It was established in court that Asian albums were money-losing. Kong agreed that the P&L for the Xtron was money-losing.
Kong agreed he was more conservative in his approach to budgeting and was more conservative after the $13m bond had been entered. Kong counsel has also put it to Wahju during Wahju’s evidence that there was no bottomless pit of money available to fund the project.
DPP showed an email to Kong. This email is an exchange between Kong and Justin. Kong wrote, “Please be bold with your budgeting.”
DPP produced another new evidence in court. This email is from Kong to Tas and copied to Ye Peng. Kong wrote, “Please aim as high as possible and spare no expense to take Sun all the way to…..”
DPP showed Kong another email. In this email is from Tas to Kong, Ye Peng and Justine. Kong wrote, “Please do whatever it takes to bring her to the top… money is not a consideration from the investors.”
DPP said, “So far, we have seen you use phrases “be bold”, “spare no expense” now “money is not a consideration”. Do you still maintain that you were conservative in your budgeting of the Crossover Project, the US phase?”
Kong said, “Your Honour, when we moved to albums, we are talking about multimillion dollars, from that point onwards, I became more and more conservative.”
DPP referred Kong to the “the sky is the limit” email. (Note this email was mentioned in court before) Kong gave the same reply as last week. “Let’s plan as if the sky is the limit” was a hyperbole that he used.
DPP circulated another new email to the court. This is an email from Kong to Justin dated 15 May 2008. DPP said that in May 2008 the entire $13m under the first BSA (Bond subscription Agreement) had been drawn down.
In this email to Justin, Kong wrote in this email, “Peng and I have been talking ..….. since Wyclef Jean came into the picture, XPL would have plowed in $8m + $4.45m = $12.45m. For us to recoup that would have to wait 6 years until 2014.”
DPP asked, “Knowing that it would take six years, until 2014, for the project to recoup, are you saying that you never asked Ye Peng, Serina or Eng Han, Hey by the way, you know those 13 million bonds that Xtron owes to the church? When do we need to pay them back because we are only going to recoup everything in 2014?”
Kong replied, “Your Honour, by 14 May, if your Honour would look at E-361, there had been budgets already. If we could just look at E-361.”
DPP said, “No, Witness, answer my question first. Knowing what you knew, as reflected in this email that I’m showing you and not some other email that you want to jump to, did you ever ask Ye Peng, Sharon or Eng Han when Xtron would need money to repay the bonds? Surely, that plays a part in your budgeting. You must know whether Xtron has some obligations coming up that may put a crimp on your ability to spend the money on the Crossover Project.”
Kong replied, “Your Honour, up to this point in time, I didn’t know there was a two-year maturity date, but the reason I wanted to show E-361 was because the budget by then would have shown that within five years, within seven years Xtron will be able to pay everything back, principal and interest. So if we just have a look at just E-361.”
DPP said, “Witness, can you answer my question first?…. did you ever ask Ye Peng, Serina or Eng Han when the bonds needed to be repaid….”
Kong replied, “Up to this point in time, in May 2008, I didn’t know, and I have not asked.”
<…some questions and answers..,>
Kong said, “…. I was told that that is not a problem because Eng Han, our fund manager, said that you can always re-issue the bonds and extend the maturity date.”
<…some questions and answers…>
DDP said, “I put it to you that when you were budgeting you had no consideration for whether Xtron could repay the bonds because there was no intention on the part of you, Serina, Eng Han, Ye Peng and John Lam that Xtron would actually be responsible for paying the bonds.”
Mr Sreeni stood up, “…… I don’t think the put should include the intention of other parties.”
DPP said, “… his team actually intended, he can answer the question, your Honour.”
Mr Sreeni, “Your Honour, I don’t think you can put the intention of another accused to one accused… it doesn’t mean anything.”
DPP, “… if two people are charged with murdering somebody is a conspiracy, surely one can be asked. The two of you went with the intention of killing the victim. It cannot be that if one of the elements of the charge is that there was a collective intention that such a question cannot be put.”
Judge said, “Yes, it is an element of your charge, so please go ahead.”
DPP repeated the put statement to Kong and he disagreed.
No comments:
Post a Comment