
三立電視前資深副總經理龔美富之子龔益霆被女藝人指控下鎮定後劑性侵,檢方於6月以強制性交罪起訴但未就下藥部分起訴。女藝人聲請參與訴訟獲准,台北地院將勘驗其與龔母趙如玉在通訊軟體上的對話紀錄。
AI-generated summary
江祖平去年9月在社群發文爆料電視台人員性侵、偷拍及下藥事件,其後公開加害者正面打馬賽克照並提告,檢方於6月依強制性交罪起訴龔益霆但未就下藥部分起訴。
2026/10/13 13:04
龔益霆遭控下藥性侵女藝人。(資料照)
〔記者翁靖祐/台北報導〕三立電視前資深副總經理龔美富之子龔益霆被某女藝人指控下鎮定後劑性侵遭起訴。女藝人提告以前,曾透過通訊軟體和龔男母親趙如玉聯繫,今日台北地院再度開庭並傳喚龔男到庭,法官在庭上安排,未來將勘驗女藝人與龔母在通訊軟體上的這段對話紀錄。
全案源於,江祖平去年9月在社群發文,爆料電視台人員性侵、偷拍,甚至下鎮定劑後將女演員脫衣並拍下影片,女演員醒來以後,一氣之下將影片全部刪除,未料男方卻回嗆「刪啊!我有雲端」。
請繼續往下閱讀...
起初江祖平並未公開加害者名字,但事件爆發以後她先是PO出加害者的正面打馬賽克照,並指男方事後拒絕為受害者買避孕藥,男方的身分也隨即被民眾認出。事後,江祖平提告,檢方於今年6月依照強制性交罪起訴龔,不過關於下藥的部分,檢方認定查無具體事證,因此不予以起訴。
受害女藝人後續向法院聲請參與訴訟案件,為對證據調查及被告抗辯時陳述意見,聲請參與訴訟,法官在徵詢兩造的意見以後,認為女藝人聲請有理由,准予聲請,並於今年9月8日傳喚兩造出庭,並採隔離視訊的方式進行庭訊。
☆尊重身體自主權,遇到性騷擾勇於制止、勇敢說不,請撥打113、110☆
AI outlook — possibilities, not facts
法院將勘驗女藝人與龔母在通訊軟體上的對話紀錄以查證下藥指控
Very likely · Within weeks
若對話紀錄證實下藥行為,檢方可能追加起訴或修訂起訴書
Possible · Within months

The Zhuhai Special Economic Zone Construction Waste Management Regulations will be implemented on October 15, 2026. For the first time, a special chapter is set up for the management of decoration waste. It is clear that the generating units and individuals need to notify the manager in advance, classify the collection, entrust the removal and pay the fee. It is prohibited to mix domestic waste or dump and pile it without authorization. Violators will face penalties such as warnings, fines, and even detention.

Former Yilan District Court judge Zhang Xuanhao was dismissed from his duties as a judge for the first time due to three drunk driving accidents. After being transferred to a judicial affairs officer, he drove drunk again and injured a passerby. The disciplinary court ordered him to suspend his duties for one year, and he can appeal.

Justices Cai Zongzhen, Yang Huiqin, and Zhu Fumei of the Judicial Yuan have long refused to participate in the review, but issued "disagreement with the legal opinion" in the name of the justices and authorized legal sources to pay for inclusion, triggering a Facebook debate between lawyer Fan Guohua and copyright expert Zhang Zhongxin. Fan Guohua questioned whether he was abusing public resources by using his job title for publishing and charging without comment, citing the analogy of the 33 yuan electric cooker case; Zhang Zhongxin believed that the document was a personal creation and the use of job titles was a separate issue. The two sides debated the ownership of documents and the appropriateness of their positions, involving copyright, the distinction between public and private matters, and official ethics.

83-year-old Ms. Fang was forced to accept the arbitration clause after the fund company’s app was upgraded, otherwise she would not be able to use the app. The court found that this coercive method violated the principle of voluntary arbitration, and the arbitration agreement was not effective for investors. It upheld the first-instance ruling that rejected the fund company manager’s objection.

Justices Cai Zongzhen, Yang Huiqin and Zhu Fumei refused to participate in the deliberations of the Constitutional Court for more than 300 days, but later expressed their personal opinions in the form of a "Legal Opinion of Disagreement", which was published in the magazine "Taiwan Lawyer" and authorized to be downloaded by Fayuan Legal Network for a fee. This triggered controversy over judicial ethics and copyright. Fayuan.com has removed the relevant article, and other legal circles have reported and requested investigation.

Justices Cai Zongzhen, Yang Huiqin and Zhu Fumei refused to participate in the deliberations of the Constitutional Court, but issued legal opinions with the title of justice and authorized paid downloads. They were reported to the Judicial Yuan by members of the legal profession. Scholars Zhang Jiayin and Su Yantu criticized his behavior as violating judge ethics and confusing private comments with formal judgment opinions, which may weaken the authority of the Constitutional Court and affect the fairness of the trial.