關於 if statement in one line ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

To dear foreign workers in Miaoli

1. According to the announcement of CDC on June 6th 2021, all the foreign workers in KYEC will stop working, start quarantine, and be paid as usual. Please stay at your place with an easy mind.

2. According to the announcement of Miaoli local government today (June 7th 2021),

a. All foreign workers in Miaoli should not go outside except for going to work. The dormitory staff or other dedicated staff will be responsible for all the essential grocery shopping.
b. The business or the manpower agency will be responsible for all commute to work.

I understand that this policy may cause some confusion among foreign workers, but please don’t worry and stay calm. I will deliver your opinions to the government, and continue to seek a better solution.

3. According to media Apple Daily today, “To assist all the foreign workers in KYEC who had stopped working, the ministry of labor has provided translators and quarantine care package.” Please confirm if the statement from the government is real, and if all the supplies are enough. If there is any concern, please don’t hesitate to let us know.

4. Today, hundreds of the Filipino KYEC workers who tested negative had been brought to the Zaoqiao Township dormitory, while the workers have provided photos of some sanitary problems of the environment, which is different from the photos from the front-line command station. We have delivered the problem to the front-line command station, and ask them to help to disinfect and clean up the environment as soon as possible.

5. The ministry of labor provides information on LINE as illustration. Please take a look.

6. One-Forty CARE, a non-profit organization, provides real-time anti-pandemic information in multiple language. Please take a look, and let’s get through the pandemic together. Link of One-Forty CARE information: https://bit.ly/3fnSTxU

Team of Sung Koung Ding, the Miaoli council member

- - - - -

Đối với tất cả những người lao động nhập cư (di trú) ở MIÊU LẬT :

1. Theo thông báo của Trung tâm chỉ huy phòng dịch Trung ương ngày 6/6, lao động nhập cư nước ngoài của KYEC sẽ nghỉ việc, nghỉ ở nhà và vẫn được nhận lương .Mong mọi người an tâm ở lại nơi sinh sống.

2. Theo thông báo của Chính quyền huyện MIÊU LẬT( di trú )Từ hôm nay (7/6):
( 1. )Kể từ hôm nay , công nhân nhập cư trong huyện sẽ ngừng ra ngoài trong thời gian đi làm, và việc thu mua, mua sắm nhu yếu phẩm hàng ngày sẽ do những người quản lý ký túc xá hoặc nhân viên chuyên trách của đồn. Cảnh sát huyện được hướng dẫn tiến hành kiểm tra trên các đường phố cộng đồng bất cứ lúc nào.

( 2. )Tổ chức công cộng hoặc công ty trung gian chịu trách nhiệm đưa đón đến và đi khỏi nơi làm việc.

Tôi biết rằng chính sách này có thể khiến người lao động nhập cư ( di trú)cảm thấy khó hiểu, nhưng hãy bình tĩnh và yên tâm, tôi sẽ chuyển tiếng nói của bạn đến chính phủ để tìm kiếm các phương án quản lý tái định cư tốt hơn.

3. Theo báo cáo của Apple Daily tại Đài Loan hôm nay: "Để đối phó với việc công ty KYEC ngừng hoạt động hoàn toàn đối với công nhân nhập cư(di trú) , Bộ Lao động đã bố trí phiên dịch viên và cung cấp cho công nhân nhập cư (di trú)bộ dụng cụ phòng chống dịch để họ yên tâm hơn. Hai nghìn công nhân nhập cư (di trú)cũng có các cuộc gọi điện thoại. Chúng tôi sẽ liên lạc thường xuyên. ”
Vui lòng xác nhận với tất cả các công nhân di dời. Tuyên bố của Bộ Lao động có phù hợp với tình hình hiện tại không? Nguyên liệu có đủ không? Vui lòng cho chúng tôi biết nếu bạn có bất kỳ tình huống nào.

4. Hôm nay, có hàng trăm người đã tiến hành xét nghiệm nhanh ,nhằm tránh lây Lan dịch bệnh,và sau đó họ được đưa về ký túc xá Tạo Kiều .Tuy nhiên, những bức ảnh do công nhân nhập cư ( di trú) quay lại những hình ảnh về môi trường,vấn đề vệ sinh tại ký túc xá rất kém , không đảm . Chúng tôi đã báo cáo tình hình cho sở chỉ huy để hỗ trợ dọn dẹp môi trường tại chỗ càng sớm càng tốt.

5. Ngoài ra, Bộ Lao động Đài Loan đã cung cấp phiên bản LINE của nền tảng phổ biến thông tin, như thể hiện trong hình, mọi người lao động nhập cư (di trú) vui lòng tham khảo. ( https://lin.ee/GOrGlZI )

6. One-Forty CARE, một tổ chức phi lợi nhuận, phổ biến thông tin mới nhất về phòng chống dịch bệnh bằng nhiều ngôn ngữ khác nhau trong thời gian thực. Mong lao động nhập cư ( di trú ) Hãy cũng tham khảo để cùng nhau vượt qua dịch bệnh. Link chia sẻ: https://bit.ly/3fnSTxU.

Nghị sĩ huyện MIÊU LẬT Tống Quốc Đỉnh

-----

給各位苗栗的移工朋友：
　
一、根據中央流行疫情指揮中心在2021/06/06公告，京元電外籍移工停止上班，居家隔離，薪資照付，請大家放心待在住處。

二、根據今日（2021/06/07）苗栗縣政府公告：
1.全縣移工自即日起除上下班期間停止外出，生活所需採買由移工宿舍管理人員或專責人員統一負責，責成縣府警察局於社區街道隨時查察。
2.上下班統一由事業單位或仲介公司負責接送。
　
我知道這個政策可能讓移工朋友感到不解，不過請大家稍安勿躁，我會將各位的聲音傳達給官方，尋求更好的安置管理方案。

三、根據今日台灣蘋果日報報導：「針對苗栗京元電子移工全面停工，勞動部已進駐通譯人員，並提供移工防疫包，讓他們安心，兩千多名移工也都有掌握電話，都會定期聯絡。」，請各位移工朋友確認看看，勞動部的說法是否與現況相符？各項物資是否足夠？有任何狀況請讓我們知道。

四、今日有百名京元電子快篩陰性的移工朋友，因宿舍降載分流被帶往造橋的宿舍，但移工回傳的現場照片，似有環境衛生的嚴重問題，與前進指揮所給予的照片有所落差，我們已經情形反映給前進指揮所，盡快協助現場環境清理。

五、另外，台灣勞動部有提供LINE版資訊傳播平台，如附圖，請各位移工朋友參考。

六、非營利組織One-Forty CARE 有即時傳播各種語言最新防疫資訊，也請各位移工朋友參考，一起度過疫情。分享連結：https://bit.ly/3fnSTxU。

苗栗縣議員宋國鼎服務團隊

——

這一波疫情來得很快，就連身為本國人的我們，對疫情的更新資訊有時都感到吃不消。

而對於外籍移工而言，更因為語言和資訊取得管道的限制，對疫情更顯得焦慮，我們也接獲到一些因為資訊落差引發的對峙事件。目前苗栗疫情發展，移工族群也面臨更高的群聚危機。

透過這樣的翻譯，讓移工朋友可以用他們的社群提醒彼此，是我們希望可以幫上忙的地方。

這是前些日子爆出已經被加拿大法院接理對藏傳佛教噶舉派法王的訟訴。（加拿大法院鏈接在此：https://www.bccourts.ca/jdb-txt/sc/21/09/2021BCSC0939cor1.htm?fbclid=IwAR2FLZlzmUIGTBaTuKPVchEqqngcE3Qy6G_C0TWNWVKa2ksbIYkVJVMQ8f8）

這位法王的桃色事件，我是幾年前才聽到。但，藏傳佛教的高層有這些性醜聞，我已經聽了幾十年。我以前的一位前女友也被一些堪布藉故上她的家摟抱過，也有一些活佛跟她表白。（這不只是她，其他地方我也聽過不少）

這是一個藏傳佛教裡面系統式的問題。

很多時候發生這種事情，信徒和教主往往都是說女方得不到寵而報仇，或者說她們也精神病，或者說她們撒謊。

我不排除有這種可能性，但，多過一位，甚至多位出來指證的時候，我是傾向於相信『沒有那麼巧這麼多有精神病的女人要撒謊來報仇』。

大寶法王的桃色事件，最先吹哨的是一位台灣的在家信徒，第二位是香港的女出家人，現在加拿大又多一位公開舉報上法庭。

對大寶法王信徒來說，這一次的比較麻煩，因為是有孩子的。（關於有孩子的，我早在法王的桃色事件曝光時，就有聽聞）

如果法庭勒令要驗證DNA，這對法王和他的信徒來說，會很尷尬和矛盾，因為做或不做，都死。

你若問我，我覺得『人數是有力量的』，同時我也覺得之後有更多的人站出來，是不出奇的。

我也藉此呼籲各方佛教徒，如果你們真的愛佛教，先別說批判，但如鴕鳥般不討論這些爭議，你是間接害了佛教。

（下面是我從加拿大法院鏈接拷貝下來的內容，當中有很多細節。）

Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION

BACKGROUND

ANALYSIS

A. The Spousal Support Claim in this Case

B. The Test to Amend Pleadings

C. Pleadings in Family Law Cases

D. The Legal Concept of a Marriage-Like Relationship

E. Is There a Reasonable Claim of a Marriage-Like Relationship?

F. Delay / Prejudice

CONCLUSION



INTRODUCTION
[1] The claimant applies to amend her notice of family claim to seek spousal support. At issue is whether the claimant’s allegations give rise to a reasonable claim she lived with the respondent in a marriage-like relationship, so as to give rise to a potential entitlement to spousal support under the Family Law Act, S.B.C. 2011, c. 25 (“FLA”).

[2] The facts alleged by the claimant do not fit within a traditional concept of marriage. The claimant does not allege that she and the respondent ever lived together. Indeed, she has only met the respondent in person four times: twice very briefly in a public setting; a third time in private, when she alleges the respondent sexually assaulted her; and a fourth and final occasion, when she informed the respondent she was pregnant with his child.

[3] The claimant’s case is that what began as a non-consensual sexual encounter evolved into a loving and affectionate relationship. That relationship occurred almost entirely over private text messages. The parties rarely spoke on the telephone, and never saw one another during the relationship, even over video. The claimant says they could not be together because the respondent is forbidden by his station and religious beliefs from intimate relationships or marriage. Nonetheless, she alleges, they formed a marriage-like relationship that lasted from January 2018 to January 2019.

[4] The respondent denies any romantic relationship with the claimant. While he acknowledges providing emotional and financial support to the claimant, he says it was for the benefit of the child the claimant told him was his daughter.

[5] The claimant’s proposed amendment raises a novel question: can a secret relationship that began on-line and never moved into the physical world be like a marriage? In my view, that question should be answered by a trial judge after hearing all of the evidence. The alleged facts give rise to a reasonable claim the claimant lived with the respondent in a marriage-like relationship. Accordingly, I grant the claimant leave to amend her notice of family claim.

BACKGROUND
[6] It should be emphasized that this is an application to amend pleadings only. The allegations by the claimant are presumed to be true for the purposes of this application. Those allegations have not been tested in a court of law.

[7] The respondent, Ogyen Trinley Dorje, is a high lama of the Karma Kagyu School of Tibetan Buddhism. He has been recognized and enthroned as His Holiness, the 17th Gyalwang Karmapa. Without meaning any disrespect, I will refer to him as Mr. Dorje in these reasons for judgment.

[8] Mr. Dorje leads a monastic and nomadic lifestyle. His true home is Tibet, but he currently resides in India. He receives followers from around the world at the Gyuto Monetary in India. He also travels the world teaching Tibetan Buddhist Dharma and hosting pujas, ceremonies at which Buddhists express their gratitude and devotion to the Buddha.

[9] The claimant, Vikki Hui Xin Han, is a former nun of Tibetan Buddhism. Ms. Han first encountered Mr. Dorje briefly at a large puja in 2014. The experience of the puja convinced Ms. Han she wanted to become a Buddhist nun. She met briefly with Mr. Dorje, in accordance with Kagyu traditions, to obtain his approval to become a nun.

[10] In October 2016, Ms. Han began a three-year, three-month meditation retreat at a monastery in New York State. Her objective was to learn the practices and teachings of the Kagyu Lineage. Mr. Dorje was present at the retreat twice during the time Ms. Han was at the monastery.

[11] Ms. Han alleges that on October 14, 2017, Mr. Dorje sexually assaulted her in her room at the monastery. She alleges that she became pregnant from the assault.

[12] After she learned that she was pregnant, Ms. Han requested a private audience with Mr. Dorje. In November 2017, in the presence of his bodyguards, Ms. Han informed Mr. Dorje she was pregnant with his child. Mr. Dorje initially denied responsibility; however, he provided Ms. Han with his email address and a cellphone number, and, according to Ms. Han, said he would “prepare some money” for her.

[13] Ms. Han abandoned her plan to become a nun, left the retreat and returned to Canada. She never saw Mr. Dorje again.

[14] After Ms. Han returned to Canada, she and Mr. Dorje began a regular communication over an instant messaging app called Line. They also exchanged emails and occasionally spoke on the telephone.

[15] The parties appear to have expressed care and affection for one another in these communications. I say “appear to” because it is difficult to fully understand the meaning and intentions of another person from brief text messages, especially those originally written in a different language. The parties wrote in a private shorthand, sharing jokes, emojis, cartoon portraits and “hugs” or “kisses”. Ms. Han was the more expressive of the two, writing more frequently and in longer messages. Mr. Dorje generally participated in response to questions or prompting from Ms. Han, sometimes in single word messages.

[16] Ms. Han deposes that she believed Mr. Dorje was in love with her and that, by January 2018, she and Mr. Dorje were living in a “conjugal relationship”.

[17] During their communications, Ms. Han expressed concern that her child would be “illegitimate”. She appears to have asked Mr. Dorje to marry her, and he appears to have responded that he was “not ready”.

[18] Throughout 2018, Mr. Dorje transferred funds in various denominations to Ms. Han through various third parties. Ms. Han deposes that these funds were:

a) $50,000 CDN to deliver the child and for postpartum care she was to receive at a facility in Seattle;

b) $300,000 CDN for the first year of the child’s life;

c) $20,000 USD for a wedding ring, because Ms. Han wrote “Even if we cannot get married, you must buy me a wedding ring”;

d) $400,000 USD to purchase a home for the mother and child.

[19] On June 19, 2018, Ms. Han gave birth to a daughter in Richmond, B.C.

[20] On September 17, 2018, Mr. Dorje wrote, ”Taking care of her and you are my duty for life”.

[21] Ms. Han’s expectation was that the parties would live together in the future. She says they planned to live together. Those plans evolved over time. Initially they involved purchasing a property in Toronto, so that Mr. Dorje could visit when he was in New York. They also discussed purchasing property in Calgary or renting a home in Vancouver for that purpose. Ms. Han eventually purchased a condominium in Richmond using funds provided by Mr. Dorje.

[22] Ms. Han deposes that the parties made plans for Mr. Dorje to visit her and meet the child in Richmond. In October 2018, however, Mr. Dorje wrote that he needed to “disappear” to Europe. He wrote:

I will definitely find a way to meet her

And you

Remember to take care of yourself if something happens

[23] The final plan the parties discussed, according to Ms. Han, was that Mr. Dorje would sponsor Ms. Han and the child to immigrate to the United States and live at the Kagyu retreat centre in New York State.

[24] In January 2019, Ms. Han lost contact with Mr. Dorje.

[25] Ms. Han commenced this family law case on July 17, 2019, seeking child support, a declaration of parentage and a parentage test. She did not seek spousal support.

[26] Ms. Han first proposed a claim for spousal support in October 2020 after a change in her counsel. Following an exchange of correspondence concerning an application for leave to amend the notice of family claim, Ms. Han’s counsel wrote that Ms. Han would not be advancing a spousal support claim. On March 16, 2020, counsel reversed course, and advised that Ms. Han had instructed him to proceed with the application.

[27] When this application came on before me, the trial was set to commence on June 7, 2021. The parties were still in the process of discoveries and obtaining translations for hundreds of pages of documents in Chinese characters.

[28] At a trial management conference on May 6, 2021, noting the parties were not ready to proceed, Madam Justice Walkem adjourned the trial to April 11, 2022.

ANALYSIS
A. The Spousal Support Claim in this Case
[29] To claim spousal support in this case, Ms. Han must plead that she lived with Mr. Dorje in a marriage-like relationship. This is because only “spouses” are entitled to spousal support, and s. 3 of the Family Law Act defines a spouse as a person who is married or has lived with another person in a marriage-like relationship:

3 (1) A person is a spouse for the purposes of this Act if the person

(a) is married to another person, or

(b) has lived with another person in a marriage-like relationship, and

(i) has done so for a continuous period of at least 2 years, or

(ii) except in Parts 5 [Property Division] and 6 [Pension Division], has a child with the other person.

[30] Because she alleges she has a child with Mr. Dorje, Ms. Han need not allege that the relationship endured for a continuous period of two years to claim spousal support; but she must allege that she lived in a marriage-like relationship with him at some point in time. Accordingly, she must amend the notice of family claim.

B. The Test to Amend Pleadings
[31] Given that the notice of trial has been served, Ms. Han requires leave of the court to amend the notice of family claim: Supreme Court Family Rule 8-1(1)(b)(i).

[32] A person seeking to amend a notice of family claim must show that there is a reasonable cause of action. This is a low threshold. What the applicant needs to establish is that, if the facts pleaded are proven at trial, they would support a reasonable claim. The applicant’s allegations of fact are assumed to be true for the purposes of this analysis. Cantelon v. Wall, 2015 BCSC 813, at para. 7-8.

[33] The applicant’s delay, the reasons for the delay, and the prejudice to the responding party are also relevant factors. The ultimate consideration is whether it would be just and convenient to allow the amendment. Cantelon, at para. 6, citing Teal Cedar Products Ltd. v. Dale Intermediaries Ltd. et al (1986), 19 B.C.L.R. (3d) 282.

C. Pleadings in Family Law Cases
[34] Supreme Court Family Rules 3-1(1) and 4-1(1) require that a claim to spousal support be pleaded in a notice of family claim in Form F3. Section 2 of Form F3, “Spousal relationship history”, requires a spousal support claimant to check the boxes that apply to them, according to whether they are or have been married or are or have been in a marriage-like relationship. Where a claimant alleges a marriage-like relationship, Form F3 requires that they provide the date on which they began to live together with the respondent in a marriage-like relationship and, where applicable, the date on which they separated. Form F3 does not require a statement of the factual basis for the claim of spousal support.

[35] In this case, Ms. Han seeks to amend the notice of family claim to allege that she and Mr. Dorje began to live in a marriage-like relationship in or around January 2018, and separated in or around January 2019.

[36] An allegation that a person lived with a claimant in a marriage-like relationship is a conclusion of law, not an allegation of fact. Unlike the rules governing pleadings in civil actions, however, the Supreme Court Family Rules do not expressly require family law claimants to plead the material facts in support of conclusions of law.

[37] In other words, there is no express requirement in the Supreme Court Family Rules that Ms. Han plead the facts on which she relies for the allegation she and Mr. Dorje lived in a marriage-like relationship.

[38] Rule 4-6 authorizes a party to demand particulars, and then apply to the court for an order for further and better particulars, of a matter stated in a pleading. However, unless and until she is granted leave and files the proposed amended notice of family claim, Ms. Han’s allegation of a marriage-like relationship is not a matter stated in a pleading.

[39] Ms. Han filed an affidavit in support of her application to amend the notice of family claim. Normally, evidence would not be required or admissible on an application to amend a pleading. However, in the unusual circumstances of this case, the parties agreed I may look to Ms. Han’s affidavit and exhibits for the facts she pleads in support of the allegation of a marriage-like relationship.

[40] Because this is an application to amend - and Ms. Han’s allegations of fact are presumed to be true - I have not considered Mr. Dorje’s responding affidavit.

[41] Relying on affidavit evidence for an application to amend pleadings is less than ideal. It tends to merge and confuse the material facts with the evidence that would be relied on to prove those facts. In a number of places in her affidavit, for example, Ms. Han describes her feelings, impressions and understandings. A person’s hopes and intentions are not normally material facts unless they are mutual or reasonably held. The facts on which Ms. Han alleges she and Mr. Dorje formed a marriage-like relationship are more important for the present purposes than her belief they entered into a conjugal union.

[42] Somewhat unusually, in this case, almost all of the parties’ relevant communications were in writing. This makes it somewhat easier to separate the facts from the evidence; however, as stated above, it is difficult to understand the intentions and actions of a person from brief text messages.

[43] In my view, it would be a good practice for applicants who seek to amend their pleadings in family law cases to provide opposing counsel and the court with a schedule of the material facts on which they rely for the proposed amendment.

D. The Legal Concept of a Marriage-Like Relationship
[44] As Mr. Justice Myers observed in Mother 1 v. Solus Trust Company, 2019 BCSC 200, the concept of a marriage-like relationship is elastic and difficult to define. This elasticity is illustrated by the following passage from Yakiwchuk v. Oaks, 2003 SKQB 124, quoted by Myers J. at para. 133 of Mother 1:

[10] Spousal relationships are many and varied. Individuals in spousal relationships, whether they are married or not, structure their relationships differently. In some relationships there is a complete blending of finances and property - in others, spouses keep their property and finances totally separate and in still others one spouse may totally control those aspects of the relationship with the other spouse having little or no knowledge or input. For some couples, sexual relations are very important - for others, that aspect may take a back seat to companionship. Some spouses do not share the same bed. There may be a variety of reasons for this such as health or personal choice. Some people are affectionate and demonstrative. They show their feelings for their “spouse” by holding hands, touching and kissing in public. Other individuals are not demonstrative and do not engage in public displays of affection. Some “spouses” do everything together - others do nothing together. Some “spouses” vacation together and some spend their holidays apart. Some “spouses” have children - others do not. It is this variation in the way human beings structure their relationships that make the determination of when a “spousal relationship” exists difficult to determine. With married couples, the relationship is easy to establish. The marriage ceremony is a public declaration of their commitment and intent. Relationships outside marriage are much more difficult to ascertain. Rarely is there any type of “public” declaration of intent. Often people begin cohabiting with little forethought or planning. Their motivation is often nothing more than wanting to “be together”. Some individuals have chosen to enter relationships outside marriage because they did not want the legal obligations imposed by that status. Some individuals have simply given no thought as to how their relationship would operate. Often the date when the cohabitation actually began is blurred because people “ease into” situations, spending more and more time together. Agreements between people verifying when their relationship began and how it will operate often do not exist.

[45] In Mother 1, Mr. Justice Myers referred to a list of 22 factors grouped into seven categories, from Maldowich v. Penttinen, (1980), 17 R.F.L. (2d) 376 (Ont. Dist. Ct.), that have frequently been cited in this and other courts for the purpose of determining whether a relationship was marriage-like, at para. 134 of Mother 1:

1. Shelter:

(a) Did the parties live under the same roof?

(b) What were the sleeping arrangements?

(c) Did anyone else occupy or share the available accommodation?

2. Sexual and Personal Behaviour:

(a) Did the parties have sexual relations? If not, why not?

(b) Did they maintain an attitude of fidelity to each other?

(c) What were their feelings toward each other?

(d) Did they communicate on a personal level?

(e) Did they eat their meals together?

(f) What, if anything, did they do to assist each other with problems or during illness?

(g) Did they buy gifts for each other on special occasions?

3. Services:

What was the conduct and habit of the parties in relation to:

(a) preparation of meals;

(b) washing and mending clothes;

(c) shopping;

(d) household maintenance; and

(e) any other domestic services?

4. Social:

(a) Did they participate together or separately in neighbourhood and community activities?

(b) What was the relationship and conduct of each of them toward members of their respective families and how did such families behave towards the parties?

5. Societal:

What was the attitude and conduct of the community toward each of them and as a couple?

6. Support (economic):

(a) What were the financial arrangements between the parties regarding the provision of or contribution toward the necessaries of life (food, clothing, shelter, recreation, etc.)?

(b) What were the arrangements concerning the acquisition and ownership of property?

(c) Was there any special financial arrangement between them which both agreed would be determinant of their overall relationship?

7. Children:

What was the attitude and conduct of the parties concerning children?

[46] In Austin v. Goerz, 2007 BCCA 586, the Court of Appeal cautioned against a “checklist approach”; rather, a court should "holistically" examine all the relevant factors. Cases like Molodowich provide helpful indicators of the sorts of behaviour that society associates with a marital relationship, the Court of Appeal said; however, “the presence or absence of any particular factor cannot be determinative of whether a relationship is marriage-like” (para. 58).

[47] In Weber v. Leclerc, 2015 BCCA 492, the Court of Appeal again affirmed that there is no checklist of characteristics that will be found in all marriages and then concluded with respect to evidence of intentions:

[23] The parties’ intentions – particularly the expectation that the relationship will be of lengthy, indeterminate duration – may be of importance in determining whether a relationship is “marriage-like”. While the court will consider the evidence expressly describing the parties’ intentions during the relationship, it will also test that evidence by considering whether the objective evidence is consonant with those intentions.

[24] The question of whether a relationship is “marriage-like” will also typically depend on more than just their intentions. Objective evidence of the parties’ lifestyle and interactions will also provide direct guidance on the question of whether the relationship was “marriage-like”.

[48] Significantly for this case, the courts have looked to mutual intent in order to find a marriage-like relationship. See, for example, L.E. v. D.J., 2011 BCSC 671 and Buell v. Unger, 2011 BCSC 35; Davey Estate v. Gruyaert, 2005 CarswellBC 3456 at 13 and 35.

[49] In Mother 1, Myers J. concluded his analysis of the law with the following learned comment:

[143] Having canvassed the law relating to the nature of a marriage-like relationship, I will digress to point out the problematic nature of the concept. It may be apparent from the above that determining whether a marriage-like relationship exists sometimes seems like sand running through one's fingers. Simply put, a marriage-like relationship is akin to a marriage without the formality of a marriage. But as the cases mentioned above have noted, people treat their marriages differently and have different conceptions of what marriage entails.

[50] In short, the determination of whether the parties in this case lived in a marriage-like relationship is a fact-specific inquiry that a trial judge would need to make on a “holistic” basis, having regard to all of the evidence. While the trial judge may consider the various factors listed in the authorities, those factors would not be treated as a checklist and no single factor or category of factors would be treated as being decisive.

E. Is There a Reasonable Claim of a Marriage-Like Relationship?
[51] In this case, many of the Molodowich factors are missing:

a) The parties never lived under the same roof. They never slept together. They were never in the same place at the same time during the relationship. The last time they saw each other in person was in November 2017, before the relationship began.

b) The parties never had consensual sex. They did not hug, kiss or hold hands. With the exception of the alleged sexual assault, they never touched one another physically.

c) The parties expressed care and affection for one another, but they rarely shared personal information or interest in their lives outside of their direct topic of communication. They did not write about their families, their friends, their religious beliefs or their work.

d) They expressed concern and support for one another when the other felt unwell or experienced health issues, but they did not provide any care or assistance during illness or other problems.

e) They did not assist one another with domestic chores.

f) They did not share their relationship with their peers or their community. There is no allegation, for example, that Mr. Dorje told his fellow monks or any of his followers about the relationship. There is no allegation that Ms. Han told her friends or any co-workers. Indeed, there is no allegation that anyone, with the exception of Ms. Han’s mother, knew about the relationship. Although Mr. Dorje gave Ms. Han’s mother a gift, he never met the mother and he never spoke to her.

g) They did not intend to have a child together. The child was conceived as a result of a sexual assault. While Mr. Dorje expressed interest in “meeting” the child, he never followed up. He currently has no relationship with the child. There is no allegation he has sought access or parenting arrangements.

[52] The only Molodowich factor of any real relevance in this case is economic support. Mr. Dorje provided the funds with which Ms. Han purchased a condominium. Mr. Dorje initially wrote that he wanted to buy a property with the money, but, he wrote, “It’s the same thing if you buy [it]”.

[53] Mr. Dorje also provided a significant amount of money for Ms. Han’s postpartum care and the child’s first year of life.

[54] This financial support may have been primarily for the benefit of the child. Even the condominium, Ms. Han wrote, was primarily for the benefit of the child.

[55] However, in my view, a trial judge may attach a broader significance to the financial support from Mr. Dorje than child support alone. A trial judge may find that the money Mr. Dorje provided to Ms. Han at her request was an expression of his commitment to her in circumstances in which he could not commit physically. The money and the gifts may be seen by the trial judge to have been a form of down payment by Mr. Dorje on a promise of continued emotional and financial support for Ms. Han, or, in Mr. Dorje’s own words, “Taking care of her and you are my duty for life” (emphasis added).

[56] On the other hand, I find it difficult to attach any particular significance to the fact that Mr. Dorje agreed to provide funds for Ms. Han to purchase a wedding ring. It appears to me that Ms. Han demanded that Mr. Dorje buy her a wedding ring, not that the ring had any mutual meaning to the parties as a marriage symbol. But it is relevant, in my view, that Mr. Dorje provided $20,000 USD to Ms. Han for something she wanted that was of no benefit to the child.

[57] Further, Ms. Han alleges that the parties intended to live together. At a minimum, a trial judge may find that the discussions about where Ms. Han and the child would live reflected a mutual intention of the parties to see one another and spend time together when they could.

[58] Mr. Dorje argues that an intention to live together at some point in the future is not sufficient to show that an existing relationship was marriage-like. He argues that the question of whether the relationship was marriage-like requires more than just intentions, citing Weber, supra.

[59] In my view, the documentary evidence referred to above provides some objective evidence in this case that the parties progressed beyond mere intentions. As stated, the parties appear to have expressed genuine care and affection for one another. They appear to have discussed marriage, trust, honesty, finances, mutual obligations and acquiring family property. These are not matters one would expect Mr. Dorje to discuss with a friend or a follower, or even with the mother of his child, without a marriage-like element of the relationship.

[60] A trial judge may find on the facts alleged by Ms. Han that the parties loved one another and would have lived together, but were unable to do so because of Mr. Dorje’s religious duties and nomadic lifestyle.

[61] The question I raised in the introduction to these reasons is whether a relationship that began on-line and never moved into the physical world can be marriage-like.

[62] Notably, the definition of a spouse in the Family Law Act does not require that the parties live together, only that they live with another person in a marriage-like relationship.

[63] In Connor Estate, 2017 BCSC 978, Mr. Justice Kent found that a couple that maintained two entirely separate households and never lived under the same roof formed a marriage-like relationship. (Connor Estate was decided under the intestacy provisions of the Wills, Estates and Succession Act, S.B.C. 2009, c. 13 ("WESA"), but courts have relied on cases decided under WESA and the FLA interchangeably for their definitions of a spouse.) Mr. Justice Kent found:

[50] The evidence is overwhelming and I find as a fact that Mr. Chambers and Ms. Connor loved and cared deeply about each other, and that they had a loving and intimate relationship for over 20 years that was far more than mere friendship or even so-called "friendship with benefits". I accept Mr. Chambers' evidence that he would have liked to share a home with Ms. Connor after the separation from his wife, but was unable to do so because of Ms. Connor's hoarding illness. The evidence amply supports, and I find as a fact, that Mr. Chambers and Ms. Connor loved each other, were faithful to each other, communicated with each other almost every day when they were not together, considered themselves to be (and presented themselves to be) "husband and wife" and were accepted by all who knew them as a couple.

[64] Connor Estate may be distinguishable from this case because Mr. Chambers and Ms. Connor were physically intimate for over 20 years, and presented themselves to the world as a married couple.

[65] Other decisions in which a marriage-like relationship has been found to exist despite the parties not living together have involved circumstances in which the couple lived under the same roof at previous points in the relationship, and the issue was whether they continued to be spouses after they took up separate residences: in Thompson v. Floyd, 2001 BCCA 78, the parties had lived together for a period of at least 11 years; in Roach v. Dutra, 2010 BCCA 264, the parties had lived together for approximately three years.

[66] However, as Mr. Justice Kent noted in Connor Estate:

[48] … [W]hile much guidance might be found in this case law, the simple fact is that no two cases are identical (and indeed they usually vary widely) and it is the assessment of evidence as a whole in this particular case which matters.

[67] Mr. Justice Kent concluded:

[53] Like human beings themselves, marriage-like relationships can come in many and various shapes. In this particular case, I have no doubt that such a relationship existed …

[68] As stated, Ms. Han’s claim is novel. It may even be weak. Almost all of the traditional factors are missing. The fact that Ms. Han and Mr. Dorje never lived under the same roof, never shared a bed and never even spent time together in person will militate against a finding they lived with one another in a marriage-like relationship. However, the traditional factors are not a mandatory check-list that confines the “elastic” concept of a marriage-like relationship. And if the COVID pandemic has taught us nothing else, it is that real relationships can form, blossom and end in virtual worlds.

[69] In my view, the merits of Ms. Han’s claim should be decided on the evidence. Subject to an overriding prejudice to Mr. Dorje, she should have leave to amend the notice of family claim. However, she should also provide meaningful particulars of the alleged marriage-like relationship.

F. Delay / Prejudice
[70] Ms. Han filed her notice of family claim on July 17, 2019. She brought this application to amend approximately one year and nine months after she filed the pleading, just over two months before the original trial date.

[71] Ms. Han’s delay was made all that more remarkable by her change in position from January 19, 2021, when she confirmed, through counsel, that she was not seeking spousal support in this case.

[72] Ms. Han gave notice of her intention to proceed with this application to Mr. Dorje on March 16, 2021. By the time the application was heard, the parties had conducted examinations for discovery without covering the issues that would arise from a claim of spousal support.

[73] Also, in April, Ms. Han produced additional documents, primarily text messages, that may be relevant to her claim of spousal support, but were undecipherable to counsel for Mr. Dorje, who does not read Mandarin.

[74] This application proceeded largely on documents selected and translated by counsel for Ms. Han. I was informed that Mandarin translations of the full materials would take 150 days.

[75] Understandably in the circumstances, Mr. Dorje argued that an amendment two months before trial would be neither just nor convenient. He argued that he would be prejudiced by an adjournment so as to allow Ms. Han to advance a late claim of spousal support.

[76] The circumstances changed on May 6, 2021, when Madam Justice Walkem adjourned the trial to July 2022 and reset it for 25 days. Madam Justice Walkem noted that most of the witnesses live internationally and require translators. She also noted that paternity may be in issue, and Mr. Dorje may amend his pleadings to raise that issue. It seems clear that, altogether apart from the potential spousal support claim, the parties were not ready to proceed to trial on June 7, 2021.

[77] In my view, any remaining prejudice to Mr. Dorje is outweighed by the importance of having all of the issues between the parties decided on their merits.

[78] Ms. Han’s delay and changes of position on spousal support may be a matter to de addressed in a future order of costs; but they are not grounds on which to deny her leave to amend the notice of family claim.

CONCLUSION
[79] Ms. Han is granted leave to amend her notice of family claim in the form attached as Appendix A to the notice of application to include a claim for spousal support.

[80] Within 21 days, or such other deadline as the parties may agree, Ms. Han must provide particulars of the marriage-like relationship alleged in the amended notice of family claim.

[81] Ms. Han is entitled to costs of this application in the cause of the spousal support claim.

“Master Elwood”

[News] ทีมงาน Cyberpunk 2077 ส่วนใหญ่สมัครใจทำงานล่วงเวลาเพื่อทำให้เกมเสร็จสมบูรณ์ แทนที่จะเลื่อนวางจำหน่ายอีกครั้ง
.
หลายคนอาจจะทราบกันมาแล้วว่า Cyberpunk 2077 ในตอนนี้ได้เข้าสู่สถานะเสร็จสิ้นการพัฒนาและเข้าสู่กระบวนการผลิตแล้ว แต่ตัวเกมก็ยังต้องได้รับการขัดเกลา ที่ทาง CD Projekt Red ได้สั่งให้ทีมพัฒนาต้องทำงานล่วงเวลา 6 วันต่อสัปดาห์ในช่วงโค้งสุดท้ายก่อนที่เกมจะวางจำหน่าย
.
แต่จริงๆ แล้วทาง CD Projekt Red เคยพิจารณาที่จะเลื่อนการวางจำหน่ายเกมอีกครั้ง เพื่อหลีกเลี่ยงปัญหาที...
Continue Reading[News News Most Cyberpunk 2077 crews voluntarily work overtime to complete the game instead of re-postpone.
.
Many of you are already aware that Cyberpunk 2077 is now in a state of completion, development and production process. But the game has to be purified at CD Projekt Red has ordered the development team to work 6 days a week. In the last curve before the game is on sale
.
CD Projekt Red has actually considered re-re-reduction to avoid issues that require the development team to work overtime to finish the work or in the game called Crunch.
.
In the latest GameInformer Show, CD Projekt Red has been discussed inside to find possible options to finish the game in time. Release including the Cyberpunk 2077 re-scrolling. However, most developers of CD Projektt. Red voluntary and encouraged to work increases in the last 6 weeks before a release they didn't think it was Crunch with a different perspective on this story in Poland and with crunch stories published by various media. Overrated and negative trends. Despite the development team being proud of this work, it's up to 1 in the game development team. Afraid to celebrate the game at once in a gold status.
.
This is also consistent with the previous report with CD Projekt Red Developer, who expressed disappointment in Bloomberg's latest report and other media trying to hit news that studios are using Crunch to rush to work and think they're having a paint egg for them. Hopeful, want CD Projekt Red to look like a bad company.
.
By Adrian Chmielarz, the Founder of People Can Fly made a statement on Facebook that argues that Crunch is not an evil way and a situation that needs to be Crunch is not white or black. As many people look, the Łukasz Szcepankowski of CD Projekt Red. Says game studio managers don't count money smoking cigars and take advantage of teamwork Crunch on one side
.
Meanwhile, Jason Schreier, Bloomberg's journalist, who reports CD Projekt Red, orders the Cyberpunk 2077 development team to work overtime or Crunch, argues that GameInformer argues that his news is incorrectly reported, comes out on Twitter that GameInformer doesn't care about him. I have interviewed dozens of developers from CD Projekt Red and they are ready to reveal emails at Adam Badowski Spearhead studio CD Projekt Red. Sending to apologies to all the developers who had to work overtime in June. Y. In the past, with the following mind.
.
′′ Hey
.
I think there's no much gourmet for this.
.
We delayed the re-release to 19 Feb. Y. And I know this is a bittersweet thing for all of you. In one way, we also congratulate each of you because of the extra time needed for the game to make it glowing. On the other hand, we're sorry because that means we have to work hard for longer and longer. We're all running to the end, but still running... I want to offer a solution that solves everything but I can't find it. We need to finish the game and we can't finish it in July. Y. That's the truth that is.
.
What I can offer is to tell you about this. Each day we use to purify the game. It's worthwhile. We just started sending the preview to the media and the first impression (from PietSmiet and Game Informer). It's what they are very excited about and they are. It's all from the utmost devotion every day, every week. I hope when we submit a preview to the media on 25 June. Y. We will gain more confidence.
.
If I wish for anything, I would like to request you to ' patiently try ' to deliver the game. Then I apologize to the family of all team members and support from them. To the family of my team, I realize that I'm hard working in love. It's often that they can't be together at home, but I promise that this is the last time and the finish line is just around reach.
.
All this hard work will bring to Cyberpunk 2077 if not make it the most memorable game. At least 1 of the most memorable games in Generation. I'm sure.
.
Thank you,
Adam"
.
Jason says more about companies with culture, Crunch or Rubbing. It doesn't mean they are evil, dangerous, or the villain of the game industry. But he himself has just seen many people jumping into the band reject reality to try to try. To protect CD Projekt Red and Cyberpunk 2077 this much. And if many people read this email at Spearhead Studio CD Projekt Red, apologize to the company's family and still think his report on the CD Projekt Red, there's a Crunch ′′ It's overrated ′′ He has nothing to say either.
.
Jason's such tweet is commenting on the game. I agree and disagree.
.
′′ They don't want to believe that CDPR is making any mistake. These gamers are just bias and bias against some companies. As we know, it's disappointing to see those game people who stomped on Naughty Dog and drowned in the dirt, but defended CDPR. But at least it makes me feel like [if it's a game company like or hate kelīyd these gamers don't care at all
The gameman of daylaum says.
.
′′ Thank you for making the development team unhappy with the development of the game and the production process. And fear to show pride in all the hard work because you khuṇ Jason Schreier Schreier brought the Crunch news to paint the egg again in the colors. The same day that the game is in Gold. I hope you don't play this game from what you have done
The gameman named Jazzy Boo says.
.
′′ CDPR needs to be scolded for what the whole game industry does. Crunch will always exist. No matter how big the project is or how much time the game developers are, CDPR Crunch pays compensation. Beautiful and the teamwork is done with their own decisions ′′
The nrenfuk people say.
.
Cyberpunk 2077 is scheduled to be available on PS4, XB1, PC and Stadia on 19 November. Y. This is it.
.
Source: https://www.playstationlifestyle.net/2020/10/08/cdpr-cyberpunk-2077-crunch-reports/
https://wccftech.com/cyberpunk-2077-delayed-again-extra-work/
https://www.playstationlifestyle.net/2020/10/09/cyberpunk-2077-crunch-exaggerated
https://twitter.com/jasonschreier/status/1314577749114314753
-------------------------------
Just top up Steam Wallet Wallet GetSteamWallet.com
-------------------------------
Command and Conquer: The Ultimate Collection Reduced to 166.19 baht (Origin). See here-https://bit.ly/2N3PkzlTranslated

I reached out to my friends and fellow YouTubers in Taiwan after a news article claiming that "TAIWAN IS THE MOST DANGEROUS PLACE ON EARTH". Is this statement true? What is the most dangerous thing these foreigners have experienced after living in Taiwan for over 100 years together?!

Please support all YouTubers in this video by subscribing to their channels:
@馮韋元Francois Devatine
@I'm Jonas
@Victor x Grace
@外國人在台灣-安德鏡頭下的世界
@Prozzie
@Cole Fogle
@法國Anna
@Wes Davies 衛斯理
@lexww歐亞力
@Amy英國奶奶
@Bonjour Louis! 我是路易
@lifeintaiwan
@Xiaofei小飛

#Taiwan
#MostDangerousPlaceOnEarth
#TaiwanIsSafe

Do you want to see MORE videos like this one? Please consider supporting me on Patreon as all my income will go directly back into the channel and cover either future travels or other resources: https://www.patreon.com/LukasEngstrom

Please follow me on:
Facebook: www.facebook.com/LukasTaiwan
Instagram: www.instagram.com/LukasEngstrom

If you want to send my something that might be shown in a future video, please send it to:

ATT: Lukas
RM. 2, 6F., NO.201, FUHE RD.,
YONGHE DIST., NEW TAIPEI CITY 23450,
TAIWAN (R.O.C.)

Business inquiries:
中文/English
創作者經紀人/Contact person: - Maggie
Line ID: @redi
Email: contact@lukasengstrom.com

The following is the gear I’m using when making my videos. I’m part of Amazon Services LLC Associates Program which means that I will get a small commission if you purchase anything via my links. Any commission I’ll be getting will go straight back into buying new gear for my future videos, so any kind of support is highly appreciated!

Cameras:
Canon EOS R (main camera): https://amzn.to/3fCbINR
Canon M50 (B-cam): https://amzn.to/2Tf998r

Insta360 One X 2 (Best 360 camera): https://www.insta360.com/sal/one_x2?insrc=INRAIR0
Insta 360 One R (Best 360/action cam combo): https://www.insta360.com/sal/one_r?insrc=INRAIR0

Lenses:
Canon RF 15-35mm F2.8 L IS USM: https://amzn.to/3o4N8YZ
Canon RF 24-70mm F2.8 L IS USM: https://amzn.to/34RDy1V
Canon EF 24mm f/1.4L II USM: https://amzn.to/2O0a62Y
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 STM https://amzn.to/2O5DJA0
Canon EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM: https://amzn.to/2X88oR7

Studio equipment:
2x Rode NT2A Microphone set: https://amzn.to/3fBoOuK
Ninja V recorder: https://amzn.to/36azTzR
SanDisk Ultra 3D 1TB SSD: https://amzn.to/36f1pfH
SanDisk Ultra 3D 2TB SSD: https://amzn.to/3fErckb
DJI:
Drone: DJI Mavic 2 Zoom: https://amzn.to/2Sak4CX
Mavic 2 Fly More Kit: https://amzn.to/2TlpLLT
Gimbal: DJI Ronin-S Handheld 3-Axis: https://amzn.to/2NG4L20

Other:
Microphone: RØDE VideoMic Pro+: https://amzn.to/2Tg9mbx
2x SanDisk Extreme Pro Memory Card (128GB): https://amzn.to/2Oi0CQX
Bag: Lowepro ProTactic BP 450 AW II:https://amzn.to/2NDbCsN
Canon EOS M Mount Adapter: https://amzn.to/2O1jH9I
Canon EF-EOS R Mount Adapter: https://amzn.to/2NDak0V
JOBY Gorillapod 3K: https://amzn.to/2S3GQfR
ADATA SD600Q SSD (240GB): https://amzn.to/2Wp28Tf
ADATA D8000L LED Power Bank: https://amzn.to/34MrlLY
Transcend ESD240C Portable SSD (480GB): https://amzn.to/2X5L7xW
Transcend ESD350C Portable SSD (480GB): https://amzn.to/32LBzeg
Transcend StoreJet 25MC HDD (1TB): https://amzn.to/2KekmUd
Transcend 128GB microSD: https://amzn.to/2tCkOmw
MacBook Pro 16”: https://amzn.to/3fElb77 Asus VP28UQG 28" 4K/UHD monitor: https://amzn.to/2CE5eeI

I am a bullet original song link here.
《我是子彈》歌曲表演： https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BmFw...
澳門蓮花衛視Macau Lotustv： https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4GuK...
《備戰，備荒，為人民》是毛澤東在關於第三個五年計劃中提出的一句名言，
現在的中國共產黨跟當時的中國共產黨是同一個共產黨，沒什麼變...
若我將現代中國共產黨的官方文宣翻譯成英文給一般西方人看，
我清楚知道99.9％的西方人會不相信、覺得我在開玩笑，因為我自己以前也無法置信...
西方再不醒來，真的是快要完全沒機會了

If I translated Chinese propaganda for the average westerner they would not believe what the Chinese communist party was saying. The media frothing at the champs over trump while xi jingping makes one war mongering statement after another and no one bats an eye lid. If the west doesn't wake up and realise the wolf that is at the door soon, it will all be too late. The tide must first be slowed, then stopped and then turned. We must change the way we think about our civilisation and start protecting it instead of destroying it. The Chinese communist party have already shot two missiles in the south china sea. A war with China is one we might not win.

▶ Patreon： https://www.patreon.com/dr34mlucid
▶ Paypal是一次性的，連結在此： https://www.paypal.me/dr34mlucid
▶ FB: https://www.facebook.com/dr34mlucid
▶ IG: dr34mlucid

▶ LINE貼圖連結：
https://store.line.me/stickershop/pro...
（也可以直接到LINE貼圖商城的創作者欄位搜尋：清醒夢 或 dr34mlucid ）

#dr34mlucid #ChinaandTaiwan #解放軍

硬漢兄弟表示：我們被恐嚇了！『請幫幫我們』
#社會案件 #硬啦 #硬漢兄弟
-----//不自殺聲明//-----

本人在此特地聲明，謹此宣告，絕不自殺，絕不發生意外。

本人樂觀開朗，身體健康，近期至未來五十年之人生規劃都已妥當，交友廣闊，身無隱疾，且家中尚有老父老母需奉養，絕無任何自殺輕生之意圖。近期也未規劃前往外地旅遊踏青，生活作息正常，更無機會接觸木炭、毒藥、槍砲彈藥等危險管制物品。

本人並無任何使我困擾之慢性病或心理疾病，故絕不可能做出任何看似自殺之行為。

本人從無睡眠困擾，故不需服用安眠藥，更不會有服用過量的問題。

本人強調個人不酗酒也不吸毒。

。本人近期嚴守其身絕不會接近下列地點，例如：

1. 開放性水域以及偏郊積水攤
2. 任何無救生員之游泳池
3. 有高壓、危險氣體，或密閉式未經抽氣處理之地下室、蓄水池、水桶等
4. 無安全護欄之任何高處
5. 任何施工地點（拆政府除外），包括製作消波塊之工地
6. 任何以上未提及但為一般人正常不會前往之地點

。本人恪遵下列事項：

1. 開車或騎摩托車之前會檢查煞車部件、油門線等，並會在加油前關閉車輛電源與行動電話。
2. 絕不擅搶黃燈、闖紅燈。
3. 乘坐任何軌道類交通工具，本人一定退到警戒線後一步以上，直到車輛停妥。
4. 騎乘機車必戴安全帽；乘車必繫安全帶。
5. 絕不接近任何會放射對人體有立即危害的輻射之場所（如核電廠）或設備。
6. 颱風天不登山、不觀浪。

。本人將盡可能注意居家電器、瓦斯、火源之使用。
。本人居住之房屋均使用符合法規之電路電線，絕無電線走火之可能；
。本人絕對不在家中置放過量可燃性氣體或液體。
。浴室中除該有之照明外，不放置任何電器用品，
。睡覺前會關閉大量耗能電器，僅保持電燈、冰箱、電扇外之所有電器開關。
。本人絕不會與隨機的不明人士起衝突，並盡可能保護自我人身安全。

若本人被發現死亡，且現場無外力及打鬥掙扎痕跡，如在車內房間等等隱蔽場所，絕非本人自殺。

若網友在看完此聲明之後，近期或將來發現此帳號不再發片，請幫我討回公道，謝謝。


。I, declares to whom may concern:
。I am optimistic with healthy fitness,
。without any illness or disease confuse me,
。so I will NOT do any thing connected to suicide by any means.
。I do NOT have medical issues with sleeping,
。so I do NOT need to take any medicals about it.
。I am NOT an alcoholic nor having drug addiction,

。neither visit the following places alone and / or with relatives or friends:

1. Open water area
2. Pool without watcher
3. Closed place like not ventilated tank, pool, cellar with hazardous gas
　(i.e. high pressure gas, explosive gas, toxic gas, etc.)
4. Any place without safe barriers from falling
5. Any building site (well, except the deconstruction place for governmental buildings),

。including spots to making concretes.

6. Any place does not mentioned above, where no common people might visit.

。I strictly follow the under rules:
　1. I check my brakes and parts before driving,
　　and turn off my mobile and the power of my vehicle.
　2. I do not rush in traffic lights.
　3. I keep the distance for more than one step from the security line
　　while taking any vehicle or transportation if they have, until they are
　　fully parked and ready to aboard.
　4. I wear helmet with scooters or motorbike properly.
　　I wield safety belt while driving or being a passenger.
　5. I will NOT close any harmful radiative place (like nuclear plant) or equipments.
　6. I will NOT go hiking, wave seeing, or visit any dangerous places.

。I try my best to watch over the usage of appliance, gasoline and fire.
。My place uses legally certificated safe electricity equipments,
。thus the possibility of having accidents in fire IS insignificant.
。In addition to this, I never have illegal amount of flammable gas or liquid.
。I do not have any appliance despite of necessary lighting,
。and turn off all switches despite of lights, refrigerators or fans.
。I do not having conflicts with strangers,
。and put my personal security as highest priority.
。Hereby I authorize any of you who viewed this statement to have rights to announcing charges
　or calling police, once this account does not login for days (legal definition of missing a long time)

硬漢兄弟 instagram ➡️ http://t.cn/EZXWwX8
硬漢妹妹 instagram ➡️ http://bit.ly/2TaM4Gr
硬漢兄弟 facebook粉專 ➡️ https://www.facebook.com/K122427/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
下是演員的instagram連結 ⬇️
導演-阿伯怪 ➡️ https://goo.gl/EamhcU
黃包包-➡️ http://t.cn/EtXBcY3
虎牙陳伊➡️ http://t.cn/EPEts5a
魷魚➡️ http://bit.ly/2LJlUa8