecilia abduction dominated the news, some cars were broken into in my building.)
Why Cecil ia Zhang?
Since the defendant has the ears of the government and some politicians, they could spin my case easily. Mostly, I think they spread rumors that connected one of the defendant's (Weldon's) daughters with me. These kind of rumors had the effect of masking their malicious intention (i.e., destroying my career out of jealousy and/or hatred). Besides, they further exposed me to hatred and contempt.
Of course, I do not think they would tell anybody about the reference letter of 1993 - the origin of my grievances - and the subsequent bullying and harassment.
Rumors asides, two actual incidents involving Weldon's daughters may bear some particular significance to Cecilia's case. One was a sexually explicit telephone message one of his daughters left in my answering machine in summer 1995, and the caller was clearly a minor at the time.
The other one was a stalking incident on June 15, 2000 - about four months before the online robbery - when all three of Weldon's daughters were in my usual lunch place when I walked in. The youngest one was probably 9 or 10 years old.
I do not know how the defendant might have spun those two incidents. They clearly incite hatred in people. In fact, I believe that at least three people were influenced by the first incident.
1. Ed Ng, a lawyer who said to me "all you have is one recording".
2. Warren Kinsella, a liberal insider. See the section on him in the last chapter.
3. Lisa Caruso, a woman agent sent to me in summer 2001.
For details, please read my report.
Who were involved in the Cecilia Zhang case?
(Note: To snatch a 9-year-old from her bedroom, which happened to be different from her usual bedroom due to visit of family member(s), in the middle of the night, more than one suspect was likely to be involved, as opposed to a single suspect in the current investigation. Indeed, within approximately ten days of the abduction, a lead investigator publicly stated that there was evidence to suggest that more than one person were involved in the crime.)
After my failed privacy request, I am fairly sure that the government had become actively involved in bullying and harassing me. This, together with the possible knowledge and/or cooperation of CIC in sending the last woman agent to me just 10 days before Cecilia's abduction, raised the horrifying possibility of the government's involvement in Cecilia Zhang's abduction and murder.
During the investigation and eventual fall of the Privacy Commissioner George Radwanski, I started to pay attention to liberal politicians. My feeling was that some of them knew about my case, as spun by the defendant. This feeling grew stronger during the last election as I felt that the Liberals were very concerned that, if I went public in the middle of a campaign, my case could become an election issue to the detriment of the Liberal Party. Specific incidents detailed in my report suggested Paul Martin's knowledge of my file, notwithstanding my first open letter on December 12, 2003.
As recently as in September, right before the first ministers meeting on health care, which was hugely important to the Prime Minister politically, I again experienced police bullying and Internet problems. Did the Prime Minister provide political direction in the latest incidents? I tend not to think so (but I could be wrong). What likely happened was that the politicians provided cover-up for the defendant's wrong-doings, and the defendant in turn did the dirty work on me to make sure that Mr. Martin stayed in power.
Clearly, the ruling Liberal party regarded my file as a potential political liability and they tried to do everything possible to muzzle me. But I do not think that the party or its members were directly involved in Cecilia Zhang's abduction or murder.
Conclusion
I hope the above summary will provide a general idea as to why I think there is a connection to the Cecilia Zhang case. Still, I strongly suggest that you read my report (and blog) thoroughly.
As they say, the devil is in the details.
Note: The usual disclaimer applies: Everyone is innocent until proven guilty.
