The Nina Wang Case.

[Danny VdB]

Hi all,


This topic had disappeared with Howard's departure from the network.
So I am reopening it for those who want to report or comment on it.


Danny

[Alvin Chua]

Hi Danny,

Its sad new to hear that Mr Howard have left the network. Any reason from him for the departure?

[Danny VdB]

>Its sad new to hear that Mr Howard have left the network. Any reason from him for the departure?

Hi Alvin,


You can ask him.

His idea of what this network (or feng shui) "should be", didn't seem to fit with what this network "is"
So he made his conclusions.


Danny

[Annie Pecheva]

Hi,

Good to have this topic again.
Joseph Yu started to post in his blog a series of articles and his report from the court. Here is the link:
http://fsrcenter.blogspot.com/2009/07/my-report.html


Greetings to all,

Annie

[Joseph Yu]

Hi All,

When the two Fung Shui expert witnesses, Mr. Szeto and myself, presented our reports to the court, the judge had some doubts about allowing us to be part of the trial as there was no precedence. After examining our reports, the judge commented that I had a judgemental statement about Nina Wang could not have believed in the absurd idea of a Fung Shui Will. As an expert witness, we were to present factual opinions from our knowledge but not to make any judgement. I agreed to remove the statement and the report was accepted. Mr. Szeto had to remove a statement about the implication of Tony Chan keeping the Fung Shui Will instead of burning it in the ceremony. Either the plaintiff added this new allegation or the statement had to be removed.

Cross-examination is a process when the barrister in the opposite camp attack the witness statements. Mr. Szeto was accused of plagiarizing a website when he wrote his expert witness report. He obviously did not understand the seriousness of the allegation and explained that he had read the content of the website and found that the materials were correct before he copied the materials into his report. The barrister used over 3 hours to discredit his report. When it was my turn, instead of attacking the materials in my report, the barrister asked questions to confirm the way I learned Fung Shui. My reply was consistent with what I wrote in the report and the judge told the barrister there was no need to question me further.

Joseph

[Annie Pecheva]

Hi,

Here is a new article on Nina Wang's case, written by Ken Lai in his blog:

http://kenlaifengshui.blogspot.com/2009/07/man-who-is-both-feng-shu...

Monday, July 27, 2009
The man who is both a Feng Shui genius AND a Feng Shui idiot

Is it possible for someone to be a Feng Shui genius AND Feng Shui idiot at the same time?

A case in point would be Nina Wang's $13 billion estate legal case in Hong Kong.

Tony Chan, Nina Wang's "secret lover", claims that Nina had paid him US$30M in cash and eventually willed her whole estate to him because of "love".

Nina's original heir, Chinachem Charity foundation claims that Nina paid US$30M to Tony for his "Feng Shui services" and NOT out of "love".

Each side of the litigating party has found their own "expert Feng Shui witness" to testify about the "prowness" or "lack of prowness" of Tony Chan's Feng Shui knowledge.

Tony Chan has hired the world famous traditional/ classical Feng Shui master Mr. YYZ. Based on Tony's Feng Shui practices of burning real paper money, digging of "Feng Shui holes", burying of ritualistic objects and Tony's secret Feng Shui manuscript, MR. YYZ concludes that Tony is "a Feng Shui master who does not know Feng Shui".

This conclusion is exactly what Tony's lawyer wants--- that Tony Chan does not know much about Feng Shui and hence, it is his charm or Nina's love that the latter willed her estate to Tony.

Incidentially, Mr. YYZ is also the co-author of "The complete idiot guide to Feng Shui" book.

Chinachem Charity has solicited the service of a Daoist Feng Shui master Mr. Szeto. 80% of the Macau casino Feng Shui jobs were done by him. He also hosts a few occult and supernatural cable TV shows in Hong Kong. So Mr. Szeto has the "home field advantage" and name-recognition here.

Mr. Szeto did not talk low about Tony Chan's Feng Shui practices. Instead, he explains the hidden meanings and rationale of each ritual objects used by Tony. Obviously, Tony does not do traditional but ritualistic Feng Shui.

Mr. Szeto has stopped short of saying Tony is a Feng Shui genius. After all, who in Feng Shui history has made more money than Tony Chan? Even Mr. Szeto has made a lot less than him!

So, did these two Feng Shui expert witnesses tell the truth?

In my opinion, both did tell the truth BASED on their own special perspective or bias. A traditional-trained Feng Shui master will definitely testify that someone who practice ritualistic Feng Shui is NOT real (or traditional) Feng Shui. It is just weird that Tony Chan's lawyers had hired a traditional Feng Shui master instead of a ritualistic one.

This case illustrates the diversity of Feng Shui practices and problems in defining what is "real Feng Shui". I think the business of "expert Feng Shui witness" will be a short-lived one.

Ken Lai

[Annie Pecheva]

Dear Joseph,

In one article from China Daily, I read the following:

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/hkedition/2009-07/11/content_8414444.htm

"Edward Chan, counsel for Tony Chan, questioned the credibility of Szeto's report, saying some of the report's content is plagiarized from websites, including a blog written by Cheng Chi-yin.

A website Szeto referred to used incorrect Chinese characters carrying the same pronunciation but different meanings. Chan suggested Szeto copied them into his report without correction".

Wow, this sounds like a rough mistake of Mr. Szeto!
Can you comment on this? Which were these Chinese characters?

I enjoy reading your posts in your blog.

Greetings,

Annie

[Danny VdB]

Dear Annie, all,



Ken Lai's article comes close to my own conclusions based on what I have read about this case so far.

In a way Joseph has gotten himself into a no-win situation.
Apart from having had the brief opportunity to say in the court what he thinks real "feng shui" should be, neither outcome of the court case will be good.

If Tony Chan wins the case, then Joseph has played a part in helping a practitioner of the kind of "ritualistic feng shui" that he abhors (according to his blog), and Tony Chan gets away with millions of dollars.
This would only serve to strengthen the other practitioners of this ritualistic feng shui.

If Tony Chan loses the case, then Joseph has been the expert witness for the losing side, and in the eyes of the public has agreed to work for a crook.

I wonder if Joseph has properly thought about all implications of agreeing to being used as the expert witness for Mr Chan.
Will not people in Hong Kong (and elsewhere) logically ask where is the abhorrence for superstitious and ritualistic feng shui, when one is ready to help one of these practitioners by serving as his expert witness in the court.?


Danny

[Joseph Yu]

Dear Danny, All,

An expert witness is a witness who testifies within his capacity to help the court to understand things related to his field of expertise. He is not working for either the Plaintiff or the Defendant. He does not work for them even though he is paid by one of them. However, if the one who retains the expert witness finds that his testimony is detrimental to him, then he can terminate the relationship and he will not provide the expert witness report. Therefore, it does not matter who wins the case, an expert witness wins if his testimony is honest and shows integrity of character.

In my report, it is stated that Tony Chan worked as a Fung Shui Master but his work was not Fung Shui related. In fact, most Fung Shui Masters in HK do not consider digging of holes in various Chinachem sites "planting life base 种生基 (zhong sheng ji)". It may be just as Tony Chan said, to enhance luck according to the first Ju 局 in the book 天圖布局 given to him by his late father. This is further confirmed by the fact that Nina Wang's finger nails, hair and her four pillar chart were not among the items unearthed from the sites. These things are essential parts of "planting a life base".

To be involved in this court case, I will neither win nor lose. What I gain is the involvement which is wonderful experience. During my stay in HK, one of my friends introduced me to some very wealthy people and to my surprise, they know a lot about Feng Shui and Four Pillars as they have consulted all the top practitioners. They said they would like to introuduce clients to me if I work in HK but I have decided to retire and spend my time enjoying life rather than making money that I do not need.

Josephies

[Joseph Yu]

Dear Annie,

Ghost Valley Master (Gui Gu Zi 鬼谷子) was a famous person in the Spring Autumn Period. The book written by Professor Chan Ying Leuk used the wrong character for "valley" and wrote 鬼榖子instead. The two characters have the same pronounciation but the latter means "cereals".

Apart from what Edward Chan stated, in my report I also pointed out several obvious errors:

1) Mr. Szeto quoted from Professor Chan's book that Zhang Liang 张良 planted a life base for himself putting his finger nails, hair and four pillar chart in the coffin. I pointed out that Four Pillars was invented in the Tang Dynasty 唐朝 and improved and made popular in the Song Dynasty 宋朝 by Xu Zi Ping 徐子平. Zhang Liang lived in the late Qin 秦 and early Han Dyansties 汉朝 which is many hundred years earlier.

2) Mr. Szeto plagiarized the whole paragraph from a Taiwan website about Yao Chong 姚崇 planting a life base. To support this, Xin Tong Shu 新唐书 was quoted. Four characters were deleted purposely and the meaning was totally changed. The story in Xin Tang Shu was about Yao Chong's great grandson constructed a tomb by the side of his great grandfather's tomb. This tomb was to be used to bury himself after his death.

Joseph

[Danny VdB]

Hi Joseph,


> An expert witness is a witness who testifies within his capacity to help the court to understand things related to his field of expertise. He is not working for either the Plaintiff or the Defendant.


That's the beautiful theory, but in actual practice everybody knows that the expert witnesses were chosen and payed by their respective side of the case.
Is there anybody in the world who believes that these reports are independant and unbiased?
The judges also know there is likely to be bias (ranging from carefully hidden to rather plain), and take it into account.
This system is used because if only one expert witness was chosen, who will decide? The only fair solution is to let both sides bring in an expert of their choice.

***

For example the two handwriting experts.
Why did one find only 4 writing irregularities in the will, and the other one 40?
Without knowing anything more than that we can already tell which expert was retained by which side, don't we?

Same for the reports you and Mr Sveto brought.
The statements you had to remove from your report already tell us for which side you are working.
Suppose for a moment you would have been the expert witness retained by Chinachem, would your report have contained the remark that Nina Wang could not have believed in the absurd idea of a Fung Shui Will.?
I don't think so.
Mr Svetos' report would also have been different if he was payed by Tony Chan.
It is not that you both are lying, but the perspective and bias will be different when you are working on the other side. And even if you say the same thing, it may be phrased rather differently.

By the way, how did you come to this conclusion on what Nina Wang could have believed or not?
When a person is even a little bit gullible, and sick to the point of dying soon, desperate.., then they will easily believe in almost anything than can possible prolong their life...


> an expert witness wins if his testimony is honest and shows integrity of character.
---

Then didn't you both lose already when you had to remove a prejudiced statement from your reports?
The judge asked to remove the statements and kept the rest, but at that moment he also knew already that both reports were quite biased.

And isn't there also something like honesty towards one's own principles?
If not purely for the money, then why would somebody who abhors ritual feng shui, be willing to lend himself to serve as the expert witness on the side of somebody who probably practiced, taught and sold such ritual feng shui "services"..?
That's what I don't understand very well.
(It really doesn't matter if he got it from his father's book or not..., it is ritual feng shui all the same..)

Maybe it's just the court culture being different in that part of the world, I don't know.


Danny

[Joseph Yu]

Dear Danny,

I made the statement that Nina Wang would not have believed in such an absurd idea because it was my judgement that writing something to fool Heaven and at the same time to ask Heaven's mercy is absurd. The judge did not accept this statement not becaues it was biased but because I was not in a position to judge. He mentioned that I took over his position to make judgement.

If Chinachem approached me in the beginning, they would have given up retaining me as expert witness right away. It would be the same as Tony Chan stopped using Giles as handwriting expert witness. The fact is that I would not change anything I was to say or the way to say no matter who retained me.

You don't understand the Chinese culture. No one, no matter how evil or how stupid, dare to fool Heaven. This is in the DNA of the Chinese people. In the old days, the emperor was considered the Son of Heaven 天子 and to cheat the emperor was a crime leading to the death penalty. The reason I drew the conclusion that Nina Wang could not have believed in such a theory because it is absurd to try to cheat the gods in Heaven.


The judge asked to remove the statements and kept the rest, but at that moment he also knew already that both reports were quite biased.>

I already explained the reason the judge gave when he asked me to remove that statement. For ther rest of the reports, the judge believed that they might be helpful although he might judge all according to his understanding of the statements.



My stand point is not to avoid people who brings Fung Shui a bad name. I stand out to denounce such deeds. When cross-examined, I told the court that I still hold the belief to destroy such practices. The case is not about someone sued for practising something that I abhor. It is about whether the Will is a Fung Shui Will. It does not matter whether someone is whom I dislike, my statement as expert witness may be benefial to or harmful to him but it will be the truthful statement.

Suppose someone is a cheater and I abhor cheaters. If I saw him in a restaurant when someone was murdered in another part of the city, should I stand out to witness that he could not be the murderer when he was charged for murder?

Isn't your allegation illogical?

Joseph

[Danny VdB]

Dear Joseph,


> You don't understand the Chinese culture. No one, no matter how evil or how stupid, dare to fool Heaven. This is in the DNA of the Chinese people. In the old days, the emperor was considered the Son of Heaven 天子 and to cheat the emperor was a crime leading to the death penalty. The reason I drew the conclusion that Nina Wang could not have believed in such a theory because it is absurd to try to cheat the gods in Heaven.
---

But isn't this Mr Sveto a Chinese as well?
And didn't he say that he performed about 400 such feng shui will ceremonies for customers?
So, we can already forget about this "no one in China would try to..."

***

I agree that the feng shui will idea is absurd. I am definitely not going to use it myself.
But it is no more or less absurd than this petition to Heaven idea you described in your blog the other day.
And there you mention how it is popular in China and plenty of people believe in it , no doubt about it.

If plenty Chinese people can believe in this petition to heaven (and ready to spend a night in a coffin for it), then why wouldn't they believe in something like a "feng shui will"?
There is plenty of absurd ideas that are being believed by people all around the world.

So, just this feng shui idea will being absurd, does not mean in any way that Nina Wang could not have believed in it.
That's where your reasoning was illogical.
When people are desperate enough (e.g. when they are diagnosed with a deadly disease), they are are not rarely ready to believe and pay for even the most outrageously absurd "cures".
That's well known, the court doesn't even need to call forward a psychological expert witness for it.

***

Now, if we go a bit into the "logic" of this petition to heaven you described.
It seems to me feng shui will becomes a rather logical extension of it.
In the feng shui will one donates all the money, rather than only part. So supposedly it will be more effective.
And by putting it in form of a "will" complete with some witnesses signing, it shows a more firm commitment and trust than when it is just a "petition" or "promis". So again supposedly more effective.

Can something like that be sold to somebody?
Yes, if they are desperate and naive enough, and if the original "petition to heaven" has not helped, and dead is nearing..., then that person may be easily convinced to try something "stronger": make a feng shui will.
People who are desperate do not act logically, they act emotionally and sometimes even panicky.
Is that what happened, here?
We don't know, but definitely we cannot rule it out as being too absurd.
It's only a small step more than the petition to heaven, which you say is already being believed by many in China.

***

The story you bring about the cheater who is accused of murder is not applicable here.
If you are the only person who can give somebody an alibi for a very grave crime like a murder, then I agree you would do it even if you dislike him. Because not doing it could land him in jail for a crime he has not done. It does not compare to his bad acts when he cheated some people.

But here it is not as if you were the only person who has the credentials to function as an expert witness on feng shui.
There are many.
So in your story we could say there were a hundred different people who saw the cheater in the restaurant that day.
Then if he asks you to be his witness for alibi, you could simply say sorry and suggest to take somebody else who saw him there, for example the people who were also eating at his table, or the owner of the restaurant.


Here no murder has happened, it is only about some poor money.
If somebody whose practices I dislike (not even as strong as "abhor") asks me to serve as his expert witness, then I would smilingly suggest he take somebody else as there are enough other candidates.
This is about standing by one's own principles, and not unnecessarily getting associated with practices one dislikes.

Even if it is not proven that Tony Chan abused ritual feng shui, it has also not been ruled out.
You say the case is not directly about the practices you abhor.
But there is a very reasonable possibility that the case is directly related to his activities in ritual feng shui.
Otherwise , why would they have to call in "feng shui experts" if "ritual feng shui" is not in the picture?

***

So a more fitting metaphor is: somebody who abhors meat and the killing of animals, has agreed to serve as the expert witness for a wealthy butcher who is accused of having killed deers in the National park.
That's what still looks absurd to me.
Other vegetarians and animal lovers will simply ask why you are agreeing to help that butcher.
It is not an illogical question.



Danny.