Ordinarily, I am the first one to...nevermind, this is just too inexplicable for me.........so I shall let it lie.....
I must say, from my view, that I believe there is a large segment of the deaf community that is very sympathetic of John and his family.
Not surprising with all the things he had to tell the community... Take a look at Sorensons current marketing, same thing.
Once again, you see this incident in a completely opposite way from the way the D/dea community sees it. Does that tell you anything at all?
I've heard, many times, that every single one of those VRS companies were doing the same things and they decided to pick the weakest company owned by the deaf who wouldn't have the money and resources to fight charges. Everyone else (practically) got off scott-free.
The Yehs are owning up to it and will probably be out in 4-5 years.
I've heard, many times, that every single one of those VRS companies were doing the same things and they decided to pick the weakest company owned by the deaf who wouldn't have the money and resources to fight charges. Everyone else (practically) got off scott-free.
The Yehs are owning up to it and will probably be out in 4-5 years.
The burden of proof is far heavier in a case like this, and if the court finds him guilty, then, well....
I've heard, many times, that every single one of those VRS companies were doing the same things and they decided to pick the weakest company owned by the deaf who wouldn't have the money and resources to fight charges. Everyone else (practically) got off scott-free.
The Yehs are owning up to it and will probably be out in 4-5 years.
I know members of the Deaf community who believe he was innocent. Granted, one of them is a good friend of his so I kept that in mind while she was sharing information. According to her, he still drives the same 15 year old car, and lives in the same house he's always lived in. So that means either he hid the money in some foreign bank account, or he never got any of that money that was fraudulently received.
I'd appreciate you not making divisive statements about me.
don't be so dramatic.I completely agree with you. That's why I made the statement in the original post about why the lawyer didn't demonstrate he was defrauded too.
However, I do know that innocent people have been found guilty and served prison/jail sentences. According to someone close to him, she did not believe in any way that he was aware of what was going on. This could be either the good friend not wanting to believe it could be true, or it could be her knowing the person he really is and that he wouldn't have done something like that.
I guess what it boils down to is obviously he was guilty in a court of law.
It is sad to me though; even if he was guilty, that the first Deaf owned VRS had to go down like that.
Obviously.... You haven't heard about the Cadillac CTS-V in this whole story...
I've demonstrated my argument on that here on alldeaf before. Even John Yeh himself said that other VRS were doing it in the video. But that is another thread.
However -
My ex-girlfriend whom I am still friends with told me her POV. She worked for him. I'd like to add a few more details about this relationship but I think it is too personal to share on the forum. What she had to say - I have no doubts he knew.
Do you guys even know what happened *AFTER* the indictment?
I know members of the Deaf community who believe he was innocent. Granted, one of them is a good friend of his so I kept that in mind while she was sharing information. According to her, he still drives the same 15 year old car, and lives in the same house he's always lived in. So that means either he hid the money in some foreign bank account, or he never got any of that money that was fraudulently received.
I'd appreciate you not making divisive statements about me.
Obviously.... You haven't heard about the Cadillac CTS-V in this whole story...
I haven't heard about that but I have heard enough about him via PMs to know that odds are good that he knew about what was going on.
If he didn't know what was going on, it raises some serious questions about his ability to run a business. Anyone that is that unaware of what is going on in his own business is guilty of negligence and therefore, guilty by default for not monitoring what was taking place under his own nose.
"I didn't know what was going on" is hardly a credible justification.
What I want to know though; is if he really didn't know this was happening, why didn't his lawyer prove that he was defrauded by his employees?