Monday, September 22, 2014

22 September 2014 – DPP cross-examined Sharon (MrsLightnFriends: 23rd Sept 2014)

DDP’s cross-examination of Sharon on 22 Sep 2014

Related to the boards minutes

Sharon said the Crossover Project is a sensitive issue. Therefore, she could not record it in the board minutes.

She further explained that this is the direction from the board to remain as discreet as possible when it comes to the financial support of the Crossover Project.

DPP: “You received a direction from the board not to record anything in the board minutes about how the bond proceeds are used?”

Sharon: “Yes, your Honour.”

DPP: “Who on the board directed you not to record anything in the board minutes about how the Xtron bond proceeds are used?”

Sharon: “Your Honour, this is a general consensus, and the board secretary signed off. He was aware of what has been discussed during board meeting and what I recorded in the board minutes.”

DPP repeated the question again as Sharon is not answering to her question.

<some questions>

Sharon then said that when she took over from Serina, she instructed her not to record in the board minutes and that is a direction from the board.

When being pressed further questions by DPP, Sharon said that she could not really remember what Serina had told her.

In Sharon’s earlier answer she said that the direction given to her was that she must not record in the board minutes anything about how the bond proceeds are used. When being further questions by DPP she said that she was told there is no need for the board minutes to record how the bond proceeds were used.

Then DPP said: “I put it to you, Ms Tan, that you are being disingenuous in your evidence now.”

<some questions>

DPP: “Well, if that’s the case, the auditors already know, and the board knows, then there’s obviously no sense in you being given this direction not to record in the minutes of board meeting anything about how the bond proceeds were used. Correct?”

Sharon: “Correct, your Honour. That’s why I said on the hindsight we should have minuted down.”

DPP: “So on hindsight, the instructions that Serina gave you made no sense.”

Sharon: “Your Honour, may be at that time, when the instruction was given make a lot of sense, because all we wanted was to keep the Crossover Project very discreet.”

<some questions>

DPP: “May I put it to you, Ms Tan, that the answers you have given about what can and cannot be recorded in the board minutes of meeting and why are not truthful, and they show that you have been shifting your position according to what you perceive to be a favorable position to take in your evidence.”

Sharon disagreed with reason and insisted that the minutes are accurate information. She said on the hindsight everything should be minuted down to be more complete.

Related to Auditors

DPP said it is the duty of the church’s finance manager to assist the church’s management to make sure that its financial statements are properly drawn up and give a true and fair view of the church’s state of affairs in that particular financial year. And Sharon who was the financial manager and also a member of the audit committee, she would have quite a lot of interaction with the audit team.

DPP reminded Sharon that when Tiang Yi and Sim gave evidence, they told the court that during the audit, the auditors will ask for supporting documents for transactions that are looking at, but they will not normally go behind the documents to investigate whether the document is genuine and authentic. Mr Sim also testified that if he’s given minutes of meeting, he would assume that those minutes are the actual records of what transpired during the meetings.

DPP: “Basically, if they are given false documents, then they will be defrauded into signing off on the financial statements on the basis of documents which don’t give a true and fair view of the church’s affairs.”

Sharon: “That’s a fair statement, your Honour.”

Related to the advance rental and redemption of bonds

DPP Mavis, tendered new evidences that was recovered from Sharon’s blackberry phone.

These are messages between Sharon, Eng Han, Serina and Ye Peng.

DPP requested Sharon to look at Mr Chew’s message. In the many messages, one of the message is Mr Chew talking to Sharon about the plan to pay advance rental to Xtron.

DPP: “Why do you say to Eng Han here that there may be a problem, the same Mr Sim is doing XPL accounts so we will know where the money goes to? Why is this a problem?”

Sharon: “Your Honour, what happened was this conversation between Eng Han and myself, we were discussing on the advance rental to be given to Xtron, and at the same time Xtron would be able to use the advance rental to invest into Firna bonds. So at that point in time, I was concerned with regards to disclosure, because even after we do the redemption, if Mr Sim sees that Xtron invests into Firna again, then he will want to know what is this Firna investment about.”

<some questions>

DPP: “Mr Chew responds to your concerns about there may be a problem…”

Mr Chew wrote: “That’s okay. We have sound reason to do it… we get lawyers to draft agreement between CHC and Xtron.”
Sharon wrote: “My concern for Mr Sim is he will know the same money given to Xtron is used to buy Firna contract. No so much of the building issue.”
Mr Chew replied: “Xtron will buy the rights from Ultimate Assets, not Firna. He won’t know the link between Firna and UA.”
DPP: “If we look at these messages between you and Mr Chew, Mr Chew is suggesting that the transactions be documented and that you all get lawyers to provide the necessary legal documentation. But you, clearly are worried that the suggestion is not going to work, because you go on to say “my concern for Mr Sim is he will know the same money given to Xtron is used to buy Firna contract.” Can I suggest to you, Ms Tan that what we see here is Mr Chew making a suggestion that the transactions of advance rental to Xtron subscribes to Firna bonds, and so on, be documented. My suggestion is that his proposal of documentation is really intended only as a cover story to provide an appearance of legitimacy for these transactions. And it’s clear that you know, because you go on to express further worry …”

Sharon disagreed. She said: “…. the contract that Eng Han was referring to is the advance rental license agreement. And this is for giving advance rental to Xtron to secure a building for the church… it is not something that was thought up just in order to redeem the Xtron or Firna bonds.

<some questions>

DPP: “….What you really concerned about here was Mr Sim finding out that advance rental from CHC had been channeled into the redemption of the Firna bonds. That’s what you were concerned about. You can agree or disagree.”

Sharon: “Your Honour, I disagree because he would still be able to find out that the books will be open to him. Xtron has used the advance rental to purchase the Firna bonds.”

<some questions related to SOF10 and SOF11>

DPP said that the four accused (Sharon, Eng Han, Serina and Ye Peng ) did not want Mr Sim to know the truth about where the money invested by the church in SOF10 and 11 would go. And that was why Sharon was anxious that the SOF investments in T10 and T11 should be redeemed before Mr Sim audited the books, so that he wouldn’t question them.

Sharon disagreed with DPP and asserted that T10 and T11 still remain in the CHC book of FY2009 and Mr Sim will be able to see it.

No comments:

Post a Comment