Two days ago, I researched all the lawyers and organizations in HK, looking for the best ones.
Yesterday, I retained top legal counsel (I paid 15,000 HKD for a 3 hour meeting. Ouch.)
Immediately after that, I scheduled a meeting with Senior Inspector Lai, and I filed a police report, which is published in full in the article, "Fight Corporate Violence: Marshall vs. Cathay Pacific Management."
I explained my position in, "To The People of Hong Kong: On Virtue, Authority, and Terror."
Today I contacted all the relevant trade unions that represent Cathay Pacific staff. I also reached out to numerous journalists, and I've been looking for the best contact info for Hong Kong Police. (There's multiple associations, but is there a definitive organization that protects on-duty officers? Is there a particular member of the HK Police I can contact to report officers being fraudulently put in harms' way?)
And then I get an email from Cathay! Yay, maybe they'll fix things. Here we go, I'll add some bold -
From: Customer-Relations firstname.lastname@example.org
Date: Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 4:36 PM
Subject: MR SEBASTIAN MARSHALL - 26 December 2011 / KA 482 / Hong Kong to Taipei (KMM10041771I15977L0KM)
Our Reference: 2998612
30 December 2011
Mr Sebastian Marshall
By email: email@example.com
Dear Mr Marshall
I write in relation to an internal report raised on an incident that
occurred on board flight KA 482 prior to departure from Hong Kong to
Taipei on 26 December 2011.
We are currently looking into the incident and will get back to you as
soon as we have concluded our investigation.
In the mean time, we thank you for your patience and understanding.
Joseph Anthony Schaffel Gonzalez
Assistant Manager Customer Relations
Cathay Pacific Airways Limited
This message contains confidential information and is intended only for
the individual named. If you are not the named recipient, you must not
read, copy or otherwise use the contents of this message. Any
unauthorised use may lead to legal proceedings against you.
Email transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as
information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, incomplete
or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept liability for
any errors or omissions in the contents of this message which arise as a
result of email transmission.
Nice to hear from you, Joseph.
You guys still don't get it, though. Let's make seven points.
1. You've already misrepresented yourself again. firstname.lastname@example.org - I never gave you guys that email address. You're not responding to an internal report, you're responding to a huge public backlash that's building.
2. You don't acknowledge that you saw the contents of my police report and public statements, even though you clearly did. You're writing to an email I never gave you.
3. So, have we established that you've seen my blog? (This is the only place that email is posted) Because if so, you know you stranded me in Hong Kong after you guys breached your duty of care to me. And you're not referencing that at all.
4. Your standard operating procedure is to silence all critics. See, EX: "This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named."
5. And more threats! Silly of you: "If you are not the named recipient, you must not read, copy or otherwise use the contents of this message. Any unauthorised use may lead to legal proceedings against you."
(Note to blog readers: Be careful, maybe Cathay Pacific will come after you.)
6. And nothing friendly. You ask for my "patience and understanding" and you "will get back to you as soon as we have concluded our investigation." Umm, I'm supposed to be in Taipei, and I'm not because your middle manager called the police when I questioned him, repeatedly escalated the situation, your staff lied to the police, and then I haven't heard from you... until I come out in public.
7. In all fairness, you did offer me "Kind regards" though. Thank you for those, you have my Kind regards as well.
I'm sending you this blog link via email. Please forward this to everyone at corporate. You now have no plausible deniability that this is happening.
With Kind regards,
Edit: My email reply to Joseph -
From: Sebastian email@example.com
To: Customer-Relations firstname.lastname@example.org
Date: Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 5:37 PM
Subject: Re: MR SEBASTIAN MARSHALL - 26 December 2011 / KA 482 / Hong Kong to Taipei (KMM10041771I15977L0KM)
Here you go, Joseph -
You guys might want to start owning up to some responsibility and apologizing. I know you think apologizing is weak and threatening is strong, but that's dead backwards. Real dialog will result in the best results with me.
I'm actually super reasonable, friendly, and good to people who are cooperative with me. I just don't take threats very well, especially when the person threatening is actually in the wrong.