Chinese Couple Detained in Qatar on Daughter's Death

A Chinese American couple Matthew and Grace Huang from southern California were detained in Qatar on suspicious death of their adopted daughter Gloria.

According to Huangs's defense team, 8 year old Gloria died suddenly on unknown reasons. At the time, she had not been eating anything for 4 days. The Huangs alleged that it was a habitual behavior formed when the girl was in an orphanage in Ghana before she was adopted in 2009. Gloria had showed a pattern of not eating for days, then suddenly start sensational binge eating with anything she could find, often in trash cans or from strangers' hands.

The Huangs have all of their 3 children adopted from Africa. Gloria is the middle one, between two brothers. The Huangs had been jailed for 6 months, and their murder with intent trial just began. Qatari police believed Gloria was starved to death. They also believe the Huangs have been in human trafficking business and possible human organ harvesting.

The defense team in the US prepared documents with medical proof that Gloria's rather bizarre behavior was not uncommon, and that it was unlikely that she died of starvation.

For Chinese, what is intriguing is the rationale given by the Qatari prosecutors behind the charge. Law enforcement officers raised questions about why the Huangs would adopt children who were not "good looking" and who did not share their "hereditary traits". Police suspected the Huangs must have hidden evil agenda on these children, especially since they did not send them to schools. ped

Another parent would not have allowed their children not eating for days, not even once. However, we would not second guess Huang's thoughts and their devotion to God as well as their believing in power of supreme blessing.

Although the defense team solicited most authoritative testimonies from famous pediatricians and built their defense on scientific fact findings, it will be a difficult task to challenge opposing common senses.

A Ten Year Old Girl For Sale

Ten year old Jinxi was wiping her name from an advertisement of herself painted on the outside wall of her step father's house. She only wiped out her name, but dare not touch the words 'Good Price for Sale' and the contact phone number.

August 10, 2012, Jinxi was dragged out of bed by her step father Mr. Wu Hainan to the local human trafficking market in Mile County of Yunnan Province. Wu hanged a big sign on Jinxi's neck, which read 'Good Price for Sale' and his phone number. When police was tipped to the scene, Wu was bargaining with a buyer. He insisted such as pretty and obedient girl worth at least 100 thousand Yuan ($1500).

Police escorted Jinxi back to her home, a new government development ironically named 'Harmonic Garden'. Wu refused to let police and the Jinxi in. A local official came to persuade Wu to open the door.

Police and local officials informed Wu it was against the law to sell children for money. The family had been receiving government vouchers for low income people of RMB 453 Yuan ($60) per month. They lives in a government subsidized low rent housing development. The government will help them in case of financial difficulties. In the end, Wu agreed to keep Jinxi, for now.

'Government voucher was not even enough to pay the rent for the 400 square feet apartment,' said Wu. Wu stated he was in his 50s, no longer fit to earn enough money for the family of three.

Reporters visited the family in the afternoon on August 16, guided by local police. Jinxi was scared to see so many people because she was afraid Wu had made a deal with a buyer. Many advertisements of Jinxi could be seen all around the housing development complex.

Soon it was 6 o'clock. Jinxi made dinner, then work on her summer homework and calligraphy exercises.

Her step mother Ms. Bi Sheng was disabled from Poliomyelitis. She told the reporters she found the girl when she was 3 days old on a roadside. She loved the girl. Bi said after the August 10 incident, she slept with Jinxi everyday. If Wu would sell Jinxi again, she would inform the police. She was worried she did not have strength to fight off Wu, and Jinxi would be sold one day.

Wu was not at home that day.

Here are the conversation between reporters and Jinxi:

Reporters: 'What if your step father sold you?'
Jinxi: 'I can't think that far, I don't know about future. Perhaps I do not have a good fortune'.

Reporters: 'Do you hate your biological parents?'
Jinxi: 'Sir, I don't really understand what is hate. Actually I found them, and visited their family once, where I have a big sister and a litter brother. They are very poor. I do not hate them.'

Reporters, 'Then do you hate your step parents?'
Jinxi: 'How boring and exhausted it would be if you have to hate this one and that one everyday? Why hate someone?'

Jinxi told reporters that the only thing she could do was to work hard on her schoolwork, grow up and find a good job so she can give her step parents a good life.

Reporters made several attempts to contact Jinxi's step father, but Wu refused to answer the phone. When they left, they were not sure whether they would be able to see Jinxi again.

A Disturbing Picture

A volunteer for the orphanage Children's Hope Foundation of China posted a disturbing picture. Posting a picture of this nature online probably crossed the legal boundary in many countries, therefore it will not be included in this post. However, here is a brief description: a 4 years old child (Yiyi) was laying on a bed, with her chest open top-down. A gloved hand was also in the picture, taking an organ (the heart or the livers) out of her chest.

Now, the questions:
1. The child was laying on a flowered quilt, and the background of the room showed shattered dirty cartoon boxes. The lighting was deem. It could not be a scene of an E.R., or any operating room. It could not be in a coroner's office. Where was it then?
2. There was fresh blood on the child's face. Lots of them. Is there a reason to perform autopsy minutes after the death?
3. The secene was positioned to show the child's face, body, and the organ in one composition. It is in good resolution. What is the purpose of taking such picture (except to prove the owner of the organ that was just taken out)?

About the whistle blower: Ms. Wu graduated from Capital University of Medical Sciences. She volunteered in many charity organizations. She also operated a medical equipment company, Beijing Shangdeguangye Medical Equipment Ltd.

Wu also posted a picture showing the child, Yiyi, playing with her a few months ago at the orphanage. After she learned of the child's death, she contacted the Children's Hope Foundation for information but her requests had been repeatedly denied. Another person, Shanghai based also posted she had been served an order to seal regarding this case.

Reader may follow Wu Xuxin's weibo account to check out the image. However, be warned that it is unbearable graphical. And be warned again. It may also be found here before it is censored.

While the head of the Foundation Ms. Zhang Wen responded more time would be needed before all information could be gathered and confirmed, notable writer Xu Zhirong, with online nicker Routangsen or Fleshy Tang Monk, revealed that he learned the Children's Hope Foundation charges adopting families from the US $19,150 plus RMB 35,000 for each child adopted from the orphanage. Also, the foundation has a contract with a linked travel agent that all adopting families must use. Xu demanded the Foundation a candid answer on how much money it made in the child trafficking process.

According to its website, the Children's Hope Foundation is a non-profit organization, which has started providing service to more than 4600 needed children since 1992. It was officially chartered in on 3/29/2010.

No Child Trafficking in Hunan

Today another investigation of the Shao Orphans incident was concluded by the Hunan Communist Party. "No Child Trafficking Operation Was Found", concluded the task force.

Twelve Party members were expelled from the Party, but no fault was found of the government operation.

Not sure when was this round of investigation started, and who was involved. There had been several official investigations launched by the local government after the scandal was broken out by oversea medias. Most recently, the New York Times carried the story on September 18, 2011. All previous investigations concluded no fault committed by any person or government agency.

The newest conclusion followed the suit of previous in denying any wrong doing of the more than dozens provincial government agencies of wrong doings, and insisting that no law had been broken. However, the statement did not answer questions such as why the orphanage documented those children as 'someone left at the front door of the orphanage', rather than 'delivered by the police' as how it took place; also why social agencies fabricated a different set of identification for those children so that they could be marketed as 'orphans'. In a layman's eyes, it's obvious some laws must have been broken by someone, unless it's in an absolute lawless country.

Parents of 'Shao Orphans' Arrested

The two leading parents of 'Shao Orphans' were arrested on June 22, 2011 by Shaoyang police on sex charges.

After the broke of scandal of several Chinese government agency, including many provincial level agencies engaged child trafficking on May 9, 2011, Longhui County, Shaoyang Prefecture, and Hunan Province promised to investigate. The investigation disputed all 'rumors' spared on the Internet, and cleared the local governments of any wrongdoing, as a spokesperson told the official Renmin of the CCP Central Propaganda Department on July 14, 2011. Parents alleged their children were taken away by local officials citing family planing violations (most of these children were only child of a family, some have all proper papers, some do not have proper papers due to varies reasons). Health, police and court systems forged document to make these children 'orphans' so that they may qualify for international adoption. Then these children were sold to adoptive families, most Americans', for profit. Because many of these children were named 'Shao', the scandal were referred 'Shao Orphans' in news.

The 'Shao Orphans' is not an isolated incident. Before and after the alleged time frame when the children were taken by force by government officials in Shaoyang, Hunan, several other cases in other provinces went to court trail when many other state run orphanages were found actively engaging in child trafficking for profit. In some cases, state orphanages were found paying for mob to steal babies, so that they could be sold to western families for adoption.

While the parents are preparing for legal actions, the two leading parents were arrested by police, accusing them of buying sex.

Adoptive Parents in the West have Moral Obligations, too

When I indulge myself with iPhone4 and iPad2, do I need to care how it was made? When I place my 2 years old plasma TV on the curb, am I bothered on thoughts where it goes? A little bit, in both cases, but not much. After all, they are consumer goods I buy and trash every day. There might be a feeling after attending a seminar with a tree-hugging speaker, but not much residue after 5 days or 5 tours to Wal-Mart. I am still feeling guilty from time to time, i.e. when taking a break from flipping burgers on my front lawn, by the way.

Adoption is a total different matter. The 'little angle' you received in the mail had been a member of another family before. There had been a caring Mom, a proud Dad and over-joyed grandparents, uncles and aunts. It was a sad story for any family to give up their child for whatever reason.

What if the child was stolen, or worse, taken away from his family by violent force?

In the recent exposed case of Chinese Family Planing Officials made profit by confiscating children from their families and then selling them to the West for adoption, many children were taken away from the arms of their parents by violent force.

It was long known the world that many babies were killed by Chinese Family Planning Officials, which had also been reported by the Seagull. Somehow, that had become acceptable. The killing usually happened in the delivery room where the mother had no chance to see the baby. It is never acceptable to me, and I doubt it legal in any court outside mainland China, but we all knew it was the practice of many Family Planning Officials in many places in China. We sorta taken it as granted. And when that happened, we tend to blame the parents for not being able to elude the officials. But now we are shocked. How heartbroken to see your baby and sometimes toddler taken away from you and know you will never see him again?

The scary part of the recently exposed Shaoyang case was that multiple levels of government, from the village, town to county and province and more than 10 different government agencies were involved. Some fish and hunt babies in remote rural areas and some fabricating papers to make these babies 'clean' for adoption. When 10 different government agencies told you the same story with back dated government records, can you tell?

It is a misquote in some news and blog stories that only 13 children were taken away. These 13 children was the scope of an investigative report published by "New Century". This number reflected a 'partial' list that the reporter could verify in one village (Gaoping Village of Longhui County of Hunan Province) between year 2002 and 2005.

Another misquote in some news and blog stories is that these babies are 'illegally born' per China's Family Planning Act. This is not true. Many of babies were 'lawfully' born only child of a family, with all proper documentation but still taken away nevertheless when their were discovered by the official baby hunting teams. In remote mountain areas such as the reported village, one family living away from the town could be easily overpowered by a team of 30-40 officials. Some were offered a time window to buy back their baby. In the case of the featured family, they were given one day to gather $1,700 to buy back their daughter. This equals 2 times their annual income. They was only able to borrow $1,000 from relatives and friends in one day, not enough to buy their daughter back from local officials. Then the baby was transferred to a higher level government agency where she was prepared to be sold to the West.

Adoptive Parents in the West have moral duties to respond - partially, because they have a unique role to stop this horror. Money talks. The only reason of this tragedy was because the government can make profit by selling the babies to the West at $3,000 per capital.

The always business-minded Chinese government will have to listen to their customers. If their customers stop buying, they will have to figure out how to improve or what needs to change. Chinese governmental never blink under military or political pressure, at least they always claim so. However, the Chinese government has always tried their best to appease to 'economic rules', as they are proud of doing. They will listen to the voice of their customer to keep the adoption business a lucrative income source. Only adoptive families can save more children from being taken away from their parents. Nobody else in the world has the mighty power you process to influence Chinese government's practice on this issue. If you don't want that happen to your children, you should at least 'voice' it for other's children.

There are many ways to help. For your convenience, here is a check list, from which you can pick up one or more entries to help. It wouldn't take you too much time:

• Inquire this case to the Chinese officials in charge of overseas adoption business;
  
• Contact the reporters and give them a pat on the back for their braveness and great sense of social responsibilities;
  
• Demand more documents regarding your child's identity in China; not every Chinese government officials lie, some may refuse to participate;
  
• Call your local Chinese embassy or consulate and inquire about the case. They will call home, trust the communist system;
  
• Until you receive a satisfactory answer, do not adopt more children from China;
  

This is not the first time government run orphanages were caught selling children for profit. The Hengyang Welfare Center, another prefecture-level agency in Hunan Province, was found linked to children trafficking cases a couple of years ago. In the Hengyang case, the state orphanage hired gangs to obtain children, then prepared them for international adoption. The case went to trail in the court of Qidong County on February 22, 2005. Gang members were sentenced, but no government officials were punished. This is not the first time government were caught confiscating children for profit. Another state run orphanage in Zhenyuan County, Guizhou Province was found doing exactly the same as Shaoyang officials did in this case in 2009. The orphanage vowed not to do it again, but no government officials were punished. The above two cases all covered by Chinese news media, but few noticed and little was done. This is not the first time government promised to investigate. A government task force was formed on March 11, 2006 to address the parents' complaint, regarding the children taken away in Shaoyang. It took one day for the task force to produce a report, which found no wrong doing of any government officials.

The practice of state run orphanages must be stopped. This time it might be different, with the western media's involvement. But the most powerful and ultimate motivation is still the purchasing power of western adoptive families.

Adoptive families in the West have the right to remain silent, but you also have moral obligations to do something, say something, or not doing something. You will have to be either blind or pretending to be blind to say the case was an isolated incident in one remote village. Village officials would not be able to produce the entire identity papers to make a child's file look 'clean'.

Missing Chinese Children in the US

More than 100,000 Chinese children had been adopted by western families at Chinese government run orphanage. In the year 2010, according to 'China Adoption', 3,401 Chinese babies came to the United States through adoption process sponsored by the Chinese government.

American couples were told their Chinese babies were orphans, often discarded by their parents. However, a brave reporter showed many of these babies were 'confiscated' by the local government to be sold to American couples for profit against their parents' will.

The picture on the left is Yang Ling, daughter of Mr. Yang Libing, before the 10 months baby was taken away by government officials in May, 2005. Yang Ling is the first child of the Yang family, therefore it is not even about the infamous One Child Per Family policy. Yang family was given a one day window to collect $1,600 (Y10,000 RMB) to get the baby back. At the time, Yang Lining was working as immigration labor out of town and the poor family couldn't get the money in time. When Yang got back, it was all too late. The girl had been delivered to a government run orphanage in a big city, and there was little the local officials could do. Yang was beaten up by the local officials many times for keep bothering them asking for his daughter. Other family would have given up, but Yang and his wife were persistent, until his wife mentally collapsed in 2009 and had been missing since. Today, through help of a responsible reporter, Yang was able to trace his daughter to the United States, the picture on the right. However, the original contact no longer worked.

The higher level government agencies and the orphanage fabricated the entire dossier, including public notary, police report, and government records even an application with Yang's signature to claim the girl was found in a park, for the little girl to make the adoption process 'legitimate'. According to the journalist investigation, at least dozens of babies were taken away in the same county to be sold to the western families, disguised as orphans during 2002-2005. Many of these children were first child of a family taken away by force.

Before the source Missing Children with family name 'Shao' is to be harmonized by the Central Propaganda Department, reader can view the news article published on "New Century" as long as a video of interview of the father Yang Libing.

According to the investigation by reporters, among 13 babies taken away by government in one village (Gaoping) between 2002 and 2005, 3 were first child of their families.

Yang Libing is still looking for his daughter. The Yang family is waiting for the girl. Anyone reading this with information of the girl please let the adoption family know that the parents of their adopted girl were still looking for her. The mother had gone insane and was missing. The father hadn't worked a job for 7 years. They wanted their baby girl back. One clue, the baby's official last name was 'Shao', named after the upper level government 'Shaoyang'. If you have any information regarding the whereabout of the child, please contact ontact the editor at newsroom@caixinmedia.com, or call by phone at +01186 (10) 8590-5000, FAX: +01186 (10) 8590-5101. Their contact information can be found at the website of the news article.

This was not the first exposure of questionable, to an extend, illegal, practice of the local governments in handling adoptions. It had been reported earlier that some local government would 'purchase' second-born babies at low cost from residents who couldn't afford fines of the One Child Per Family policy, then sold them to westerners for profit.

The message to the western family who plan to adopt a child from China: regardless whatever the story you were told by Chinese officials regarding the source of the child, no matter how many government records came along as evidence, they were probably not true. People who are willing to raise a child of others must be of great sense of humanity and caring. For the sake of broken families in China and parents who are still desperately looking for their own babies, stop adopting children from China. In the least, you should point the article linked to Chinese official sellers, and demand the situation to be improved.

Former Utah governor and the US ambassador to China Jon Huntsman Jr. adopted a girl Gracie Mei from China in 1999. Mr. Huntsman had been told the girl was a girl given up by her family and was found in a park. Mr. Huntsman probably should think the story over again. Gracie's parents might be looking for her return for the past decade, every day and every night.

The reporter's name is Shangguan Aoming. The cover story published on "New Century", issue of No. 18-2011, May 9, 2011.

The fate of a little girl

A sketch of the little girl based
on the passenger's description.
The girl looks like 3 years old,
small and narrow face, big eyes,
long eyelets, curved hair.
She was wearing Adidas top,
a pink skirt and Adidas pants.
However, the clothes were very
dirty. She was bear foot.

A little girl disappeared from a packed train in Jiangxi, China on June 8. Hundreds children were stolen and kidnapped in China everyday. At any given time, hundreds of stolen children were being transported by cars, trucks, buses, and train. One of such trafficking was noticed by an alert passenger Mr. Yang. Mr. Yang attempted to dial 110, police emergence number, but was not able to connect. Mr. Yang then notified the railroad attendance, once oral, and once in writting, and the police on board. Mr. Yang took off at station of Quzhou at 8:14 on June 9, when he got hooked up and posted online, while the train was travelling at over 100mph on its way from Wenzhou, Zhejiang to Guiyang, Guizhou. The post received more than 2.5 million hits and 200 pages of threads in a matter of hours.

Hundreds of thousands of Chinese Internet readers were mobilized to contact dozens of police and national security agencies through public as well as private channels. All railroad and police agencies along the thousand mile of railroad were contacted while the K941 train was in their judiciary. National and Provincial governments were contacted, too.

And the 3 years old girl disappeared along with the human traffickers.

No single government, railroad or police department reacted to the repeated alert. It is reported that in some major cities on the route, the police emergency number were blocked because of the volume of the calls on the little girl from all over the country. The most common answer from the dispatchers was, 'we know, thank you.' And that was it.

Finally, one of the Internet readers got his brother, a railroad detective in Zhuzhou, Hunan to abroad the train when it arrived Zhuzhou at 16:36 on June 9. The railroad police on the train told the detective that the girl and the traffickers were taken off the train in Yingtan, Jiangxi by police for questioning.

The online community celebrated, only to know that the onboard turned out to be a lie, the reason of the lie (to a police colleague) was difficult to comprehend.

Police's inaction in 8 hours while the train K941 was travelling between Quzhou and Jiangtan.

Three days later, the facts we could collect at this time was, the group was on the train in Cart 11, seat 97 while Mr. Yang took off at the station of Quzhou. They were no longer seen by the time the train left station of Yingtan, a huge train hub connecting three major railroads. While media pressure mounting on, police in Yingtan checked all surveillance cameras in the station, but did not find the group. There were three stations between Quzhou and Yingtan, which were Yushan, Shangrao and Guixi.

Now you get an idea why so many children could disappear in a totalitarian police state. You may also get an idea why Premier Wenjia stated there was deeper social root to understand the multiple high profile violent unrests in a recent talk.

Stolen children were often trained to be beggars. In order to take advantage of people's sympathy, many of them were maimed. They would be broken both legs and sometimes all four limps, blinded, had tongue cut, etc. Some were sold to government infancy, where they would be sold to American adopters.

LA Chinese Baby Auction Case New Twist

The online attention to the Craig's List Chinese baby trading case was quelled down overnight with a message cross posted all over Internet and major Chinese media claiming that it's a harmless prank. The almost instant response invited more skepticism than answering questions.

1) Without exception, all of the reports, including those appeared on hundreds of Internet sites and those released by major Chinese news agencies cited the same little known source USA Qiao Bao(notable, there's no reference to the incident on its website as of the time of writing: http://www.chinapressusa.com/) and repeated the story word by word;
2) There is absolute zero official reference to this case in English media;
3) There is no official police statement anywhere from LAPD or FBI;
4) According to the report, an LAPD police officer Carlos Monterroso told the reporter that the person who posted the message did not violate any law, and no charge would be filed. This simply can not be true. In a high profile United States v. Lori Drew, 2008 case trailed in Los Angeles, Lori Drew was found guilty in three accounts for violating EULA of AOL by posting false information. This is mandated in the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1030. No LAPD officer can be so unprofessional to the extend to say a federal criminal offense is lawful.

Therefore, the 'Hoax' report itself must be a hoax.

Nobody Wants A Crying Baby, For Real!

I don't like the baby we adopted. (Beverly Hills)
Reply to: sale-958665137@craigslist.org [?]
Date: 2008-12-15, 8:36AM PST

Hello. My name is Barbara Stanwick. I need help, my adopted baby isn't what I expected and I don’t like it. Here’s my story…

Ever since my husband, Don, and I married 22 years ago, I've wanted children. The years passed, and once I turned 45, I knew it was too late for me to conceive. So last year, on my 46th birthday, Don surprised me with adoption papers. It was the greatest day of my life. We were going to adopt a baby! It was from China, but I was still excited (we're very gracious, and wanted to save a baby from the communists)!

After being on the adoption list for several months we were informed that a child had been selected for us! My anxiety acts up on planes, so Don's assistant, Lauren, retrieved the baby. I was finally going to have my very own child.

When Lauren walked in, it was swaddled in blankets. I named her Wing, right then and there. A combination of Wang and Ling. I had never been happier, holding little Wing in my arms.

But it was all downhill from there. I pulled back the blanket from her face and that's when I saw the problem. Not only did Wing NOT look like wanted her to, but she was BALD! I had been given a BALD looking baby! My vertigo hit me like a wall.

Since then, I have been trying to send Wing back to China, but they won’t take her. I filed a complaint with the adoption agency, but they didn’t accept “bald baby” as a reason for returning it. Wing cries all the time, which makes my migraines act up and I think the cat might be allergic to her as well. If anyone would like to take Wing, even though she's bald, I will either trade or sell her to you. She's not a bad baby, I just think we can find a better one. Thank you for your time. Serious inquiries only.

From Craig's List (http://losangeles.craigslist.org/wst/bab/958665137.html), firstly flagged by a post on XiXiHe through MITBBS. Although the original thread has been removed by the Los Angeles Craig's List, they should still have information regarding the person who posted on the heavy traffic list.

For an 8 year old gril Anna Mae He

Please come to this website to make a donation for the Baker family in their legal fighting for welfare of 8 year old Anna Mae He. Yes, we Chinese care about fairness, and we care about the wellbeing of the little girl.

Recap of the event: Anna was abandoned by her biological parents after born. The father, 'He', a human smuggler and sex offender, suspected Anna was not his biological daughter. The mother, 'Qin', entered into the US with a fake document suffers in difficult financial situation. They begged the Bakers to adopt Anna.

Now, Anna is an 8 year old daughter, the 'He' family wants her back, and they win. The Tennessee Supreme Court bent to the Chinese political power. The 'He' family was depicted as hero standing high against greedy American rich who steal Chinese babies. This is unfair to the Bakers family, it's unfair to the girl, and it is not good for the wellbeing of the girl.

The Bakers Lost Anna

The Supreme Court of Tennessee made a decision (W2004-01225-SC-R11-PT) on Jan 23, 2007 to return seven years old Anna Mae He (He Mei in Chinese) to her biological parents, the He family. The Bakers, Jerry and Louise) lost the child after six years of bitter legal battle.

The girl's biological father, Mr. He Shaoqiang (Jack), was a student at University of Memphis. In 1999, He and his wife give the 3 weeks girl He Mei the Mid-South through local church, who asked Mr. Baker's family to take care of the girl. When Baker returned the girl to the church after the initial 3 months agreement expired, Mr. He asked Baker to continue taking care of the girl. The Hes, Bakers, the Mid-South and lawyers got together, and convinced that having Mr. Bakers adopt the girl was the best solution.

The He family left a long trace of cheating and dishonesty. The couple, Jack and Casey never married in China, while they forged document to gain a spouse visa to come to the US. Getting married in China cost you half hour and $5. You'll have to question the real motivation to lie on such a simple fact. The Casey entered the US with a student spouse visa (F2 visa) on June 1998 with a 2 months old pregnancy. In one of the later conversation with Ms. Chunn, a birth-parent counselor, Jack expressed concerns about whether he was the biological father of the unborn child. When He Mei was born on January 28, 1999, she was put up for adoption. However, while Casey seemed to comfortable with adoption, she "wants to maintain guardianship to the child so she can continue in the US" (as ducumented by the counsel W2004-01225-COA-R3-PT).

At the time, Jack was accused of sexual assault to a female Chinese classmate which later led to his expel from the school. It was when he was facing deportation after he lost his student status when the He family started a legal and media battle against the Baker family on He Mei, an American citizen's custody. He Shaoqiang once indicated he would trade the girl to a lawyer for his help on He's sexual assault case.

The little girl had been initially abandoned, but only later to be exploited by the He family for purpose of money, legal assistance, over-stay in the US. What a valuable baby!

The Baker family believed returning He Mei to the He family was not the best interest of the little girl. They sold their house to pay lawyer fees, and vowed to raise He Mei the best they can do.

The Hes family lost the initial rounds, but sought to the Chinese consulate and political influences. Now the liars won. As Chinese, we are ashamed. During the lengthy legal struggle, the Hes family was depicted as heroes who stood firm on their child confronting rich evil Americans and greedy lawyers on Chinese media in the mainland, making use the lack of communications on the two sides of the Pacific.

The Supreme Court of Tennessee made a mistake to return the girl to a liar, forgery felony, a sexual criminal, who evidently cares nothing about the girl. It will be a shameful mistake if that decision was made under political pressure. If they can read Chinese, they should read on Chinese website and BBS what Chinese people who knew the He couple say about their characters and personalities.

Sorry Bakers, but your courage in love was admired, and will be remembered. Best wishes to the little girl.

“贺绍强对我性骚扰的真相”受害者投书各媒体?!

齐晓军

贺绍强的骗局

报社编辑及关注贺案的朋友们:

你们好!

我是贺绍强性骚扰案的受害者。 一年多以来, 贺绍强性骚扰及贺梅案引起了轰动, 媒介上也一直在报导. 但我想告诉你们,至少关于性骚扰部分的报导有很多地方是极其失真的. 这些错误的报导不仅助长了恶人的威风，对社会造成不良影响， 而且在很大程度上掩盖了事实真相， 并深深伤害了真正的受害者。 下面叙述一下性骚扰和所谓罗秦被打案前前后后的大概经过。

1998年8月下旬，我进入孟菲斯大学商学院 MIS 本科读书。 当时我托福考了500 多分， 英文仍然不是很好， 对校园的一切都不熟悉。 第一个学期开始我报了6门课，期中考试前退出一门，学期末以4A，1B的成绩通过了其余5门课。 我先生九月底拿到了亚特兰大市的工作邀请。当时我们商量着我是否离开孟菲斯随他去新的地方。 我们跟那里的几所大学联系过，回答都是入学要求最低托福550分。 而我要在那个地区入学， 必须重考托福， 而不知又需要多久。 我对先生说： 你先去工作吧， 在那边继续帮我打听学校的事， 也许我在这里读一两个学期后转学过去，那时学校就不要求托福了。 时间对我来说很重要。当然后来因为官司及各种原因，我直到毕业才离开孟菲斯。

我先生离开10天后星期天（10月11日）的上午， 那天是秋假（Fall break）。 我去图书馆旁边的电脑室去写作业。 因为第一次用学校的电脑， 我的Password 又不对， 无法打开电脑， 只好去找只好去找lab assistant 寻求帮助。当时在服务台工作的贺绍强非常热情， 不仅帮助我打开电脑，给我讲了一些用电脑的知识， 还说如果我们互留下电话， 今后有什么问题他可以帮忙。贺留了他的名字及电话，我也写了我的姓名及电话。 在我做作业期间，贺曾来到我的桌子前询问有没有事要帮忙， 我说没有。 他当时问了一些关于我的现状， 并说他知道我先生刚找到工作。 大约1：00 左右，贺又过来对我说： 2：00 电脑室会关闭，他知道有校园内有另外一个电脑室会在此时仍会开放， 他自己正好要过去，如我愿意的话，下班后可以顺便带路。在这里我根本没有邀请请他补什么课。 我进电脑室时，一个人用学生卡开的门，我只是跟着进入， 并没有注意门上有什么字。由于我在两点前确实完不成手头的事， 这个人是中国同乡，又在电脑室工作， 自然也就相信并赞同等2：00 时随他过去。

贺在2:00 时招呼我离开， 在去英语系Patterson Hall 的十几分钟里，他对我谈的是学英文的技巧和一些学习方法， 并再次说如果有困难他愿意帮助我。我十几年没进校门了， 入学后对很多事都不清楚，确实要咨询的事太多了， 又遇到了一个“热心’的中国人，因而对他这些话题很感兴趣。贺在初接触时确实给人的印象是热情实在的， 如果不把他在不同场合说的话来比较， 也确实不容易发现他的欺骗。 不仅我当时没有怀疑他的用心， 后来不是他用谎言编织的故事也欺骗了一些人吗？

我随贺来到 Patterson Hall， 因为他一直在说：你有什么问题要问的话我可以帮助解答。我这时感觉功课可以晚一时做，花一点时间问些学业方面的问题倒是必要的。 他领我来到一个教室， 摆好手椅让我坐下。 因贺当时在商学院读MIS硕士（他对公众一直说是经济学博士），和我同一个专业，我问了他几个关于专业方向方面的问题和几个课本中的语法问题。

没多一会，贺说我问的问题太枯燥，建议劳娱结合，一起出去看电影。 我回答说： 不想去。 贺又说可以带我去商店，我说没有什么东西要买。最后贺说：那去校园外好不好？ 我说：我真的什么地方都不想去， 我压力很大，在忙于功课。很短暂沉默后，我正在考虑去电脑室， 贺突然说：你很美，你知道我很喜欢你。并把手放在我肩头。 我感到很害怕， 对贺说：谢谢你，我已经结婚了。 祝你好运。 说完就往出跑。贺拦住我的去路，我吓的直哆嗦，哭着求他放了我。 贺根本不听，我与他抗争约一二十分钟， 三个衣扣被解开，由于蓝色纤维长裤的隐形拉链在背后，贺在动态中没有找到，所以状态还好。贺也没有达到目的。 当我借机逃出教室后， 贺追出来， 在楼梯口挡住我的去路并威胁说： 不要把今天的事说出去， 否则我不会放过你。

我平生第一次遇到这类恶性事件。 当我哭着回到家里， 刘教授在厅里看电视， 我直奔自己的房间， 拨通了我先生在亚城家中的电话。他的室友告诉我他不在家， 并会转告我先生。 一个多小时后我先生打来电话， 我把所发生的事情告诉了他。 我先生当时建议报警，安慰我不要伤心， 他会尽快完成手头的工作， 请假回来解决。（电话帐单上有号码显示。政府控告人没有去调电话帐单， 在法庭上让贺的律师钻了一个空子）。 在我先生尚未回来的几天里， 我感到天昏地暗， 不之所错措。五天后星期五晚（10月16日）丈夫回来时， 我身上浮肿的部分已经消除， 但肢体上的淤血瘢痕仍然可见。 第二天（10月17日）我先生在盛怒之下去学校警察室报了警， 后被告知当事人需要到场， 又接我一起去叙述详情。

事件发生后， 贺曾经给我写过email， 甚至打过电话。报案后的第二天早晨（10月18日）， 我先生接到一个电话，对方说的英文， 但对我名字的发音很准确。 经学校调查，值班人员叙述打电话人是一东方男子，除眼镜有所不同，其他特征与贺绍强相同。（见学校法庭纪录）

10月19日，校方及警方对性骚扰事件进行了调查。 先同贺谈话，之后学校的官员向我了解情况，看了我的伤势，纪录了受伤的状态， 但没有拍照。这个失误也让贺的律师钻了空子。

贺绍强一边在警察局的自述里说我有精神病， 向他借钱， 诬陷他等， 并欺骗美国警察说在中国妇女在事件发生24小时内不报案， 警方是不予受理的。（见贺的陈述）另一边又请一些人找我谈话，要求和解，并请我撤掉这个案子。

贺太太曾经多次骚扰我，撒泼似的打电话， 到电脑室与我纠缠， 甚至在法庭门外威胁我。

11月27日，我先生回孟城探亲， 我们象往常一样带室友去购物。 在大中华超市遇到贺夫妇。 由于他们一直骚扰我， 我先生想当面警告他们停止骚扰。 双方争吵起来，贺竟然报警说我先生打了他们。警察到达后问明情况， 看到没有任何打架的情况发生， 便把他们的地址交给我们，并叫双方离去。 后来就是贺绍强为了扰乱局势，逃脱罪行，把贺太太送进医院留观一夜， 制造了一个所谓被打打出血，陷入经济困难的骗局。

我想就贺绍强制造的几个骗局具体谈一下真实情况：

1）所谓被打打出血， 造成经济困境。

我先生根本没有动手打他们。 贺绍强在不同的地方有不同的说法。 对学校说罗秦被打翻到在地上( 学校有记录存档); 在警察局的起诉书中说罗秦被打撞在shopping cart 上, 在医院的记录上显示, 罗被两个男人攻击, 撞在石头上，他在媒介上的说法更是版本不一. 更有甚者, 罗秦在法庭听证会上, 向法庭展示了血迹斑斑的内裤, 说是被打大出血造成的. 这么严重的“伤情”又有这么实在的“证据”， 难道法官是白痴吗？贺还在警察局的起诉书中说他们有现场证人， 但到了法庭又截然全无。

罗秦到底是否被打大出血？事实上，法庭及律师经过调查得知, 其一，商店的售货员证明双方确有争吵, 但无肢体接触; 其二，法庭调出罗秦的病历, 医生检查证明罗秦没有阴道出血, 没有任何被打的痕迹. 留院观察一夜的原因病例上写的很清楚，是严重的滴虫性阴道炎(severe trichomonas vaginitis)。因此法庭在听证后根据这两点撤销了对我先生的起诉, 更没有把这个荒唐的案子送到陪审团审理的事。

我们一直在咨询， 如何出示罗秦的病例才算合法。 这是贺绍强欺骗公众的一个主要环节, 也是牵连贺的几个案子的主线。 如果我们展示了罗的病例， 他们会告我们侵犯个人隐私。 不公布吧， 永远也无法让这个强有力的事实来证明他们欺骗的恶劣行为， 揭示几个案子的真相。 贺绍强之所以造此假案，一方面想让警方感到性骚扰受害的一方的丈夫做事很恶劣，另一方面试图以此博得警方对罗秦同情，从而放弃对他性骚扰的追究， 以便逃脱刑事惩罚。当然也为后来的贺梅案找了一个非常恰当的借口和理由。 如果人们同情贺家是在他们欺骗的前提下， 那真相大白后，不仅同情者会感觉到心灵的伤害， 最主要的是贺家后果是极其可悲的。 我想至少从两个地方可以搞到罗秦的病例：医院及法庭。朋友们应该去这两个地方取证，报社应该重新报道关于罗秦被打大出血骗局。

賀紹強曾说对此案表示异议。他說﹐打人案是陪审团即將开审前忽然被撤销的﹐原因不明。不过，他的律師认为法院的做法不合法。他目前仍保留对齊曉軍的丈夫提起訴訟的权利﹐包括刑事訴訟和民事索賠。按照贺的说法，即使法院撤销有陪审团的trial也是发现了什么重要的线索， 何况法院从未安排过trial，贺只是欺骗公众而已了。如果说法官在听证会上掌握充分的证据证明罗秦没有被打，法庭怎么可能会安排判决庭（trial）呢？再说刑事案只有判决了之后，案子不能重审， 原告无法上诉（例如贺的性骚扰案，我是无法上诉的， 只有眼泪往心里流）； 所谓被打大出血案根本没有上trial， 他们确实可以重提此案，我们期待着法院能把调查结果，听证材料及证据公诸于众。但可悲的是贺的这个假案子永远也不会赢，因为事实证明他们没有被打，那个假案是他们诬陷，造假的证据。

2关于和庭的说法

贺绍强称我为了帮助我先生而不惜尽一切力量告贺绍强。不错, 是我们一直坚持上告性骚扰案, 为此坚持了四年, 后来终于走到了trail. 而企图和解的不是我们而是贺家. 就他动用的官方人士就不下两三个，中国使馆原教育处的李光明先生就是其中之一。李光明先生在1999年初给我打电话，让我不要压力太大，问我是否可以私下处理此事；贺还托他的律师John Walt与孟大协商进行要求和解（mediation）。在此我们出示学校律师给我先生的信作为证据. 大学法律办公室的官员Ms. Story 找我和我先生谈过话， 并反复转达贺绍强要求和解的愿望。贺的另外一位律师Mr. Walton 曾经给我们的律师写信要求和解， 有信为证。 一直是贺在要求和解， 为什么到了媒介上说我们要求和解呢？ 我先生陷入的假案子在贺编造后一年多被调查撤销了，而性骚扰案我们却坚持了四年。

我们有什么必要与其和解？ 不可能。 2001年4月，我们的律师通知我，贺绍强要认罪（ plea guilty）, 我当时很高兴。 当时法院的Mr. Blackwood处理认罪的案子。 据说是被告一方提出申请， 经Mr. Blackwood报到法庭， 被告才被安排去认罪法庭见法官。 这件事贺对媒介说了吗？贺说他的律师都建议他认罪，和庭，他本人不同意。但为什么我们一次又一次接到他要求和庭的请求？难道这些律师都违背贺的意愿， 在不同的时期，背着贺与我们联系的吗？当贺看到我坐在听众席位上时， 他与其律师交谈， 并改变了认错的主意。贺为什么在和解目的未达到时，有认罪的意图呢？ 这些事实在法院应该不难被调查出来吧？贺的这种颠倒黑白的行为, 恐怕连他自己也会感到滑稽吧？

3）对我个人的诬陷

在我们报案后， 贺绍强的计策之一就是从人品上诬陷我， 以便让人们认为我是性骚扰和贺梅案罪魁祸首，其实贺是害人必害己。

诬陷之一：关于贺诬陷我和刘教授同居

我和先生当时在找到工作之前与清华大学的刘教授和租一套两居室。 刘教授是我先生两个要好的同学在中国多年的同学和同事。先生的同学托我们帮助刘教授，特别是每周带上他去商店买菜和生活用品。刘教授人不错，我们一直和睦相处。我先生找到工作后，我们不好意思也没理由让人家搬出去，而搬出去后在每周去商店时接来接去的更是麻烦。 当时此地这种和租房子的例子很多。

贺却对众人说我与刘教授同居， 说什么不知我身上的伤痕是他在下午2：00造成的还是晚上8：00 造成的， 因为我的室友是男性。从这一点也不难分析出，如果同居的话，还会有伤痕造成吗？ 事实是罗秦在大中华现场要求刘教授站在他们的立场上为他们作证，刘教授说如果作证就叙述事实。 而事实是她未被打，罗秦怎能对刘教授的回答满意呢？ 罗秦怀恨在心， 曾经在学校听证会走廊上破口漫骂刘教授， 一方面侮辱他， 另一方面想激怒他，造成真的被打的事实以取得同情。 贺绍强更是嫁祸于人的高手，让外界听了之后对原被告的人品各打五十大板。 受害人本来就受到了很大的创伤， 若再让人们认为其品行不佳， 更是苦上加苦。 贺害人之手段是非常毒辣的。

诬陷之二：关于贺诬陷我请他辅导生理卫生课, 和要借款$500.

请调查一下, Memphis 大学MIS专业本科有生理学和生理卫生课吗? 贺在有些媒介上改口说是生理学, 请查一下我毕业后的成绩单和学校课程要求, 请把法庭的纪录调出来，谎言是一目了然。 编造这种谎言要说明什么？无非是想说对方在勾引他。 我相信以前贺绍强的同学和同事， 特别是对他有较深了解的人都会知道他的人品吧？ 尽管初次见面不能看出，即便他的伪装曾蒙蔽了那些善良的人们的眼睛， 但他的恶本性难移。 而且在案件后来的交涉中看到了贺的恶劣本质。即便是少数相信他的人， 今后也会对他的本质有不同的认识。

贺的室友谢玲玲女士在校听证会上作证说我打电话向贺借钱。我当场质问她你怎么知道的，她说是贺太太告诉她的, 她其实没有听到任何电话交谈. 我说：那你知道的一切信息都是从贺太太告诉你的了？ 她回答： 是的。这种由涉案当事人单方面口授的信息的可信度本身就有问题，更何况这是无中生有的捏造！我很赞赏和佩服那种为朋友作证的勇气，但是，即便是给朋友作证，也要尊重事实，绝不能撒谎。如果以情妄法，是要付法律责任的。

据说ABC成功地找到齐向几位男同学借钱的“证据”, 他们是哪几位, 贺绍强在法庭上怎么没有出示这些证人? ABC 真的有此“证据”， 还是贺对我的又一个栽赃？ ABC为何不大张旗鼓地报道此事，而对此无声无息呢？难道所有ABC电视台会引用贺谎言吗？贺的险恶用心不难看出吧？

4) 关于贺对法庭材料事实方面的欺骗

贺绍强说他当时收到一封信且知道关于他“性骚扰”的案子调查被停止而感觉很开心.

事实上性骚扰案从未 dismiss. 既是在文件丢失那次, 法官还特别对贺强调案子不是终止, 而是需重新从听证开始再审理。他的信在哪里？去法庭调查一下有无此事。 贺伪造的东西何其多！

賀紹強对多維社及不同的媒介說我出示了染有其精液的牛仔裤， 及称打断一条肋骨等。 他是想说我出示的证据不真实，未被法庭认可， 所以判他无罪。 贺绍强不是有律师吗？ 他们可以把性骚扰案的法庭纪录搞出来。我的政府控告人除了出示了我的一条深蓝纤维裤子， 其余没有任何直接证据。 而那条裤子也是为了证明拉链及不易找到，贺的目的未遂。 正因为没有直接证据， 无法判其有罪。纪录纪录hinesenewsnet.com)賀紹強說齊曉軍和他就性侵犯案共同共认了兩名目击者﹐即事发時看管Patterson Hall機房的研究生Michael Bodary和英語系終生教授Charles Hall﹐并说兩人已先後作證﹐当時沒有看到异常情況。

事实上我没有提供任何目击证人。Charles Hall 确实到庭为贺作证， 只证明没有听到声音。 Michael Bodary 根本就没去法庭。 没有听到声音就说明事情没发生吗？Charles Hall 在法庭上证明没听到异常声音, 遇到贺时也不知贺从哪来. 因此完全不是外界报导的“进入时遇到Charles Hall.” 因为我当时吓坏了, 只是哭着求他放我, 不愿让别人知道, 故没有喊叫. 我在3层, Dr. Hall 在2层, 他怎么会听到呢? 我的案子就是吃亏在于没有目击者和直接证据，无法给贺判罪。零号口供（即没有证人的证词）无论在中国还是美国都是很难以此给对方判刑的。尽管如此，贺对我性骚扰的事实还是客观地发生了，存在着！

5）关于所谓性骚扰案影响贺家的经济和身份问题

贺对公众说由于学校撤销了他的奖学金并失去身分。 我们在这里可出示学校律师给贺的律师并转发给我们的信。后来在事实证明贺在没有结婚前就到孟大外国学生办公室（International Student Office）骗取了I-20， 添上罗秦的名字并带回中国将罗办到美国。他们在中国根本就没有结婚。 如果已婚，来美的中国人有几个拿不出结婚证的？这种欺骗行为使得该办公室的官员非常气愤， 此事报到移民局， 并通知贺不可申请OPT， 当然也就失去身份了。因为性骚扰案孟大只是没有发他学位。 贺失去OPT的申请机会是因为他的移民欺骗。为什么说我害了他家，贺是要公众恨我， 认为他被害，经历坎坷，而同情他的案子。其实大多数中国人的眼睛是雪亮的。

贺氏真的在拼命打工吗？ 很多次，甚至在他们把贺梅送出去之后的初夏， 我在电脑室看到贺在用计算机，贺太太一边看中文报纸，有时还向我狞笑挑衅。你们可以到校网络室查到贺上机的纪录。后来我忍无可忍到学校讲了他们挑衅的事， 贺的密码才被停用，看到他们的次数也减少了。

6关于性骚扰案审理时间的拖延

事件发生在1998年10月， 学校的听证会在1999年的9月举行。 其间贺绍强以各种借口更换了两次法庭。 因为不同的法庭是由不同的人组成，每次校方都要组织人选， 安排时间。 贺明知开庭的结果对他不利， 一面拖延， 一面向我们要求和解。我们坚持没有和庭。 在法院审理期间，法院需要时间调查， 贺绍强开始曾借口没有律师，后来又与自己的律师闹矛盾， 换律师等原因拖延出庭时间。 2001年12月trial 已经定好，开庭后由于听证会的录音带丢失，只得再从听证开始审理。 事后证明贺绍强有听证会的录音带， 此案一拖又是一两年。

而我们多次催促自己的律师帮助定trial的时间， 因为我2001年5月要本科毕业，并去亚特兰大与先生团聚。

7 关于孟菲斯大学是黑手

贺多次说法庭及大学都在舞弊，校方开始搞错了，取消了他的工作。 事实上在调查此案期间停了他与学生直接接触的工作，案发很久以后， 他还在图书馆内作整理书架的工作。

学校没有舞弊。正因为我与贺的说法不同，法律办公室的官员每次与我谈话时都对一些问题反复提问我。后来他们认定我是诚实的，贺是骗子。他们的调查都有纪录，备案，并且校方调查了很久，因此几个月后贺才被送进监狱， 送上法庭。贺很会利用人们的心理。当他在逻辑推理和事实验证下败露时， 就把大前提搞乱，还有其偷换概念的招数确实是一时有效。如果孟菲斯大学怕贺起诉的话，为什么在判贺无罪后仍不肯恢复他的学籍？

我们是真正贺绍强案的受害者, 因为犹豫报案, 校方没有给受伤部位照相, 没有现场证人, 陪审团无法判贺有罪. 在我从Memphis本科毕业前将近三年的时间里, 不仅要忍受学业的压力, 还要应付他们骚扰, 和流言蜚语。无数次法庭对我先生的传唤给我们的生活和经济上带来很大的麻烦,. 我无法开口主动解释, 只有把每学期的课报的满满的, 想尽快离开那里. 当时的处境大家是可以想象的.

2001年五月我通过了GMAT考试并回到亚特兰大于丈夫团聚, 我先生供我继续读硕士. 我什么时候说我们夫妻关系不好的？他们为什么要编造我和丈夫关系不好, 与人同居等谎言? 2002年八月初, 没想到在我即将参加硕士毕业典礼的时候, 贺把我推到媒介上, 企图打跨我的精神, 在受到他的侮辱后, 利用媒介对我进一步的摧残. 我先生被诬陷, 拘留一天, 虽然假案子被撤, 但这个贺一手制造的冤案, 给我先生带来极大的精神创伤. 贺家为什么要和被他们害的人“较量“？应该说是伤害无辜把？中国朋友们更应该关心一下我们的冤案。 受到诬告和伤害后我们该怎么办? 难道我们受到应有的法律保护了吗？反诉贺太太吗? 她既是受害者, 又帮助贺骗人. 我们想原谅这个没有多少文化妇人, 而我们的好心得到的回报是什么呢? 贺被判无罪就没有犯罪吗？贺绍强是迫害我们的罪人。

我们认为媒介的记者和律师都是才思敏捷的人. 报导事实是媒介的目标. 如果媒介无法调出法庭材料, 或无力作全面的调查, 现在有李兆阳法律顾问, 完全可以进行准确, 符合法律的全面调查. 我的案子其实很简单, 没有足够的直接证据, 无法判其有罪. 渲染了那么多, 还是这样. 那么为什么贺绍强如此的是非颠倒, 欺骗记者和读者呐? 这说明他有隐情, 不能说明真相, 只能靠欺骗. 贺家的四个案子除了性骚扰案，没有直接证据判他的罪，其余的是何结果呢？

我们认为人们应该帮助贺家，不要厌弃他们。 多为他们祈祷，劝他们承认事实，走正路。 靠欺骗博得同情， 事其必反。他的朋友应帮助他们净化心灵，在今后的人生道路上不害人， 自己也少走弯路。让他们明白害人必害己，恶人必有恶报的人生道理。如果伤害无辜，即使过的了人的审判，也过不了神的审判。

如报社及读者需要我列的以上事实的证据, 或核对其他的事实.欢迎和我联系. (很抱歉, 没有时间整理贺所有的谎言). 他们可以恶语重伤, 致人死地. 但我们不想与其同类. 如果我们在贺梅案之前告他们伤害诬陷, 人们会说我们想阻拦贺梅案, 之后会说我们落井下石. 我们甚至在贺梅案判决前都没有接出事实真相， 并承受了一切冤枉和委屈。 我们想，大多数人都看清了他们的骗局, 我们有必要再跟他们纠缠呐? 如果您站在我们的位置上该如何处理? 我们对人善良, 反得伤害. 象贺这种为达到他的个人目的，竟不惜挺而走险、视美国移民法的威严于儿戏、置中国人的尊严于不顾，用欺骗的手段骗取移民文件的伪君子，他还有什么人格可言？还有什么诚信可言？ 很多朋友劝我们不要再理会这个骗子. 在这个世界上我们深深的受到了恶人的伤害, 一对自称基督徒的, 欺骗能力极强的骗子的伤害. 我们对贺梅案不想发表任何看法, 只是觉得不要再让他们为骗取帮助而伤害已经被深深伤害的人了. 真诚希望大家不要再上贺绍强的当.

Email： xiaojunqi888@hotmail.com

齐晓军

2003年5月12日