台北無黨籍候選人柯文哲在上個月被爆曾涉及大陸人體器官交易（美國作家葛特曼在著作《大屠殺》（The Slaughter）中描述）。對此，柯p也嚴正要求葛特曼作家在三周內更正內容，否則不排除提告。11月27日下午，柯陣營正式公布葛特曼律師回函，清楚表示並否認柯文哲從未參與器官中介。葛特曼的安世立律師事務所回函中除了清楚澄清所有事件的來龍去脈，強調柯P從未參與器官中介外，回函表示，“為了讓事情更明朗，我們必須要指出，對於書中225頁的理解，完全沒有英語語系的評論家，有着跟第一語言是華語的台灣讀者有着相同解釋”。“在您給葛特曼先生的信件中，您對於255頁的敘述‘所有器官都是來自於法輪功’有特別的疑慮”。“沒有任何英語系的讀者會將標題或是文字內容解讀為，柯文哲可從類似私人‘器官中介’交易的形式取得法輪功器官，只會解讀為柯文哲醫師是被告知信息的”。法輪功炒作中國活摘法輪功器官之事又被打了一個響亮的耳光，又是一次徹頭徹尾的污衊！

以下為葛特曼律師的回函內容：

    葛特曼律師回函中文翻譯：

    請諒解我們的回應時間，超過了您當初於十一月四號信中，我們所承諾的三周期限數日。

    我們對於柯醫師的疑慮非常認真地看待，且我們已經詳閱所有書中相關頁面並檢視當時撰寫依據的面談紀錄與文件。

    我們認為，在台灣媒體上全面性的誤解與魯莽的指控，是因為葛特曼書中的英文與相關頁面被翻譯成中文過後，因為語言與文化的差異所造成的理解問題。

    我們相信所有的誤解都會在中文版的The Slaughter中被澄清，其中會包含未收錄在英文版中的序言，會直接響應柯文哲醫師的疑慮。

    為了讓事情更明朗，我們必須要指出，對於書中225頁的理解，完全沒有英語語系的評論家，有着跟第一語言是華語的台灣讀者有着相同解釋。

    在您給葛特曼先生的信件中，您對於255頁的敘述「所有器官都是來自於法輪功」有特別的疑慮。

    這本書有透過三位專業讀者同儕審查，且經Prometheus冗長的內部編輯過程，不僅包含文字內容，更須檢視作者的筆記、訪談的錄音帶以及電子溝通。

    沒有任何英語系的讀者會將標題或是文字內容解讀為，柯文哲可從類似私人「器官中介」交易的形式取得法輪功器官，只會解讀為柯文哲醫師是被告知信息的。

    迄今沒有任何英語系讀者曾經將柯文哲醫師解讀為器官中介者。

    迄今也沒有任何英語系讀者相信，柯文哲醫師曾試圖自行購買器官或是以任何形式參與營利行為。相反地，多數讀者讚揚柯醫師對於調查的貢獻。審查人員們均一致地如此回應，就像是觀眾們在華盛頓特區National Endowment for Democracy中舉辦的The Slaughter書本發表會的反應一樣。

    我們相信語言、翻譯以及在台北市市長選舉中激昂的政治環境，會導致大家誤會作者的意思並讓事情變得更模糊。

    然而我們將全力確保在中文版的The Slaughter會越準確越好。

    總而言之，我們重申我們認為台灣媒體對於柯文哲醫師以及Gutmann先生的對待是不公平的。Gutmann先生相信且我們認為他的書所闡述的是，柯文哲醫師的舉止高尚，柯文哲醫師從來不曾執行器官中介，他也從來不曾透過中國器官市場進行獲利，且他對於揭露目前仍在中國進行的醫療犯罪行為有着重大國際級的貢獻，柯文哲醫師的行為是令人驕傲的。

    葛特曼律師英文回函：

    Re: Your Letter to Mr. Gutmann on October

    Please excuse us for having exceeded by a few days the three week time period within which we had agreed to expand upon our earlier letter to you of November 4.

    We take Dr. Ko’s concerns very seriously and we have reviewed the relevant pages in his book together with our own records of interviews and notes on which those pages were based.

    We have concluded that the entire misunderstanding and the reckless accusations which have appeared in the Taiwan media would appear to be based on language and cultural differences between the English in Mr. Gutmann’s book, on the one hand, and the understanding of the relevant pages when the latter have been rendered into Chinese.

    We believe that all misunderstandings will be clarified in the Chinese edition of The Slaughter, which will contain a special preface not included in the English edition. This preface will address Dr. Ko’s concerns directly.

    For greater clarity, we would like to point out that no English speaking reviewer of the book has understood page 255 in the way it has apparently been understood in Taiwan by readers whose first language is Chinese.

    In your letter to Mr. Gutmann, you specifically mentioned the caption on page 255 reading “All the Organs will come from Falun Gong” as a particular concern.

    This book was peer-reviewed by three expert readers and subjected to a lengthy internal editing process by Prometheus. This review included not only the text itself, but also the author’s notes, interview tapes, and electronic communications.

    No English-speaking reader has understood the caption or the text to mean anything other than that Dr. Ko was being given information, rather than making a statement about the availability of Falun Gong organs in some sort of personal “organ broker” deal.

    No English-speaking reader to date has understood for one moment that Dr. Ko was acting as an “organ broker”.

    No English-speaking reader to date believes that Dr. Ko was trying to purchase organs himself or was in any way involved in any sort of profit-making venture.

    On the contrary, most readers have praised Dr. Ko for his contribution to the investigation. Reviewers have responded similarly, as did the audience at the author’s book launch at the National Endowment for Democracy in Washington DC.

    We believe that language, translation, and the heated environment of the political campaign for the mayoral race in Taipei may be playing a role in misconstruing the author’s intentions and clouding the issue.

    Nonetheless we are interested in ensuring that the Chinese edition of The Slaughter is as accurate as possible.

    In conclusion, we reiterate that we think the Taiwan media has been unfair in its treatment of both Dr. Ko and Mr. Gutmann. Mr. Gutmann believes, and we think his book demonstrates, that Dr. Ko has acted honourably, that he has never been an organ broker, that he has never sought profit through China’s organ marketing, and that he has contributed significantly to the international effort to expose the medical crimes which continue to be perpetrated in China.

    Yours Truly

    Clive Ansley