Source: www.gutteruncensored.info

Below is an interesting email that was sent (or attempted) to the CEO of Cathay Pacific Airways John Slosar and shareholders of the company from a man requesting that the company stop a pilot from having sex with his flight attendant wife. “At the very least, ask Mr. Roels to stop having sex with my wife,” the man asked the CEO of the company. The man seem desperate to have the company make the pilot who has been having an affair with his wife to stop. Shockingly the husband to the flight attendant might be suggesting that the sex is somewhat coerce and even more shocking is that he is alleging their sexual relationship could potentially cause safety issues during flights. He compare these safety issues to the Cathay Pacific flight attendant who was made to provide fellatio for a Cathay Pacific pilot inside the cockpit and the safety concerns from that incident.

In the email we learn that Cathay Pacific pilots are promiscuous with the flight attendants so much so that the pilots or flight crew call the flight attendants their “crew meals”. Apparently the man writhing to the CEO is alleging the pilot in his case is using his position at the airline to pressure the man’s wife to give him sex. Referring to his wife, the man says, “given Eden’s relatively low corporate rank, she may be excused due to lack of experience and/or fear of authority from people of Mr. Roels’ seniority”. And according to the email this situation is not an isolated occurrence at the airline with pilots using their position of authority as lavage to have sex with flight attendants or stewardesses during and after work hours. Several recent scandal may collaborate this allegation in the email…

Many emails were sent to the company on this pilot have sex with the wife topic from the man and he apparently received several replies from legal counsel at Cathay Pacific. The lawyer at CX said the company has already investigated the allegation and found it groundless. And told the man the situation between the pilot and his flight attendant wife is “entirely a private matter”. And threaten the man with legal action if he did not drop the matter and cease all communication with shareholders of the company like Air China. However the man is allegation the pilots use Cathay Pacific’s corporate rate to stay in rooms like at the Hong Kong SkyCity Marriott Hotel for sexual trysts with the flight attendants when they already have homes in Hong Kong. He tells the company that employee tickets are being used for adulterous romantic getaways and he want it to end. He wonder if Cathay Pacific condone sex between married employees because the company allow company resources to be used to conduct adultery

Another interesting allegation is that the pilot having sex with his wife is not wearing condoms when having sex with the wife or other flight attendants. And with his promiscuity, sexual habits and sexual relations with other flight attendants he could potentially pose as a health hazard for many females at the company. Anyway, the man sent emails to many people asking for assistants to forward the following email to the appropriate individual. Including this gem to the CEO with receding emails attached:

---

From:****************@gmail.com
To: wangchangshun@airchina.com; john_slosar@cathaypacific.com
Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2012 8:40 PM
Subject: Complaint against Alex Roels (CX Senior First Officer) for having sex with my wife Eden Lo (盧穎盈) 投訴國泰員工通姦 / 性行為

Dear esteemed Deputy Chairman Wang and CEO Slosar,

Can you please let me know whether the following and attached matters are being looked into?

Thanks,

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 2:09 PM, Mr. Chen wrote:

Dear Management, Customer Relations, and all relevant parties who may offer assistance,

It is quite surprising that after almost three months, Cathay Pacific continues to condone sex between married CX employees (Alex Roels and Eden Lo) during work (a potential public flight safety issue) and inter-office adultery leveraging CX resources.

After almost two months of “investigation,” the lawyer who represents Cathay Pacific, a listed company, not only addressed the wrong individual (I am not Mr. Yen but Mr. Chen) but also got the facts wrong (two and not one CX employees are involved; you need two people to have sexual intercourse). Given such sloppy responses filled with inconsistencies, the customer received no apology from Cathay Pacific and is threatened continuously.

At the very least, ask Mr. Roels to stop having sex with my wife. Given such a senior position within CX, shouldn’t CX expect him to behave professionally and morally at all times? As his conducts represents Cathay Pacific whereas given Eden’s relatively low corporate rank, she may be excused due to lack of experience and / or fear of authority from people of Mr. Roels’ seniority.

Also, according to my wife, CX pilots are promiscuous with CX flight attendants (so-called “crew meals”; a term previously foreign to me as I have never worked in the airline industry), hence the recent CX sex scandals? Perhaps there are more… The fact that Mr. Roels is not wearing a condom when having sex with my wife in addition to the promiscuity my wife mentioned mean that Mr. Roels could potentially pose as a health hazard among female CX flight attendants as well. Again, I have never worked in the airline industry; thus all my information comes from my wife.

I have already given a few examples of their leveraging CX resources to conduct adultery with dates and locations in my previous emails. If Cathay Pacific does perform a comprehensive investigation, it can easily find out more instances; I do not think it is necessary for me to provide more explicit evidences to Cathay Pacific at this point in time.

Any coordination in lies further confirms the deepness of their relationship. It is becoming clear why both CX employees do not mind resorting to dishonesty because it seems Cathay Pacific is openly condoning married CX employees to leverage CX resources for adultery / sex while covering their acts with coordinated lies (all of these according to Mr. Y.S. Cheung are “private affair of an employee”). None of the above violates any internal code of conduct (which should include “morality” and “integrity”). I do not think this sets a moral precedence for the rest of Cathay Pacific and a good public image.

The aforementioned can be backed up with evidences when necessary. It is now almost three months since I first contacted Cathay Pacific and nothing has been done other than using a lawyer to threaten the victim with legal jargons interspersed with spelling / grammar errors, inconsistencies and incorrect facts. I wonder what the public will think of such dealings from Cathay Pacific…

I will continue to pursue the issue until CX provides a fair solution and clear explanation, and I reserve my rights to contact anyone who may offer any assistance in the matter.

On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 1:56 AM, Mr. Chen wrote:

Dear Management, Customer Relations, and all relevant parties who may offer assistance,

Can you please let me know whether the subject matter is being looked into?

Thank you,

p.s. previous physical descriptions of Mr. Roels (i.e. fat and balding) can only come from my wife as I have never seen Mr. Alex Roels in-person, let alone in the nude

On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 9:14 PM, Mr. Chen wrote:

Dear Mr. Y. S. Cheung,

You do not need to get contentious. I am the victim here. You have no rights in “demanding” me to do anything; if you can write me, I can write you back as well.

Please tell me what “appropriate legal action” to take when I am only pointing out the facts (summarized below for your easy reference):

1. You are the lawyer who represents a listed company
2. Yet there are multiple spelling / grammar mistakes (even addressing the wrong individual) and inconsistencies between your two emails (examples / explanations below) which continue to contribute to miscommunication
3. Your first email was factually incorrect. Two (and not one) Cathay Pacific employees (Alex Roels and Eden ‘Wing Ying’ Lo, my newly wedded wife from end of last year) are leveraging CX resources to have unprotected sexual intercourse (i.e. make use of CX employee tickets for adulterous romantic getaways while lying to husband and family to be on duty, abuse CX corporate rate to book hotel in HK when both live in HK with a special request for a single king bed, etc.)
4. Their sexual relationship could potentially cause safety issues during flights (as per earlier CX news when a CX flight attendant provided fellatio for a CX pilot inside the cockpit). Thus, it is a public issue and not a private issue
5. You accused me of repeating in my previous email when I gave a new example (so it is not a repeat) of their abusing CX resources to conduct adultery. Certain other points I needed to repeat because you are not addressing them
6. According to you, who represent Cathay Pacific, “…the subject matters set out…entirely a private matter.” The subject matters in this case include but not limited to: adultery between CX employees, using CX resources to conduct adultery, dishonesty, etc. All of these according to you are only private mattersdo not violate any internal code of conduct and
7. You have continued to threaten a layman victim using legal jargon instead of explaining the truth, which is the only thing I am looking for

Therefore, I need to CC your bosses and others as someone needs to be accountable for at least your spelling / grammar mistakes and inconsistencies as well as incorrect facts from your “investigation.”

Moreover, it is natural for any “customer” to file complaints to the “Customer Relations Dept.” for CX related incidents. In this case, there are two CX employees committing adultery using CX resources so any reasonable person would think this must be CX related. Unless you are telling me it is customary for Cathay Pacific to threaten all customers who file complaints more than once as they might be “causing disruption and nuisance.”

I cannot accept such conclusion from Cathay Pacific and will continue to pursue the issue (whether through Cathay Pacific or legal / media) until CX provides a fair solution and clear explanation.

It is interesting how you shifted from acknowledging a single matter as in “We have also determined that the subject matter (singular)…” in your first email to acknowledging multiple matters as in “We have also determined that the subject matters (plural)” in your second email (inconsistency #1).

For your information, there were several reasons for previously addressing others:

1. There was no reply from Cathay Pacific for almost two months
2. I was not sure if you represented the whole of Cathay Pacific because a listed company can misspell one of the most common last names in the world in a rather inconceivable fashion (i.e. how do you get a “Yen” from a “Chen”?)
3. Your first email was factually incorrect. Two (and not one) Cathay Pacific employees are involved. I see that you have since corrected it from “a private affair of an employee (singular)” in your first email to “entirely a private matter (without specifying the number of individuals)” in your second email (inconsistency #2)

Throughout my ordeal as the victim, both CX employees (when contacted) have continued to lie (about time, date, details, etc.), deny and conjure up justifications for their adulterous trysts (dishonesty and disregard for any morality and integrity). It would therefore not surprise me if they coordinate and make up stories, and deny facts in front of Cathay Pacific as well.

I look forward to seeing a fair and just solution (acceptable from a reasonable person’s perspective) from Cathay Pacific ASAP within one week (before 11 July 2012).

For your benefit, you might want to double-check your grammar next time before you send out anything:

1. The sentence in your second email “…the subject matters (plural) set out in your previous letters to the company…is entirely… ” should be changed to “…the subject matters (plural) set out in your previous letters to the company…are entirely…”
2. Another sentence in your second email “Your actions (plural) may be considered as causing…If you choose to continue such action (singular)…” is inconsistent. How come multiple “actions” all of a sudden become a single “action”?
3. etc.

And the spacing of your email signature is also inconsistent. For example, your telephone number “2747 2271″ has a space in between but not the case for your fax number “21412271″

Last but not least, all rights are reserved.

29.06.2012, 12:22, “Y S Cheung” ys_cheung@cathaypacific.com:

Dear Mr. Chen,

I refer to your letter of 26^th June 2012 below in response to my earlier letter of 22^nd June, 2012 to you which you have obviously received.

I notice that you have continued to write and address your letter to various personnel in our company and Air China, despite the advice to you in my earlier letter to cease writing to us or any of our employees or shareholders about the subject matter set out in your previous letters. I reiterate that the company has already investigated your allegation that was considered our concern and found it groundless. We have also determined that the subject matters set out in your previous letters to the company (which you repeated again in your letter below) is entirely a private matter. We are not in a position to help you or comment further.

On behalf of the company, I am demanding you to stop writing further to Cathay Pacific or any of its employees or shareholders. Your actions may be considered as causing disruption and nuisance and are unacceptable. If you choose to continue such action, we will consider taking appropriate legal action against you.

All our rights are reserved.

Your faithfully,

Y. S. Cheung
Group Legal Counsel
Cathay Pacific Airways Limited
E-mail : ys_cheung@cathaypacific.com
Tel : (852) 2747 2271
Fax: (852) 21412271

From: Mr. Chen
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 7:54 PM
To: Y S Cheung
Cc: wangchangshun@airchina.com; Fiona Chow; Ivan Chu; John Slosar; William Chau
Subject: Re: Your Letters to Cathay Pacific

English version below

亲爱的Y. S. Cheung先生：

我很惊讶一家上市公司如国泰会写出如此草率的答覆，甚至完全不理会基本细节：

1. 请问谁是 “Yen先生” ？？
2. 在你的信中你提到 “…这完全是单一僱员的私事…” 这是与事实不符的。因为不是单一的僱员，而是两名僱员。Alex Roels 和卢颖盈 (Eden ‘Wing Ying’ Lo) 都在国泰工作

有资讯提供给我，显示该两名国泰员工利用国泰的公司员工价，在2012年4月25日入住宿香港天际万豪酒店。当两位都是香港人而且彼此在香港都有家，其中一位还是新婚的有夫之妇，请问是单一的僱员私事吗？他们甚至还向酒店提出特殊要求单张King Size床。请问国泰在 “调查” 时有得知此事吗？

另外有更多滥用国泰资源的例子，相信即使我不告诉你们，只要你们真的去调查，应可轻易查到。一家上市的大公司如国泰，居然可容忍此类行为，并完全推说这是单一的僱员私事。这对受害的当事人公平合理吗？社会大众能接受如此的结论吗？

你警告威胁我说如 “继续向本公司或本公司任何员工或股东写信，你将…” ，请问我有伤害到你们国泰的任何一个人吗？如果我不与国泰联繫，请问我该与谁联繫？很惊讶国泰对员工间的通姦加上不诚实的行为，毫无任何纪律处置，而且还用律师来对付受害人，试问这种处理方式会让社会大众如何评价国泰航空？

我在上封电子邮件要求的只是真相，而不是草率敷衍的答覆，例如写错人及搞错事实 (以上 1 和 2)。请国泰在一个星期内尽快提供具体的答覆给我 (2012年7月4日前)。

我保留我与任何可能对此事提供援助的人联繫的权利。

谢谢你，

Chen先生 (不是Yen先生)

_____________________

Dear Mr. Y. S. Cheung,

I am surprised that a listed company such as Cathay Pacific would write such a sloppy reply after almost two months without care even to basic details:

1. Who is “Mr. Yen”??
2. In your letter, you stated “…entirely a private affair of an employee…” This is factually incorrect. It is not a single employee but two employees. Both Alex Roels and Eden ‘Wing Ying’ Lo work for Cathay Pacific

How is it a “private affair of an employee” when two Cathay Pacific employees are using Cathay Pacific resources to conduct adultery? It has been brought to my attention that one of many examples is their using Cathay Pacific’s corporate rate to stay in Hong Kong SkyCity Marriott Hotel on 25 April 2012. Why would they do that when they are both from Hong Kong and have physical homes in Hong Kong? There is even a special request for a single “king bed.” Is Cathay Pacific aware of this from your “investigation”?

There are more examples of abusing Cathay Pacific resources which CX can easily find out if you carry out a comprehensive investigation. How can Cathay Pacific, a publicly listed company, condone such behavior and continue to brush aside the matter by saying it is only a private affair of a single employee? Is this conclusion fair to the victim? Do you think the public can accept such conclusion?

You consider it inappropriate “to write and continue to write on the subject matter…” but if I don’t contact Cathay Pacific, who should I contact? I am surprised that adultery between two Cathay Pacific employees in addition to continued dishonesty are not in violation of Cathay Pacific’s internal code of conduct. I hope somewhere within the code expects CX employees to uphold the highest standard of “morality” and “integrity.” In addition, Cathay Pacific uses lawyers to silence the victim. What will the public think of such dealings from Cathay Pacific?

In my previous email, I simply asked for the truth, not a half-hearted reply addressing the wrong individual with incorrect facts (as per points 1 and 2 above). Please therefore provide me a concrete answer ASAP within one week (before 4 July 2012).

I reserve my rights to contact anyone who may offer assistance in the matter.

Thank you,

Mr. Chen (NOT Mr. Yen)

22.06.2012, 12:00, “Y S Cheung” ys_cheung@cathaypacific.com:

Dear Mr. Yen,

I refer to your previous letters (copy attached) addressed to various people in the management team of our Company. It has also come to our attention that you have written to one of our shareholders, Air China.

We have investigated the allegation in your previous letter regarding one of our employees suffering harassment in the work place which we found groundless. We have also determined that the subject matter of your letter is otherwise entirely a private affair of an employee. As far as the Company is concerned, the matter is closed.

In any event, we consider it inappropriate for you to write and continue to write on the subject matter to the Company or any employees or shareholders of the Company. We strongly advise you therefore to stop immediately writing further to us or any of our employees or shareholders about the subject matter. Failing which, we will consider taking appropriate legal action.

All our rights are reserved in the meantime.

Yours faithfully,

Y. S. Cheung
Group Legal Counsel
Cathay Pacific Airways Limited
E-mail : ys_cheung@cathaypacific.com
Tel : (852) 2747 2271
Fax: (852) 21412271

---

Cathay Pacific’s new Premium Economy Class
Visit www.cathaypacific.com/premiumeconomyclass

---

Cathay Pacific’s new Premium Economy Class
Visit www.cathaypacific.com/premiumeconomyclass

Another email:

---

From:****************@gmail.com
To: wangchangshun@airchina.com; caijianjiang@airchina.com; sunyude@airchina.com; lishuang@airchina.com; raoxinyu@airchina.com; joycezhang@airchina.com
Sent: Friday, July 13, 2012 11:30 PM
Subject: 投訴國泰機師 Alex Roels 員工間通姦 / 性行為

尊敬的王主席：

您 好。我在五月初已投訴國泰, 有關國泰資深副機師Alex Roels和我新婚老婆 (去年底結的婚) 國泰空姐盧穎盈 (Eden Lo) 發生通姦行為之事。 因此行為已嚴重影響到貴公司的飛行紀律, 及飛行安全的問題, 但貴公司居然可以完全置之不理 , 到現在為止都沒有給我任何答覆 ，實屬不可思議！

當然我和我老婆的婚姻問題 , 我自會去循法律路徑來解決。但之前也才報導國泰機師在紐約強姦國泰空姐，另外乙則新聞則報導國泰空姐在飛行途中入機艙提供機師口淫服務, 讓社會大眾為之譁然, 因為飛行的安全關乎幾百人的生命 .

我已試過私底下與兩位相關當事人溝通，可是只是得到更多的謊言及威脅。根據我老婆的說法，她並不想跟Roels先生發生關係，因他 “肚子大又禿頭” 而且無帶套，所以我強烈懷疑她是非自願的。因當我追問其他 細節，她一律回答 “我不記得了”。

國泰至少能做的是請機師Alex Roels給我一個交代！不要再濫用權利欺負我老婆，逼她發生性行為！

我真的很不想事情鬧大到去讓國泰難堪，如果要用法律上和媒體上來得到結果, 相信絕不是貴公司想要的。我此刻仍願意信任國泰，希望王主席能立即迅速地處理這個紀律及飛安問題, 並請國泰盡快給我一個明確的回覆。

Yup, there are some serious allegations in the emails… Interestingly a week after GutterUncensored received these emails both the wife and pilot removed their Facebook profiles but not before we captured a few pics. LOL… Sadly not too many pics of the wife (just one) but we have a few of the alleged pilot in this mile high sex scandal. We were trying to get some sexual graphic images to go with this post but things fell through. Sorry! But these emails are kind of juicy and scandalous… And if you have explicit pictures and/or video of Cathay Pacific flight attendants or any flight attendants especially on a plane then please send to GutterUncensored(at)yahoo.com as soon as possible. Click on pictures to enlarge.

Here are the pictures retrieved from part 5 thus far and also others they help us find on the net. More from part 5 of the presentation should be coming soon but until then take a look at these gems:

Source: http://www.gutteruncensored.info

————————————–——————————————

————————————–——————————————