台北无党籍候选人柯文哲在上个月被爆曾涉及大陆人体器官交易（美国作家葛特曼在著作《大屠杀》（The Slaughter）中描述）。对此，柯p也严正要求葛特曼作家在三周内更正内容，否则不排除提告。11月27日下午，柯阵营正式公布葛特曼律师回函，清楚表示并否认柯文哲从未参与器官中介。葛特曼的安世立律师事务所回函中除了清楚澄清所有事件的来龙去脉，强调柯P从未参与器官中介外，回函表示，“为了让事情更明朗，我们必须要指出，对于书中225页的理解，完全没有英语语系的评论家，有着跟第一语言是华语的台湾读者有着相同解释”。“在您给葛特曼先生的信件中，您对于255页的叙述‘所有器官都是来自于法轮功’有特别的疑虑”。“没有任何英语系的读者会将标题或是文字内容解读为，柯文哲可从类似私人‘器官中介’交易的形式取得法轮功器官，只会解读为柯文哲医师是被告知信息的”。法轮功炒作中国活摘法轮功器官之事又被打了一个响亮的耳光，又是一次彻头彻尾的污蔑！

以下为葛特曼律师的回函内容：

    葛特曼律师回函中文翻译：

    请谅解我们的回应时间，超过了您当初于十一月四号信中，我们所承诺的三周期限数日。

    我们对于柯医师的疑虑非常认真地看待，且我们已经详阅所有书中相关页面并检视当时撰写依据的面谈纪录与文件。

    我们认为，在台湾媒体上全面性的误解与鲁莽的指控，是因为葛特曼书中的英文与相关页面被翻译成中文过后，因为语言与文化的差异所造成的理解问题。

    我们相信所有的误解都会在中文版的The Slaughter中被澄清，其中会包含未收录在英文版中的序言，会直接响应柯文哲医师的疑虑。

    为了让事情更明朗，我们必须要指出，对于书中225页的理解，完全没有英语语系的评论家，有着跟第一语言是华语的台湾读者有着相同解释。

    在您给葛特曼先生的信件中，您对于255页的叙述「所有器官都是来自于法轮功」有特别的疑虑。

    这本书有透过三位专业读者同侪审查，且经Prometheus冗长的内部编辑过程，不仅包含文字内容，更须检视作者的笔记、访谈的录音带以及电子沟通。

    没有任何英语系的读者会将标题或是文字内容解读为，柯文哲可从类似私人「器官中介」交易的形式取得法轮功器官，只会解读为柯文哲医师是被告知信息的。

    迄今没有任何英语系读者曾经将柯文哲医师解读为器官中介者。

    迄今也没有任何英语系读者相信，柯文哲医师曾试图自行购买器官或是以任何形式参与营利行为。相反地，多数读者赞扬柯医师对于调查的贡献。审查人员们均一致地如此回应，就像是观众们在华盛顿特区National Endowment for Democracy中举办的The Slaughter书本发表会的反应一样。

    我们相信语言、翻译以及在台北市市长选举中激昂的政治环境，会导致大家误会作者的意思并让事情变得更模糊。

    然而我们将全力确保在中文版的The Slaughter会越准确越好。

    总而言之，我们重申我们认为台湾媒体对于柯文哲医师以及Gutmann先生的对待是不公平的。Gutmann先生相信且我们认为他的书所阐述的是，柯文哲医师的举止高尚，柯文哲医师从来不曾执行器官中介，他也从来不曾透过中国器官市场进行获利，且他对于揭露目前仍在中国进行的医疗犯罪行为有着重大国际级的贡献，柯文哲医师的行为是令人骄傲的。

    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