12 May 2015 – Serina cross-examined by DPP (21 July 08 Meeting) (14 May 2015: MrsLightnFriends)

“I put it to you that E-269 is intentionally inaccurate because it portrays Xtron as being an independent company from CHC, when in fact Xtron was controlled by CHC and in particular, that Kong Hee and Ye Peng controlled Xtron for the purpose of Sun Ho’s music career.” said DPP.

This statement was put to Serina in cross-examination on May 12.
 

The sequence of the events as following:
1. On 9 July 08, Serina sent E-346 to Foong Daw Ching

2. On 18^th July 08, Tan Ye Peng sent a blackberry message to Foong Daw Ching to meet on 21 July 2008.

3. Tan Ye Peng gave a call to Foong Daw Ching on July 21 before the meeting. (Telephone record evidence produced in court by defence counsel)

4. Tan Ye Peng sent E-269 attached document to Foong Daw Ching.

5. Both Tan Ye Peng and Serina met Foong Daw Ching on 21 Jul 2008.
Foong told Ye Peng and Serina that Sun could be a related party of Xtron. Disclosure of CHC Xtron transactions => Solution is Firna bond (Eng Han’s proposed solution)

6. For riverwalk purchase, Xtron Director Kar Weng did not agree to the idea of advance rental => Solution is Amended Bond Subscription Agreement. (After consulting Foong on 1 Aug 2008)

7. Meeting with Foong Daw Ching on 1 August 2008 to discuss about the change in plan and Wahju’s glass factory in his own capacity to fund the crossover was mentioned to him.

Tan Ye Peng remembered John Lam, Serina and himself were present in the August 2008 meeting with Foong.
Serina remembered Tan Ye Peng John Lam, Eng Han and herself were present in the August 2008 meeting with Foong Daw Ching and Foong Aifang
Eng Han couldn’t remember the exact meeting date with Foong. But he did attended meeting with Foong.
Foong Daw Ching ‘s evidence was he couldn’t remember meeting with all of them. Evidence in court shows he deliberately wrote “no meeting” on 1 August 08 in his personal 4 pages document prepared by his sister Foong AiFang.

8. On 1 August 2008, after the meeting, Serina sent an email to Kong Hee and copied to Tan Ye Peng and Chew Eng Han. This email is to update Kong Hee on what was discussed in the 1 August 2008 meeting.

9. In this 1 August 2008 meeting, when come to Firna bonds, Serina and Tan Ye Peng said the same thing. “I don’t think Mr Foong will purposely lie, he may have forgotten.”

10. Eng Han said Foong lied when he was on the stand.

DPP position’s is Foong was telling the truth when he said he was not actually told about the Firna bonds. The 6 accused were not truthful to Foong.

May 13 hearing covers Firna bond and Serina was under intense cross-examination by DPP.

Recount of Serina cross-examined by DPP on 12 May 2015 in relation to 21 July 08 meeting.

Who attended the 21 July 2008 meeting?
1. Tan Ye Peng
2. Serina Wee
3. Foong Daw Ching

E-346 dated 9 July 2008
Subject “CHC Board queries on Bonds”

This is the email that Serina sent to Mr Foong in July 2008.

Hi Mr Foong,
I understand that you are overseas and will only be back by this Friday so we are trying to arrange for a meeting with Tiang Yii so that we can give Pastor Kong an update this weekend. The following are the questions that CHC Board has to ask.

1. Technically the Xtron bonds expire in 2009. Hypothetically speaking, if there is a situation where XPL cannot pay back the bonds by 2009 and instead re-issue new bonds to replace these bonds, will there be a requirement for XPL to write down the value of the bonds at expiry? Or will there be any special disclosures in XPL or CHC accounts?

2. If XPL bonds constitute portion of CHC’s investment portfolio, will there be consolidation required or special disclosures in CHC’s or XPL’s audit report.

3. As quite a substantial amount of Building Funds has been placed in investments from this financial year onwards, is there any change in the way of presentation of the Investments in the audit report and subsequently in CHC’s AGM? Do we need to show the details of the investments or just the schedule of movement in broad categories as per past audit reports?

On a separate note, the Board would also like me to ask you do you feel if there an issue of CHC investing heavily in Xtron Productions Pte Ltd when it is an insolvent company for the past few years even though Xtron is paying CHC very high interest at 7% per annum.

After discussion with Bro Foong, I need to change part of EOGM notes. See attached changes highlighted in yellow. Bro Foong mentioned that he just had a talk with the commissioner of charities (COC) recently and explained to him that churches are doing things very differently now as compared to the past….As Bro Foong sits on the COC’s advisory committee, he will be able to advise us on any new developments to be implemented by the COC.

The prosecution’s position for point 1 in E-346 is that when Serina put it as a hypothetical to Foong Daw Ching, she was being misleading, because by that time she knew that the Xtron bonds could not, in fact, be repaid upon maturity in 2009.

For point 2 in E-346. The prosecution’s position is this point would not appear to have been addressed to Foong previously. [DPP is referring to the meeting before the inception of the Xtron bonds. 25 June 2007 meeting. ]

Serina: Your Honour, I think I the June 2008 queries where John spoke to Mr Foong, there’s some talk about consolidation. But I don’t know if it’s in this meeting discussion it’s based on this specific query or not.

DPP: But you say there was a conversation that John spoke with Mr Foong in June 2008. Again, that would be about a year after Ye Peng and Eng Han spoke to him. As far as you know, this not an issue that was raised with him by Eng Han and Ye Peng prior to the first Xtron bonds being entered into. Correct?

Serina: Yes, your Honour.

DPP: In fact, would you be able to confirm that this concern about whether there might be consolidation or other special disclosures in the audit reports of CHC and Xtron only came about after the bonds had already been entered into?

Serina: Your Honour, I think regarding consolidation, yes, it’s after the bonds were entered into. But for disclosures, I think prior to the bonds being entered, Eng Han did check with Mr Foong about what would be disclosed in the church’s audit report.

…

For point 3 in E-346
Serina: Your Honour, the concern is something in relation to what we just talked about, that Eng Han had checked with Mr Foong about the one-liner disclosure. So the concern is now it is substantial amount of Building Fund, so is there a change to the accounting, any disclosure required.

For the on a separate note.
 

DPP: We have gone into this already yesterday and we won’t rehash it. But suffice to say, this also had not been highlighted to Mr Foong previously when he was supposedly consulted about the Xtron bonds. Correct?
 

There was this concern that Xtron was insolvent, so would there be any issues with this investment again is a concern that only came up subsequent to the bond being entered into. Correct?

Serina: Yes, your Honour.

….

Serina said he consulted Foong was in relation to whether in area of governance.

DPP: All right. When you consulted Mr Foong on these points, it would be in the context of him understanding that CHC and Xtron were not related parties and that CHC did not control Xtron. Correct?

Serina: Yes.

Then DPP moved on to E-269 the attachment file.

DPP read the portion of the paper about Xtron, which is the first section.
 

DPP: Would you agree the paper omits mentioning that Xtron was incorporated in 2003 to first an foremost take over management of Sun Ho’s music career from Attributes, because that was what Xtron was doing from day one of its incorporation?

Serina: Your Honour, there is mention in the paper about Xtron managing Sun. It doesn’t state exactly in those words that Xtron was incorporated to manage Sun, but there is mention of Sun.

DPP: Well, mentioning Sun is quite different from saying it was started for that purpose of managing Sun, and instead saying it was started for a different purpose. Would you agree?

Serina: Your Honour, I agree it’s not specifically stated that one of the purposes was to manage Sun. But what are the purposes that is mentioned her is also accurate.

…..

DPP: If you go to page 2 of the writing, where Sun is first mentioned, it says:
 

“When the directors of Xtron saw the potential of Ms Sun Ho’s singing career, they signed her on as an honorary, non-salaried artiste to manage her public relations and music productions.”

That cannot be true. Correct? Because we have seen how, when Xtron was started, it was really a package deal: Xtron was started in order to manage Sun Ho’s singing career. So it is not as portrayed here, that Xtron directors saw her potential and then decided to sign her up. In fact, we have seen how the directors were chosen, or, in you position, suggested by Kong Hee, after the decision to incorporate Xtron to manage Sun Ho had been made. Correct?

…….

DPP: When you meet Foong again later on in the meeting that is then described in E-325, you’ve already testified that Foong was told that CHC did not control Xtron. So that is what he was consistently told. Correct?

Serina: Yes, your Honour.

DPP: The reason this issue of making it clear that CHC did not control Xtron was important is because of the consolidation concern. Correct?

Serina: Yes, your Honour, and that is what we really thought: CHC does not control Xtron.

…..

DPP: Then the issue of Xtron bonds being considered equity for CHC, that again goes to the issue of control and consolidation. Correct? Your concern is that if the bonds are equity, then that might be seen as some form of ownership of Xtron by CHC.

Serina: Yes

…..

DPP: So you weren’t just seeing Mr Foong to address concerns arising from Ren Ci. You were also seeing him to address the concerns that you and your bond transaction co-accused had about how the Xtron bonds would be dealth with in the upcoming audits of CHC and Xtron, particularly if there were issues with the bonds being redeemed upon maturity. Correct?

Serina: Yes, your Honour, to check with him whether is there any issue with re-issuing of bonds or the extension of the maturity date.

DPP: But this meeting with Mr Foong was arranged on the basis that the church board had some concerns arising from the Ren Ci issue and wanted to consult him. Correct?

Serina: Yes, your Honour.

….
DPP referred to some blackberry messages from Tan Ye Peng to Foong Daw Ching and Kong Hee to Foong Daw Ching.

DPP: Kong Hee had also messaged Foong Daw Ching to say that the church board was very troubled with the Ren Ci case, where the monk was arrested for fraud, corruption and forgery, and that was why they wanted to meet him. Correct?

Serina: Yes.

….
DPP: Mr Foong was not told that the other reason you wanted to meet him was to explore your concerns about the accounting issues, the audit issues, that might arise if the bonds could not be redeem upon maturity. Correct?
 

He was asked those questions, but he wasn’t told, “Actually, we want to meet you for two reasons. One is because of concerns over Ren Ci, the other one is because of concerns over audit issues that might arise if we can’t redeem the Xtron bonds”.

Serina: Your Honour, I think in Pastor Kong’s message, he says about corporate governance and accounting. And I’m not involved in the direct messaging to Mr Foong to arrange for the meeting.

DPP: But your position is that insofar as everything in E-269 is concerned, were these things that Mr Foong already knew, or did he know some but not all of it? Can you tell us? I don’t need you to go through it line by line, but were these generally details he would already have been familiar with? For example, this statement that the directors of Xtron had signed on Sun Ho because they saw her potential.

Serina: Your Honour, there are information that Mr Foong already knows that Xtron has been managing Sun.

….

DPP: I put it to you that E-269 is intentionally inaccurate because it portrays Xtron as being an independent company from CHC, when in fact Xtron was controlled by CHC and in particular, that Kong Hee and Ye Peng controlled Xtron for the purpose of Sun Ho’s music career.

Serina: Your Honour, I disagree firstly that Pastor Kong and Pastor Tan or CHC controlled Xtron, and I also disagree that it is intentionally inaccurate. We put in as much relevant information as we were aware of.

DPP: I put it to you that in giving this intentionally inaccurate picture of the relationship between Xtron to CHC to Mr Foong in E-269, you were clearly not genuinely seeking his advice, but again you were simply using him as a guinea pig to run your cover story about the relationship between Xtron and CHC past him.

Serina: Your Honour, I disagree. Mr Foong is a professional. We don’t use him as a guinea pig.

DPP: I put it to you that in the instances we have seen you consulting Mr Foong, or your bond transaction co-accused consulting Mr Foong, in relation to the first Xtron BSA, you were not genuinely seeking his advice because you concealed from him the fact that the first Xtron BSA was actually a sham transaction through which you and your bond transaction co-accused persons gained access to the Church Building Fund to finance Sun Ho’s music Career.

Serina: Your Honour, I disagree firstly that it was a sham, and I wasn’t there when Pastor Tan and Eng Han first seek advice from Mr Foong. And in relation to my later involvement in queries, we provide Mr Foong with whatever relevant information that we could think of at that time.

The hearing continues