Trial: Redux

Good news! The Court of Niort's decision regarding jurisdiction has been successfully appealed and the trial has been moved to the Court of Poitiers, where, we are told, the entire case will be heard once again, including all of John's libel from 2014-15. We are also initiating legal action in the UK, so as to cut off further avenues of escape. We will have to wait another four months for the new trial, but this time around, there should be no delays by opposing counsel.

Never stop fighting until the fight is done.

Intermission

The French Court has returned our bond and declared that legal action against John Szczepaniak should take place in the UK. Behind the court's decision is John's testimony that he was and is a resident of the UK, and therefore bears the burden of liability in that country. Fortunately for us, John's trial delays in France were not enough to outlast the statute of limitations for libel in the UK.

Stay tuned. This may be a larger case than we expected.

Verdict

Because the court could not sufficiently establish John's residency in France, it has decided that the case is outside its jurisdiction. Dismissed. Why was this not decided at the consignation in June? Why did we have to endure two trial delays by opposing counsel, only to have him argue that John is not a resident after all, so none of this matters? Awful. Just awful.

We still don't know whether the court has issued a ruling on the libel itself. I will post again once we have a fuller understanding of the decision.

Verdict expected this week...

I will post another update once we have received and understood the court's decision.

Over the last several days, I have debated whether a review of John’s libel, stretching from late 2013 to the present, would be a useful addition to this blog. Yes, it would help to trace the trajectory of John’s behaviour, as it veered from peevish self-deception into purely malicious invention (and more recently, grandiose paranoia), but would it lead to a better outcome? Not really. We are only days away from a verdict, and if we get the verdict we deserve, our next task will be to leave John Szczepaniak in our rear-view mirror. A more thorough audit of John’s libel might be necessary at some point. Right now, it just feels counterproductive.

As always, I am happy to answer questions about the case via linkedIn.

Trial Update #5

Well, the hearing is over. Opposing counsel pulled some last-minute shenanigans (introducing a technical argument just days before the hearing), but the key evidence has now been submitted to the court for deliberation. We must now wait until April 9th for a decision. Obviously it is frustrating to wait so long for closure, especially with John continuing to lie about us over the nine months since the initial consignation. Nevertheless, it is good to have an end in sight.

We want to thank everyone who has maintained an interest in the case, even as it has dragged on these many months. It may not be a big case, but it is certainly an odd one – and an important one for the parties involved.

Please stay tuned. We will make one more post prior to the verdict, and at least one post after the verdict.

Case Overview

If you are unfamiliar with our libel case against John Szczepaniak, please see our Joint Statement from last Spring.

If you have a little more time on your hands, you should also take a look at the Chronology of Events and the Message Archive.

Trial Update #4

For those of you still paying attention...we held off announcing the new trial date because we figured John's lawyer would try for another delay. And that's exactly what he's done -- this time based on an even flimsier pretext. Our lawyer has submitted a letter of protest, but it looks like nothing is going to happen until after the holiday season.

It's clear that John is trying to run away from a verdict, but we have reason to believe that the court's patience is now exhausted, and that we will get our verdict in February.

Trial Update #3

We've just learned that the new trial date will be in November. We're told that this is not all that bad a delay, and that in larger cities, opposing counsel can buy as many as four or five additional months in this manner. So, another two months it is. The specific date has yet to be announced...

Wow. John just made an update...

Read it here.

*headshake*

This is not good. John is now lying indiscriminately about court proceedings. I fear this will end badly for him.

Trial Update #2

Having waited nine months to clear our names in court, we now learn that John's lawyer is using delay tactics to push the trial date further out. He claims that he has not received all relevant documents from our lawyer (a problem he could easily have fixed over the last three months). The court has granted a reprieve of one month, and will name a revised trial date sometime soon.

This is disappointing, but not too surprising. John's lawyer has been slow-walking the case from the very beginning.

So we wait. Another month of living with John's libel. At the very least, it will give us time to present more of the evidence against John, including some items not likely to be presented in court. Stay tuned.

Complete Message Archive

You can now access the complete archive of our correspondence with John Szczepaniak over the period in question. The archive is split into 5 tabulated sheets:

• Email between John and Hanako
• SMS between John and Hanako
• Email between John and Agness
• SMS between John and Agness
• Kickstarter messages between John and Peter

Note that each row containing a message from John is highlighted in pink. Also note that we have chosen to leave out supplementary tagging and indexing for the time being. Although there are a number of messages that deserve special attention, we felt it was best to provide unchannelled access as a first step.

There are still some artifacts from importing an Excel file into Google Spreadsheet. We are in the process of cleaning those up. Also, because the messages were manually extracted into Excel after using Gmail's "forward thread" function, then scrubbed of personal information, there is more room for error than we'd like. If a message appears to refer to another email that cannot be found in the archives, please contact us with the details.

Chronology of Events

For your perusal: a Chronology of Events leading up to our libel suit against John. This should help interested parties navigate the archive of emails and messages we will be publishing.

Trial Update

The initial consignation is now over and the case will be decided on September 11th, followed by a final verdict within two weeks of that date. In the meantime, we will publish a timeline of events relevant to the case, followed by phased publication of all messages exchanged with John, in chronological order. There is a lot of tedium in purging personal information from these messages, so it won't happen all at once (and no, regular expressions are not especially helpful here).

If you want personal access to the message archive, or have any questions about the case, you are welcome to contact me via linkedIn.

Pretrial Message

My name is Peter Duimstra and I am the husband of Agness Kaku. I was dragged into this mess when John Szczepaniak threatened to destroy my career, along with the careers of my wife, my sister-in-law, and her husband.

As we near the beginning of John’s trial, I want to take this opportunity to thank everyone who has supported us. Your words have been a tremendous relief, and they have given us the confidence to see this nightmare through to the end. We want all of you to know that, no matter the outcome, we will be okay. If I never see another dime of venture funding, and Agness never sees another contract in the games industry — an industry littered with childish behaviour — we can always move on to less stressful things. We will be just fine.

I also want to acknowledge the people who attacked us, but then had the good sense to listen to our side of the story. One of the most dismaying things about falling victim to this kind of libel is watching the incurious crowd cheer the perpetrator onward, or worse, help to spread the libel even further. At least some of you haven't surrendered your reason.

Those of you who still believe John’s claims about us should know that we will be publishing the complete archive of emails and messages exchanged with him over the last year. While he continues to excerpt and censor, we will simply expose everything. Judge for yourselves whether John is responsible for his problems in Japan. We have nothing to hide.

Kick and scream as he might, John Szczepaniak is now being dragged into adulthood. Eventually, he will learn that his parents’ guest house cannot shield him from the consequences of his actions.

We are not the first people to be stalked and bullied by John Szczepaniak, but with any luck, we will be the last.

Joint Statement Regarding Criminal Case Against John Szczepaniak

April 15, 2014

Hanako Abe, Nobuhiro Abe, Agness Kaku, and Peter Duimstra

We have recently endured a campaign of threats and defamation led by Mr. John Szczepaniak (a.k.a. Jan Szczepaniak) of Saint-Laurs, France. This is our first public statement on the matter.

In 2013, John successfully pitched a Kickstarter project involving a series of interviews in Japan. At John's request, Agness Kaku helped to plan and promote the project. She also put John in contact with her sister, Hanako Abe, whose network of professional interpreters seemed a good match for his needs. John persuaded Hanako to act as his interpreter-coordinator, and came to depend on her heavily as a de facto project manager.

Shortly after John's arrival, it became clear that he was unprepared and under-qualified for the work ahead. Over the next several weeks, he repeatedly abused professional interfaces and strained working relationships. John's sense of entitlement, along with his health problems, eventually led to a personal and professional meltdown in Japan. When Agness intervened to save the project, John responded with hostility. When Hanako decided to resign, John responded with panic and false accusations.

Since returning to France, John has used public and private Kickstarter postings to spread lies about Agness and Hanako and about the people they brought to his project. We believe these lies were meant to displace blame for John's failures to meet project goals, to provide a false account of the project's funds, and to punish Agness, for whom John seems to have developed inappropriate feelings. When we privately informed John that we would not tolerate his abuse, he threatened to destroy the careers of both Agness and Hanako. He has since expanded this threat to include their respective spouses, Peter Duimstra and Nobuhiro Abe.

Because John Szczepaniak has refused to retract his public statements about us, we are now prosecuting him for criminal libel in French court. An initial hearing has been scheduled for June 12, 2014.

We are happy to answer any inquiries about this matter via LinkedIn.

For basic details about the case, please see the following:

FAQ

Does Hanako Abe owe John a refund?

No. John agreed to a fee schedule in July 2013 that clearly states "A daily fee of ¥5,000 for every interpreter booking, regardless of any cancellations" (Item 6-A, "Fees and Expenses").

Did Hanako Abe pressure other interpreters to quit?

No. In fact, Agness and Nobuhiro (Hanako’s husband) had to persuade Hanako to resign because she was reluctant to leave other people, including John, without a project manager.

Why did M, the "junior interpreter" John repeatedly mentions, quit?

In M's own words, she was concerned about the risk John posed to her reputation. Essentially, John's mistreatment of other interpreters scared her off.

Why did Hanako Abe quit?

Because she could no longer afford to play nursemaid to John. John had displayed anger management issues and obsessive-compulsive behavior, was seemingly unable to distinguish between professional and personal criticism, and regularly indulged in self-pity. Note that Hanako never signed on to manage the project; she found herself backed into this role because John was disorganized in the extreme. With a thriving career and two young children, her schedule could no longer accomodate John's rampant scope creep — or his neuroses.

Did Haruko Ota defraud John of ¥80,000?

No. Haruko insisted on immediately refunding John in full (¥40,000 or $390) for the 2.5-hour Quintet interview, and John accepted the refund. She also wanted to refund John another ¥40,000 for the interview she handled with a Square Enix developer that morning. He refused, saying her performance was fine for this other, much longer, session.

Did Haruko Ota destroy John's only chance to interview the Quintet developer?

No. The interview was rescheduled and conducted with another interpreter on October 10.

Was the interpretation for Quintet substandard to the point of being unusable?

Not according to John at the time, or on October 6. It is standard procedure for interpretees to request clarifications if the interpretation is unclear, and only twice did John do so during the 2.5-hour session. He also refused Haruko's offer of a refund until she insisted. On October 6, John tried to cancel the re-do of the interview, saying it would be “pointless.”

Why would Haruko Ota do well on one interview and less so on another?

John did not show Haruko his questions for Quintet until minutes before the interview. The session involved some highly technical content. Also, the interviewee had to leave an hour and a half early. John would not trim his question list, so Haruko did a rush job (simultaneous instead of consecutive interpreting) to accommodate him.

Did Agness Kaku tell John to "keep quiet" about trouble with interpreters?

No. Agness told John on October 9, 2013 not to abandon the project, as he was threatening to do, and to stop demoralizing others with talk of how much he hated the work. John thanked her for “the pep talk” at the time.

Did Agness harass John's friends on Facebook?

No. Agness was one of John's first friends on Facebook and urged him to use his account to promote his Kickstarter project. Agness also introduced John to several of his interviewees via Facebook. Agness has never deliberately sent friend requests to anyone John considers exclusively his friend, and she has never contacted anyone to discuss John.

Did Agness harass John’s backers?

No. Agness contacted exactly one backer, Jouhaine Aljobair, who had expressed an interest in seeing Hanako's complete letter to interviewees. Backers, on the other hand, have harassed Agness at John’s behest.

How did John's backers harass Agness?

A backer named Adam Rahman sent Agness an abusive message on Facebook in November 2013, and, after blurring his own message, posted a screenshot of the exchange (entitled “Agness_Dat_Evil_Woman.jpg") to the public Kickstarter page in March. Other backers have contacted her clients, namely Square Enix, in an attempt to threaten her livelihood. A backer named George Bray asked for, and seems to have obtained, personal information, including the physical addresses of Agness Kaku, Hanako Abe, and others who supported John’s project here in Japan.

More importantly, the credulity of dozens of other backers, combined with the prominence of Kickstarter among search results, has left Agness' professional reputation severely damaged.

What did Hanako Abe do on the project?

Pretty much everything except pick the interviewees and ask them questions. Hanako was originally hired to translate emails between John and interviewees and to coordinate interpreting services (find qualified pros for the day and city John needed, get his approval, and make sure each party knew what was expected of them). John continued to transfer responsibilities to Hanako until she ended up managing the project.

How much was Hanako paid?

In total, for the 3.5-month period starting July 2013, John paid Hanako ¥516,237 ($5,033).

How much were the interpreters paid?

The 5 interpreters and 1 student assistant that Hanako coordinated worked a total of 14 interpreting sessions (some with multiple interviewees) plus the Tokyo Game Show. The total bill was just over ¥830,000 ($8,100).

What did Agness Kaku do on the project?

In response to John's solicitations, Agness encouraged John to pursue what he called a "crazy idea” and supported him from pitch to successful funding. She also introduced John to several interviewees. Later, when John suffered a meltdown and threatened to abandon the project, she persuaded him to stay the course.

How much was Agness paid?

Nothing.

Did John really have a meltdown?

Yes. Around the end of September, three weeks into his stay, John's mood darkened. He became convinced that he was a failure and the project was beyond salvage. At the same time, he began to lash out at the major local backer, two of the interpreters he had previously praised, and finally, Hanako.

What brought on the meltdown?

Garden-variety stress, we believe. John said he is unused to working five days a week, let alone every day, and has not worked with people IRL on a daily basis for many years. Having failed to prepare adequately for his stay in Tokyo, John was constantly anxious. He also claimed to be allergic to wi-fi signals, and Tokyo is well covered in those.

How did you respond?

Hanako grew worried enough to notify Agness, knowing that John had designated her as his emergency contact in Japan. Agness went to see John to make sure he was not in any danger of self-harm; they parted amicably, with John asking her where he could buy a windbreaker. John then wrote Hanako another inappropriate email angrily blaming her for “Agness [coming] to lecture me," adding "I am paying you well so you should put up with my attitude.” Agness advised her sister to resign from the project.

Did John actually threaten you?

Yes, repeatedly:

[Sent to Peter Duimstra on March 14, 2014]

Are you aware of what your crazy wife and equally as insane sister-in-law have done?

If my career has to end because of them, rest assured both their careers will most certainly end as well.

No one will walk away from this wasteland unaffected.

[Sent to Hanako Abe on March 18, 2014]

Agness' relentless pursuit of me will ruin us all. It will ruin your name, it will ruin Agness' name, it will ruin the names of Nobuhiro Abe and Peter Duimstra. And it will ruin my name. All of our reputations - the reputations of all five of us - will be worthless by the time this reaches its conclusion.

I do not need to work. You lot of four, presumably, do need to work.

[Sent to Peter Duimstra on March 23, 2014]

I have had enough of you four. I've already told Hanako I do not need to work. Why do you persist in your self-destructive urge to get back at me?

Your desire for revenge is going to taint us all. After you have finished, all of our names will be garbage.

Please note that the above posts were made in response to courtesy letters sent to people who might be inconvenienced by our legal action against John. At the time, we had issued no public criticisms of John, and had only shared our side of the story with close friends and colleagues.

Is John well?

We are not psychotherapists or doctors, but we refer you to this, this, and this.

Will you be taking legal action against abusive project backers?

This will depend in part on the outcome of the criminal case. Since none of the people who joined in John's attacks have questioned his honesty, or even asked for our side of the story, we believe they are guilty of civil, if not criminal, negligence.

We are ready to provide documentary evidence of all the above points. For appropriate parties, we will also provide access to the complete archive of 500+ emails and messages exchanged with John over the last 9 months.

FAQ Part II

(June 17, 2015)

What is this site and why should we care?

The versusJS blog provides coverage of our lawsuit against John Szczepaniak, who for the past 18 months has conducted a campaign of defamation and endangerment against Agness Kaku, Hanako Abe, and their families. The case is interesting for a number of reasons, but unless you're involved personally, as a backer of John's Kickstarter project or as a victim of John's past behaviour, you have little reason to care.

Aren't you supposed to keep quiet about court cases?

We needed a bulwark against John’s mounting libel, so we asked our lawyer if a blog providing factual information about the case would be acceptable. He said it would be fine.

If John has no money, what good is suing him?

Without a verdict, we cannot compel Kickstarter to remove the libelous content from public view, or even to enforce their own policy against personal attacks. Our requests for help from Kickstarter have been consistently ignored.

What if you never get a verdict?

If we get no justice from the courts, we can at least prevent John from ever doing this again, to anyone. That’s a pure good, and enough to keep us fighting.

Why didn't Hanako just pay John the disputed $150 booking fee?

To do so would have implied wrongdoing. Had she some sort of guarantee that John would desist from false claims, Hanako would gladly have paid John $150 out of pocket. She had no such guarantee, and John had already destroyed whatever trust she placed in him at the beginning of the project.

If this is between John and Hanako, why is John attacking Agness?

The short answer is that John really, really hates Agness.

Prior to John's attacks, the history of interaction between John and Agness consisted entirely of John asking for favours, and Agness granting them. The last favour Agness granted was giving him Hanako's personal contact info, so that he could consult her directly. Six months later, John throws Hanako and her colleagues under the bus, and includes Agness purely out of spite.

So, you did nothing wrong?

We did absolutely nothing wrong, but the real kicker is that Hanako bent over backwards to help John, and for very little pay. She even gave half of her proceeds to another Kickstarter project as a sign of good faith to John's backers. (John promptly removed all mention of this fact from project comments, and has since refund-banned any backer who challenges his version of events.)

Do we have regrets? Yes. Hanako regrets that she continued to ask John for things when she should have demanded them. Agness regrets granting John's request to interview her in 2011.

Isn't this just "he said, she said"?

No, it really isn't. If you want a formula, it’s more like he lied, then he lied again, then he lied a third time, and then she sued. People who say this is a case of "he said, she said" are being lazy, and they are helping the libeler do his damage. If you must form an opinion, please look at the evidence, ask us questions, and then decide for yourself one way or the other. If you can't do that, then don't spread the damage through indiscriminate gossip.

Have you tried contacting John’s parents?

Yes, just before the initial hearing, we sent this letter via registered mail. We did not expect a reply, but we did hope that John’s parents would take positive action.

Have you thought about trying ... ?

Yes, we have thought about getting more press attention, moving the debate to youtube, filing a police complaint (especially after John's outreach to #gamergate), and several other courses of action. All options remain on the table.

What’s your gut feeling about the situation?

Our feeling is that John’s behaviour will only improve when he has been forced to take responsibility for his failures. We also feel that the time is ripe for someone to make a real stand against online trolls and their enablers.