11 members of the USDT fraud ring received "rules of engagement" for dealing with interrogations, with no judge granting bail release?

Table of Contents

Judge Ignores Collusion? 11 Members of USDT Fraud Group Detained Without Bail

According to a report by the Liberty Times, the recent USDT fraud case investigated by the Tainan District Prosecutors Office involved dozens of victims with amounts totaling millions of Taiwan dollars.

During the process of determining detention, the prosecutors believed that the defendants had transmitted "rules of engagement" to group members to prepare for questioning by the authorities, showing signs of collusion. Therefore, they requested the court to detain and prohibit contact for 11 members of the fraud group.

However, this request was rejected by Judge Zheng Ya-wen from the Mandatory Disposition Division, who released the individuals without bail.

The female prosecutor handling the case was shocked and deeply frustrated by the judge's ruling.

Judge Zheng Ya-wen: It's Normal for Companies to Advise Caution

Judge Zheng Ya-wen, who rejected the prosecutors' request for detention, graduated from the 39th Judicial Officers Training Session and was transferred to the Tainan District Court for criminal trials in September 2012. Since August 2021, she has been handling criminal mandatory dispositions.

The authorities stated that the fraud group members were informed via text messages:

"Before the police questioning, make sure to contact the defendant. If anyone's statement is a little off, it will lead everyone to the District Prosecutors Office."

The authorities questioned how a legitimate company would instruct employees on how to respond to police questioning.

Judge Zheng Ya-wen believed:

The defendants' advice to be cautious in their statements to avoid causing legal troubles for the company is reasonable.

Tainan High Court Remands the Case Back to Tainan District Court

Following an appeal by the Southern Prosecutors Office, the Tainan High Court ruled that there were indeed questionable aspects in providing members with rules of engagement and revoked the decision, remanding the case back to the Tainan District Court for reconsideration.

The Tainan District Court clarified several points:

1. An increase in fraud cases does not determine the conditions for detention.

2. The seriousness of the criminal suspicion should be assessed based on the overall evidence.

3. Whether the content of the text messages involves collusion is a decision made by the judge based on the evidence in the case file.

4. The increase in fraud crimes is a nationwide public safety issue, not unique to Tainan, and is not directly related to the decision on whether to detain individuals in this particular case.