資料來源： 鯨魚網站
作者：法律人 2012.06.11
所謂「扁案」的 5 大荒謬
Five Absurdities in the Cases involving
former President Chen.
Chen was wanted by the KMT, and that’s all the prosecution and the court need to know…
Chen was wanted by the KMT, and that’s all the prosecution and the court need to know…
1. 史無前例，檢察官：「辦不出來就走人」
Prosecutor’s avowal to indict Chen, an
unprecedented breach of impartiality.
2008 年 9 月 15 日，陳雲南主任檢察官率特偵組檢察官八人，一字排開召開記者會，宣示扁案「辦不出來就走人」，創下舉世司法史先例。
From the very beginning of the news breaking
the investigation on Chen, the prosecution office has been gearing up,
apparently under the pressure, if not dire direction, of the KMT, to lock down
Chen instead of finding the related truth. This observation was initially made
lucid when, on September 15th, 2008, the chief Prosecutor Yun-Nan Chen,
accompanied by eight prosecutors assigned for the case under the Special
Investigation Division (SID), made his epoch-making avowal that the
investigation must indict Former President Chen otherwise the Chief Prosecutor
would resign from his post. The whole operation of spreading the dragnet to
catch the former president at any cost was hence initiated, without any
scruples of justice maneuver or even political persecution based on false
criminal claims.
2008 年 9 月 23 日，擔任國民黨秘書長的立委吳敦義質詢法務部長王清峰扁案相關人事，王清峰竟稱：「沒有問題，回去馬上交辦」。並於質詢結束後，立即前往國民黨中央黨部與吳敦義討論相關問題。
As the mission to nail down Chen has been
publicly undertaken by the SID, the KMT political machine moved further to
mobilize the Justice Ministry in the direction of catching Chen at any cost,
blatantly without any reservations in open words exChenged in line of this
ruthless political purging. This appalling fact was projected in the scene when
then Minister of Justice Ching-Feng Wang publicly noted that, almost
obsequiously, the case shall instantly be assigned and handled duly, when addressing
to the inquiry made by then General Secretary of the KMT Dun-Yi Wu at the
parliament interpellation meeting. Yet instead of returning to her office, Wang
headed right to the headquarters of the KMT to discuss with, if not being
briefed by, Dun-Yi Wu on how to proceed with the case against former president
Chen.
2008 年 10 月 24 日，行政院長劉兆玄在立法院接受國民黨立委盧嘉辰質詢，關於平抑物價與「收押」陳水扁等議題，脫口說出：「我們盡快來做」。2008 年 11 月 11 日，陳水扁前總統被特偵組偵訊後，上手銬收押。
The mission to catch Chen has instantly
become the priority of the KMT government as a whole. It took less than a month
for the then prime minister Zhao-Suan Liu to publicly avow his involvement in
the case against Chen. At a parliament interpellation meeting addressing to the
inquiry directed by KMT parliament member Jia-Chen Lu on the efforts to level
prices and, quite irrelevantly, to detain the former president Chen, prime
minister Liu slipped his words and said “…we shall speed up all the efforts in
this direction…”
And then a few weeks later, on November 11,
2008, after being interrogated by the SID for days, Former President Chen was
humiliatingly handcuffed and delivered to his endless detention up to now, on
vague claims of fraud and corruption, which were mostly overruled by subsequent
court decisions.
Chen was wanted by the KMT, and that’s all
the prosecutors and the judges need to know…
2.為關而關，台北地方法院審判中途換法官
Judge who was known to be prejudiced against
Chen was singled out to illegally replace the legal judge to sentence Chen life
imprisonment based on perjured declaration and fractioned facts.
特偵組收押、起訴陳水扁前總統，地方法院承審法官周占春合議庭於 2008 年 12 月 13 日及 18 日兩度裁決無保釋放，台北地方法院違背法官法定原則，召開庭長會議，改由判決馬英九特別費案無罪的蔡守訓合議庭審理。蔡守訓法官接手後，果然一再裁決收押陳前總統，並判處重刑。
The investigation and the detention and
indictment of Chen was indeed made with efficiency, yet the judge legally
assigned for the case, Justice Zhan-Chun Zhou has twice rendered decision of
releasing Chen free of bail. Yet the KMT influenced the Taipei district court
to, in dire violation of the law and regulation, replace the legally assigned
Justice Zhou with a Shou-Xun Cai, who was singled out to hear the case at issue
based on his record of favoring Ying-Jiu Ma, later president of Taiwan, who was
indicted on claims of embezzlement but was acquitted by Cai. It is a
longstanding rule that the judge must be randomly determined by lot-picking to
at least in formality avoid influence of prejudice. And a judge like Cai with
reputation of favoring KMT should be challenged even if he got lot-picked for
the case. But the KMT has wielded its influence on the court to bend the rule and
renamed Cai to hear the case, to serve the purpose of the KMT to use the court
to persecute Chen out of fragile legal ground. Cai did exactly, if not more
than, what the KMT wanted and kept detaining Chen for years before sentencing
him life and putting Chen in jail to rot and die away.
3.檢察官脅迫，證人辜仲諒、杜麗萍作偽證
Perjured witnesses were forced by the
prosecutor to be given for indictment
特偵組檢察官於偵訊期間，涉嫌教唆證人辜仲諒、杜麗萍指控陳前總統。杜麗萍在法庭上坦承她的自殺未遂是檢察官以收押脅迫的結果；辜仲諒更在「紅火案」高院庭訊時和他的律師及財務長供述，他在特偵組時，檢察官要他作不利扁的偽證，事實上「紅火案」的三億未流入扁家；李界木也被檢察官威脅利誘，如不配合，將讓他傾家蕩產。結果，陳前總統以「國務機要費案」被告收押，卻因「龍潭購地案」判刑入獄。
During the period of investigation,
prosecutors in charge of the Chen case were alleged to have repeatedly coerced
witnesses Zhong-Liang Gu and Li-Ping Du to make false accusation against Former
President Chen. Du confessed later at court that she even committed suicide
because the prosecutor has threatened to detain her if she refuse to cooperate
to give false allegation against Chen; Gu also alleged with his attorney and
treasurer during the court hearing of “Red Fire Case” that he faced threats
during the investigation by the SID to make false allegation against Chen, and
in fact the cash at question in the “Red Fire Case” did not go to Chen’s or his
family’s pocket; Jie-Mu Li was also threatened by the prosecutor to state
against Chen or he will lose hi pants in defying such order. Therefore,
ironically, Chen was detained based on the case of “State Classified Fund,” but
was, though eventually found not guilty in that respect, given tough sentence
based on another coined-up case involving property purchase where false
allegations were collected by prosecutors with coercion and illegal force. The
whole record of the investigation, indictment, interrogation and even the court
hearing were a chronicle of flagrant and hideous violation of due process,
gross abuse of the power of justice, and dreadful persecution on human rights.
4.「國務機要費案」高等法院改判無罪
Protracted imprisonment is outrageous
persecution since the corruption charge against Chen was overruled by the high
court;
2006 年高檢署檢察官陳瑞仁以「國務機要費案」起訴總統夫人吳淑珍引發「紅衫軍事件」；2008 年陳水扁總統卸任後，立即被發布境管，不到半年立即由特偵組約談後收押；2011 年 8 月 26 日，高等法院更一審改判「國務機要費案」貪污部分全部無罪。
It is clear that the KMT has been determined
to decimate Chen by all possible means, but all of the outstanding charges were
proved groundless.
The KMT’s plot to overthrow Chen’s regime with abuse of judicial force began even years before Chen’s second term ended. In 2006, Prosecution Office of the High Court indicted the first lady madam Chen on claims of embezzlement over state classified fund, and triggered the rebellious movement of “Red Shirt Army,” which carried out a prolonged and chaotic encampment of people hostile to Chen at the square in front of the Presidential Palace.
The KMT’s plot to overthrow Chen’s regime with abuse of judicial force began even years before Chen’s second term ended. In 2006, Prosecution Office of the High Court indicted the first lady madam Chen on claims of embezzlement over state classified fund, and triggered the rebellious movement of “Red Shirt Army,” which carried out a prolonged and chaotic encampment of people hostile to Chen at the square in front of the Presidential Palace.
In 2008, Former President Chen was instantly
imposed with departure banishment, a precursor of his impending ordeal. Half a
year from then, the SID launched its investigation on him and shortly after
interrogation and little if any criminal evidence, Chen was detained, endlessly
till he was sentenced life in prison.
However, the High Court overruled the
criminal sentence on corruption in the “State Classified Fund Case,” yet Chen
remained imprisoned on ground of other minor charges. Chen’s health much
deteriorated since 2011, but the KMT, in spite of international human rights
institutions’ repeated pleadings and Chen’s personal request, ferociously
rebutted any request to either improve the treatment to the former president in
the prison or to render probation for Chen to receive sufficient medical check
and treatment. The KMT is eager to rear the crop of its abuse of judicial
force, that is the demise of Chen. And if rescue could not be not come in time,
the perilous state of the Former President would soon lead to irreversible
tragedy.
5.所謂「扁四大案」大多已判無罪定讞
It is a pity that the image of a banal and
corruptive official cast for the Former President Chen has somehow stabilized
even among some of the used-to-be-fans of Chen, despite that all the
far-fetched and fragmented charges have either proved ungrounded or still
pending in the court deliberating.
自 2006 年「紅衫軍」、「國務機要費案」，到 2008 年 8 月 14 日，卸任後的陳水扁總統召開記者會，承認選舉結餘款未誠實申報，違反法律相關規定；並在吳淑珍主導下將錢匯出海外，因而向全國人民致歉，引發政敵圍剿與媒體大肆報導「扁家貪腐」以及所謂「四大案」。經過數年司法審理與政治沉澱，除了「國務機要費案」更一審改判無罪之外，「外交零用金案」、「二次金改案」等或因罪證不足甚至法官直斥是檢察官拼湊、臆測，二審法院大多判決無罪定讞。「南港展覽館案」更未起訴陳前總統，該案主角余政憲、吳淑珍也由貪汙罪改為圖利罪，且尚未定讞。
All the illegal, if not only inappropriate
things Chen has directly or indirectly involved so far are the failure to
declare the balance of his presidential campaign fund and the lack of guard on
his wife’s wiring money overseas. The criminal cases the prosecutors had
endeavored in fabricating to frame Chen are these: “1. The State Classified
Fund Case,” “2. The Diplomatic Allowance Case,” “3. The Second Monetary Reform
Case” and “4. the Nan-Kang Exhibition Hall Case.” The case 1 has been given an
acquittal decision by retrial. The 2 and 3 cases are built on total lack of
evidence and presumption and sentenced without legal ground, and have mostly
not reached their final stage. The 4 case has not even named Chen as a
defendant. Yet the persecuting imprisonment of the Former President is being
carried on endlessly, with an openly adopted forecast that Chen will spend his
limited days in the crucifying jail.
Chen has committed some flaws, but the pains
imposed on him and his families have much exceeded what he and the rest
deserve.
If Chen would be left to wither and die in
the torment of imprisonment, it would be equal to witness the death of judicial
fairness and human rights causes in Taiwan.
資料來源： 獨孤木 - 打狗救台灣
作者：獨孤木 2009.08.26
事實上扁案的疑點實在是多的不像話，怎麼會特偵組串了這麼久，證人的說詞還是兜不攏？這實在也是很神奇。
我在這邊摘錄一些我自己覺得比較重要的部份。
1.辜成允付出來的四億，到底是佣金還是行賄？
本來辜成允就打算付2億的仲介費，但是後來沒有買主，認為這個地不好賣，所以提高佣金到 4 億。可是，如果要行賄，不用加碼嗎？
從頭到尾，辜成允再三強調，他要付的錢，是把地賣掉的佣金。蔡銘哲沒有告訴他錢要給誰，也沒有告訴他錢要跟誰來分，四億元是純粹支付土地佣金，不是行賄官員，也沒有指示任何人去做不法的事情如賄賂等等。對他來說，把土地賣掉是最重要的，並不是為了要讓龍潭工業園區納入竹科而支付佣金。也就是說，他沒有行賄的念頭，他連錢的去向都不甚了解。
如果辜成允沒有行賄的念頭，雙方沒有對價關係，那阿扁為什麼會被以貪污罪起訴？
2.為什麼捐錢給國民黨是政治獻金，捐錢給阿扁就不算政治獻金？
阿扁與吳淑珍聲稱收到的兩億元是政治獻金，特偵組不予採信，特偵組在起訴書中強調，當時辜成允既已背負巨債，當然不可能給被告陳水扁、吳淑珍夫婦高達新臺幣4億元之鉅額政治獻金。可是筆錄中辜成允一再聲明，四億元是土地佣金，為什麼這個說法不足採信？
在他的筆錄裡面也特別提到，他在選舉時，曾捐給國民黨政治獻金。為什麼背負巨債的辜成允捐給國民黨就是政治獻金，捐給阿扁就因為他背負巨債，所以政治獻金的說法就不足採信？
3.龍潭工業園區納入竹科的權責單位是行政院，行政院長表示，阿扁沒有在他決策過程中進行指示，或是壓力，那阿扁介入的實質證據在哪邊？
阿扁有沒有因為收到這筆政治獻金，就做出違背職務的行為？也就是所謂的對價關係？如果阿扁做出違背職務的行為，那收受賄賂罪就成立，如果沒有對價關係，那收賄罪就不會成立。
根據當時行政院長與秘書長的證詞指出，阿扁僅針對龍潭工業園區納入竹科進行政策性指示，而且開會時，其實都是與會人員共同討論後所做的決議。如果阿扁想要主導這件事情的進行，為什麼不直接交代當時的行政院長游院長照辦即可，反倒還要開會進行討論？
當時的行政院長游錫?院長也表示，這原本便是行政院會主動推動的重大政策，阿扁沒有在他決策過程中進行指示，或是壓力。所有程序都是依法處理。如果是這樣，那對價關係從何成立？
如果阿扁真的知道有這筆賄款的存在，為什麼會做出這樣的指示：「三個月內需要與達裕公司談妥土地價格，如果達裕公司不接受，就宣告放棄納編為科學工業園區」。
更何況，2009 年 4 月 9 日與魏哲和對質審判筆錄中也澄清了，阿扁只為了這件事情，與行政院長、副院長、國科會主委與科管局李界木局長，五個人在總統府開過一個非正式的會議，會中沒有所謂討論，也沒有所謂共識，也沒有總統裁示要採第一案或是總統講三個月內談不成就拉倒或是三個月內必須要完成的事情，阿扁唯一所講到的是，「選舉是我的事情，其他事情你們行政部門去處理，該怎麼做就怎麼做」，就是這樣一個十來分鐘報告，最後草草結束。
光是這樣的說法，如何可以證明有對價關係的存在？
辜成允說跟總統沒有接觸，蔡銘杰說沒有見過總統，辜仲諒也說沒有為了龍潭去見總統、請託總統，那阿扁涉案的證據到底在哪裡？
4.檢方在結辯時，還刻意強調龍潭購地案浪費納稅人之血汗錢，該項推論立論根據為何？
依據起訴書記載，該案的土地價格，是由科管局建管組許勝昌、劉啟玲與達裕公司依法定程序展開土地先行使用及買賣議價程序，而於 2004 年 2 月 6 日經租金三次減價及土地售價八次減價之議價程序後，雙方達成以與市價相仿之每月每平方公尺租金新臺幣 35 元，每坪售價新臺幣 4 萬 650 元之價格。
既然土地價格與市價相仿，並未圖利地主，政府價購土地後，也順利解決廠商建廠問題，促進經濟發展，那這樣的交易會對國家造成什麼樣的損害？
業主為加速解決土地出售，提供仲介者佣金，這與國庫何干？浪費納稅人之血汗錢之說到底立論為何？
未完（待續）
資料來源： 獨孤木 - 打狗救台灣
作者：獨孤木 2009.08.27
5.本案之中，這佣金金額到底是多少錢，多出來的一億元又是誰匯的，諸多疑點完全沒有查明。為何倉促起訴？
在檢方起訴書中，辜仲諒說辜成允給予新臺幣 4 億元佣金，可是阿扁與吳淑珍的認知，是辜仲諒提出之仲介費為新臺幣5億元，事後並有退還新臺幣1億元之事實。而蔡銘哲的說法，則是賄款 4 億元。辜成允則是說付了 4 億元，可是事後又收了蔡銘哲退回的 1 億元。
那這憑空出現的一億元，是為何會出現在蔡銘哲的戶頭中，又為什麼會退回去給辜成允？到底是不是阿扁與吳淑珍的賄款？
檢方指稱這 1 億元是辜成允匯錯了，蔡銘哲退款。事實上這種說法是被辜成允否認的。新台幣一億元不是新台幣一百塊，怎麼可能匯錯了？或是誤算？那真相到底為何？
蔡銘哲聲稱拿了一億元現金給吳淑珍，除了被告供詞之外，實際的證據在哪裡？這一點沒有查明，阿扁的貪污金額就變成了新臺幣1億元現鈔及美金 600 萬元。阿扁在龍潭案到底收到多少錢？
一億現金不是小數目，一次一千萬拿給吳淑珍，時間地點都沒查明。是交給吳淑珍跟誰呢？地點在哪邊呢？不管是官邸或是總統府，總該有個會客記錄吧。那有去查嗎？吳淑珍是個身體不便的殘障人士，他收到一千萬現金總也要叫人幫他拿到銀行去吧？難不成自己推輪椅載一千萬去存錢？那應該會有其他人證呀？一億的現金很多耶。為什麼這個地方都不查？
6.如果吳淑珍收到的是賄款，為什麼出力最多的吳淑珍，最後才收到錢？
辜成允付錢的時間是從 2004 年 1 月 20 日起至 4 月 13 日止，就付清四億元的佣金。除了無法證實的一億元現金之外，事實上吳景茂收到 600 萬的時間是六月份，可是一開始的資金，從二月開始，三月、四月，全都到蔡銘哲的帳戶或他哥哥、姐姐的帳戶，連李界木都是在三、四月時就收到 3,000 萬的賄款。如果吳淑珍收到的是賄款，為什麼出力最多的吳淑珍，最後才收到錢？
事實上關於龍潭案的部份，鄭文龍律師在 4/15 的開庭記錄中有很精彩的論述。各個證人證詞兜不攏的地方，其實辯方律師下足了功夫。從所有證人證詞的論述與疑點來看，龍潭案的真相其實相當有可能是蔡銘哲向辜成允收了四億元的佣金，接著卻對吳淑珍說是政治獻金，然後只給了吳淑珍兩億元的政治獻金。
7.阿扁在國務機要費中，從來沒有經手與參與，因公務支出還超過貪污金額，為什麼會被以貪污罪起訴？
檢察官指控阿扁涉犯侵占、詐領、貪瀆一億零四百一十五萬元。可是事實上，阿扁的公務支出，講的出來的就有一億兩千七百多萬的因公支出（註）。因公支出的金額超出貪污的金額，而吳淑珍與陳鎮慧用不實發票報銷，這件事情既無法證明阿扁知情，或者有任何的指示與參與，為什麼可以用共犯侵占公物罪來起訴他？
8.如果阿扁的海外帳戶內的金錢無法證明為犯罪所得，那洗錢又怎麼會成立呢？更何況，檢察官又如何舉證阿扁知道海外帳戶的資金移轉狀況呢？
檢方舉證阿扁參與的理由有三個。
一、陳水扁、吳淑珍是夫妻，日夜相處，每月只有新臺幣數十萬元之薪水，且資產已依法交付信託，家中無故迸出新臺幣十餘億元，豈有渾然不知之可能？
二、阿扁在其家人弊案纏身之際，為防藏匿國泰世華銀行總行保管室之新臺幣 7 億 4,000 萬元以上之鉅款遭察覺，曾指示林德訓找蔡鎮宇協助搬移藏匿。
三、葉盛茂將澤西島金融情報中心透過艾格蒙安全網路通報吳淑珍涉及海外洗錢之情資，直接面報阿扁後，陳家隨即將原在瑞士信貸銀行新加坡分行吳景茂名下之存款，全數轉至瑞士美林銀行日內瓦分行之黃睿靚帳戶內。葉盛茂又於 2008 年 1、2 月間，再度將開曼群島金融情報中心通報陳致中、黃睿靚在瑞士存款涉及洗錢之情資與相關陳報最高法院檢察署之公文，直接面交阿扁，接著阿扁與吳淑珍將留存 Awento 信託公司帳戶內之美金 191 萬餘元，分四筆全數匯至吳澧培提供之帳戶，並隨即將 Awento 信託公司之帳戶結清銷戶。
這裡面的疑點在於：
1.陳水扁的財產有很大一部份來自政治獻金，這部份到底有多少錢，可能連阿扁自己都不知道。擁有超過 10 幾億的資產並非完全不可能。
2.阿扁把 7 億 4,000 萬元從保管室中移出，檢方並沒有實際證據證明這是洗錢行為。最重要的關鍵是，這沒辦法證明這筆錢是犯罪所得。而且，這筆錢的存在，跟檢方所舉證的洗錢行為有什麼因果關係嗎？
3.葉盛茂回報情資，阿扁把帳戶裡面的金額移轉到別的戶頭，或是捐給吳澧培。這最重要的關鍵還是在於，這被移轉的金錢是否為犯罪所得？如果無法證明這是犯罪所得，那又如何可以佐證阿扁有參與洗錢的行動？
註：阿扁庭訊中所指稱他因公支出內容
第一案、F 案（八期）三千伍佰萬已經經過郭臨伍、李天送結證屬實，並有李天送領據及匯兌資料可稽。
第一案、F 案（八期）三千伍佰萬已經經過郭臨伍、李天送結證屬實，並有李天送領據及匯兌資料可稽。
第二案（W 案）657 萬 8,650 元也經過黃志芳、郭臨伍、鄭明惠、張維嘉、楊豐明、曾秀惠結證屬實，並有匯款資料在卷足憑。
第三案L案加上 F J 案 375 萬 6,600 元也已經經過黃志芳、陳心怡、周鈺玲、吳澧培結證屬實，並有匯款資料在卷可稽。
第四案 S 案兩百萬元業據彭某某結證屬實。
第五案 UN 案兩百五十萬元也已經經過蘇妍妃結證屬實。
第六案 J 案一千萬元已經經由詹某某結證屬實。
第七案機密外交工作旅費一百伍拾壹萬九千三百二十二元，經由馬永成 2008 年 9 月 11 日結證屬實。
第八案M 案陳鎮慧他在 2001 年 6 月支出明細就有記載這筆，但不是由他保管的錢來支出，2008 年 9 月 11 日馬永成筆錄也有證實。
第九案捐贈慰問施明德四百五十萬元，郭文彬已經結證屬實。
第十案清真寺修建一百四十萬元，馬永成 2009 年 9 月 11 日結證屬實。
第十一案捐助公投制憲大遊行一千萬，蔡同榮 2008 年 9 月 12 日結證屬實。
第十二案捐助 326 民主和平護臺灣大遊行兩千萬元，蘇貞昌 2008 年 9 月 23 日及李逸洋 2008 年 9 月 23 日均結證屬實。
第十三案犒賞張俊雄前院長兩百萬元，業據張俊雄 2008 年 9 月 20 日陳報狀承認本人曾經以他擔任行政院長備極辛勞犒賞兩百萬屬實。
第十四案捐款新故鄉基金會五百萬元經由葉菊蘭 2008 年 9 月 11 日結證，確實有收到總統捐款五百萬元，但他轉交給鄭南榕基金會屬實。
第十五案捐款文復會兩千零玖拾玖萬八千六百三十八元，也經由收款人郝廣才 2008 年 9 月 11 日結證屬實，並有收據四紙附卷足憑。
＃＃＃