Communist Party soldier Tang Juan is charged with visa fraud and misrepresentation. (From court documents)
Juan Tang, a 38-year-old Chinese researcher suspected of concealing her military status and charged with visa fraud by the Department of Justice, will face a jury trial in July. A hearing on two motions filed by Tang’s attorneys was held by videoconference on the 19th. Defense attorneys argue that Tang’s allegations of visa fraud and misrepresentation regarding military service are problematic because of the broad definition of military service, which in Chinese refers to an armed soldier and is not specified by the U.S. government.
If convicted of visa fraud, Tang Juan could face up to 10 years in federal prison and a $250,000 fine. If also convicted of misrepresentation, she could face up to another five years in prison and another $250,000 in fines.
The third-party guardian, Chinese-American civil rights attorney Steven Xuan Cui, previously pledged $750,000 worth of property to secure the release of Tang Juan, who is living in Cui’s home under electronic monitoring. The attorneys filed two motions a short time ago, one of which was a Motion for Discovery. The plaintiff’s Department of Justice was asked to provide evidence and statements, etc., in the investigation of the case. The other is a Motion for Bill of Particulars, which asks the plaintiff to provide a detailed, formal written statement of the allegations. Judge Claire (Allison Claire) did not decide in court, but tended to support the defense attorney’s motion, saying he would issue a court order as soon as possible.
In the indictment, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) contends that Tang Juan allegedly committed visa fraud by concealing the fact that she was an active duty member of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army. On the form to apply for a nonimmigrant visa, Tang Juan answered no to the question of whether she had served in the military. There are at least eight pieces of evidence, including three articles, one document, two photographs, and phone and email analysis, that show Tang Juan’s military status.
First, the government needs to be clear about what military service means, said Don Juan’s attorney Malcolm Segal. When the FBI interviewed Tang Juan, it was done in Mandarin Chinese (note: there were agents who spoke Chinese). But the documents were written in English, except for a few Chinese characters. The government accused Tang Juan of making false statements. When the government questioned Tang Juan, it needed to explain exactly what questions it asked and what kind of answers it received.
“For example, when it comes to military service, there are multiple meanings in both English and Chinese contexts. On a visa application, it will not be specified what military service means, and searching the internet, it will not be clearly explained. So it is impossible to clearly determine what military service means. But the key to Don Juan’s trial is the visa application situation, especially answering the question of military service.”
Siegel said military service should mean being armed. The government relied on any narrow meaning or general colloquial definition of military service, both of which were tried differently and with different expert testimony. That’s why the government is required to provide the appropriate evidence and statements, as required by the motion.
Prosecutor disagrees with motion
Judge Clare said the visa application would not give specific examples of what military service means for any particular country. But military service is clearly a broader category. For example, working for a military-affiliated university, or the person’s job, part of a contract involving civilian use. Or engaging in research that is funded by the military. These are all more specific examples of answers to the military service question. So, if a person is asked a general question, did they serve in the military? If the answer is no, a more specific question will follow. The answer to the question can still be true or false. The government cannot accuse and misrepresent in response to a general question.
The crux of the question of whether or not to serve in the military also means a different meaning for someone who speaks Mandarin Chinese, Siegel said. “(The expert told me) that in Chinese, it means armed soldier. The defense argued that the government violated due process because it used more general language to determine what military service meant, forcing the defendant to testify on its own behalf (whether it was in error). This is not just a matter for valuable, expert discussion. At the heart of this argument is the question of what exactly the government means by military service. It also has to take into account what military service means in the country where the person is.”
Assistant District Attorney Heiko Coppola said she would not grant the defendants’ motion request. Because multiple documents have been given to Don Juan’s side, including the search warrant affidavit, the criminal indictment, and information submitted to defense counsel for review that was found after the government’s search. This was not to compel the defendant to testify on his own behalf. In response to the defense’s request for a Chinese recording of the questioning of Tang Juan, Coppola said that when two FBI agents questioned Tang Juan, one of them was a native speaker of Mandarin and the questioning was not recorded.
Judge Claire did not announce the results of the motion hearing in court, but praised Siegel for making a clear defense and was inclined to support his motion request.
Tang Juan’s attorney filed a motion for the government to provide evidence and statements, etc., in the investigation of the case (taken from court documents)
Recent Comments