City Harvest church founder Kong Hee and 4 others arrested
-
-
:lol:
-
-
Slit mouth woman :lol:
-
You watch too much movies.
-
slit their mouth open to make them say the truth :lol:
-
Were there any instances of sexual abuse on children? No? Were they covered up?
-
Dragging expert. They all love wayang wayang to get attention. Like horsey dressed up and behaved to attract attetion.
-
:lol: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anzzNp8HlVQ
-
Oh my.
-
:lol:
-
Originally posted by SJS6638:
Dragging expert. They all love wayang wayang to get attention. Like horsey dressed up and behaved to attract attetion.
I think she will look better fully dressed and covered up, with a paper bag on the head...
-
Dress up like the Pyramid Head in Silent Hill better :lol:
-
Silent Hill.
-
:lol:
-
Scary movie.
-
:lol:
-
No news now .....
Is the singapore court allowing kong hee holidays to spend his ang pao money from blind disciples?
-
No news now .....
Is the singapore court allowing kong hee holidays to spend his ang pao money from blind disciples?
-
blind :lol: they are blind mentally there's one place waiting for them :lol:
-
Hello, is the singapore court sleeping? No news on kong hee?
Has kong hee connection with pappies to enjoy bor chup by court?
-
:lol:
-
CITY HARVEST CHURCH LEADERS' TRIAL
ABOUT THE CASE
City Harvest Church founder Kong Hee and five deputies are on trial for allegedly misusing more than $50 million of church funds through sham bonds.
This includes $24 million to fund Kong's pop singer-wife Sun Ho's music career and another $26.6 million to cover up the first amount. The six face varying charges for criminal breach of trust (CBT) and/or falsifying accounts.
Those found guilty of committing CBT can be jailed for life or a maximum of 20 years and fined on each charge.
Those found guilty of falsifying accounts can be jailed for up to 10 years and fined on each charge.
Defence lawyers say church leaders did not break law & that sham bond allegations are untrue. Here are their arguments:
Evidence
'taken out of
context'
Report by KOH HUI THENG
FOUNDER KONG HEE
(Represented by Edwin Tong)
While he had initiated the Crossover Project (a mission to evangelise using pop music) and is married to singer Sun Ho (the face of the project), these were non-controversial facts known to all in City Harvest Church (CHC).
The prosecution was asking the court to "draw inferences of conspiracy on facts which are completely innocuous", lawyer Edwin Tong said.
For instance, Kong's role in making general decisions and his involvement in Crossover were known even to the auditors. But the prosecution had taken the "sporadic evidence" out of context to show he had control, especially over the finances.
None of what was disclosed "even allows a reasonable inference to be drawn" that Kong had agreed to do anything illegal "in a conspiracy with one or more of the alleged co-conspirators", Mr Tong added.
The fact that Kong had repeatedly asked auditors and lawyers to go through the bond agreements also undermined any reasonable inference that he intended to be dishonest.
DEPUTY SENIOR PASTOR TAN YE PENG
(Represented by Mr N. Sreenivasan)
He had been honest in sharing information, telling auditors many things "which would have invited queries", Mr N. Sreenivasan said.
The prosecution is making its case on a series of e-mails stitched together, he charged, nit-picking and saying: "Aha, you didn't tell the auditor everything."
They were also likely to ask the accused to explain the e-mails.
"(But) at this stage, you do not call the defence because of curiosity."
Noting that the "sham bonds" had not resulted in the church suffering any financial losses - a point that Mr Tong also raised - and no one from the church had complained, Mr Sreenivasan said those in the dock thought these were good Investments. "And they are still in the dock because we have an unknown complaint by a victim (whose identity) we still don't know."
CHURCH BOARD MEMBER JOHN LAM
(Represented by Mr Kenneth Tan)
He had "limited involvement" in the investments that the prosecution deemed "sham", Mr Kenneth Tan said.
In fact, the advice Lam gave in specific instances stemmed from his accountant training.
There was also no direct evidence that he, being a church volunteer, was involved in a conspiracy.
"You have two full-time pastors, the administrator of the Crossover Project, the investment manager,"
Mr Tan said. "And (he is) a volunteer who comes and goes ... He does not have the knowledge of the general plot."
FINANCE MANAGER SHARON TAN
(Repesented by Mr Kannan Ramesh)
As far as she knew, the bonds in question were authorised investments.
The prosecution's case is that the accused were entrusted with the church funds, so they had full control over them.
Not true, said Mr Kannan Ramesh.
Tan was not charged with criminal breach of trust for the bonds in question - a "somewhat unique position", according to him.
She could "not have been party to a conspiracy to get the bonds off the books of the Church" as she did not think the transactions in question were bogus, he added.
INVESTMENT MANAGER CHEW ENG HAN
(Represented by Mr Michael Khoo)
There was no, evidence of Chew's dishonesty. Neither was there evidence of his involvement in a conspiracy during the period highlighted.
Said Mr Michael Khoo: "After resigning as director of Xtron (in 2004), Chew had nothing to do with the money after Xtron received it."
His appointment as a financial advisor was made with the CHC executive members' full authorisation.
As for the "sham bonds" that the prosecution alleged, the entries were actually recorded correctly and accurately in the chirrch's books to reflect the transactions that took place. They were not removed.
News, The New Paper, Wednesday, April 9, Pg 12
-
Originally posted by M the name:
CITY HARVEST CHURCH LEADERS' TRIAL
ABOUT THE CASE
City Harvest Church founder Kong Hee and five deputies are on trial for allegedly misusing more than $50 million of church funds through sham bonds.
This includes $24 million to fund Kong's pop singer-wife Sun Ho's music career and another $26.6 million to cover up the first amount. The six face varying charges for criminal breach of trust (CBT) and/or falsifying accounts.
Those found guilty of committing CBT can be jailed for life or a maximum of 20 years and fined on each charge.
Those found guilty of falsifying accounts can be jailed for up to 10 years and fined on each charge.
Defence lawyers say church leaders did not break law & that sham bond allegations are untrue. Here are their arguments:
Evidence
'taken out of
context'
Report by KOH HUI THENG
FOUNDER KONG HEE
(Represented by Edwin Tong)
While he had initiated the Crossover Project (a mission to evangelise using pop music) and is married to singer Sun Ho (the face of the project), these were non-controversial facts known to all in City Harvest Church (CHC).
The prosecution was asking the court to "draw inferences of conspiracy on facts which are completely innocuous", lawyer Edwin Tong said.
For instance, Kong's role in making general decisions and his involvement in Crossover were known even to the auditors. But the prosecution had taken the "sporadic evidence" out of context to show he had control, especially over the finances.
None of what was disclosed "even allows a reasonable inference to be drawn" that Kong had agreed to do anything illegal "in a conspiracy with one or more of the alleged co-conspirators", Mr Tong added.
The fact that Kong had repeatedly asked auditors and lawyers to go through the bond agreements also undermined any reasonable inference that he intended to be dishonest.
DEPUTY SENIOR PASTOR TAN YE PENG
(Represented by Mr N. Sreenivasan)
He had been honest in sharing information, telling auditors many things "which would have invited queries", Mr N. Sreenivasan said.
The prosecution is making its case on a series of e-mails stitched together, he charged, nit-picking and saying: "Aha, you didn't tell the auditor everything."
They were also likely to ask the accused to explain the e-mails.
"(But) at this stage, you do not call the defence because of curiosity."
Noting that the "sham bonds" had not resulted in the church suffering any financial losses - a point that Mr Tong also raised - and no one from the church had complained, Mr Sreenivasan said those in the dock thought these were good Investments. "And they are still in the dock because we have an unknown complaint by a victim (whose identity) we still don't know."
CHURCH BOARD MEMBER JOHN LAM
(Represented by Mr Kenneth Tan)
He had "limited involvement" in the investments that the prosecution deemed "sham", Mr Kenneth Tan said.
In fact, the advice Lam gave in specific instances stemmed from his accountant training.
There was also no direct evidence that he, being a church volunteer, was involved in a conspiracy.
"You have two full-time pastors, the administrator of the Crossover Project, the investment manager,"
Mr Tan said. "And (he is) a volunteer who comes and goes ... He does not have the knowledge of the general plot."
FINANCE MANAGER SHARON TAN
(Repesented by Mr Kannan Ramesh)
As far as she knew, the bonds in question were authorised investments.
The prosecution's case is that the accused were entrusted with the church funds, so they had full control over them.
Not true, said Mr Kannan Ramesh.
Tan was not charged with criminal breach of trust for the bonds in question - a "somewhat unique position", according to him.
She could "not have been party to a conspiracy to get the bonds off the books of the Church" as she did not think the transactions in question were bogus, he added.
INVESTMENT MANAGER CHEW ENG HAN
(Represented by Mr Michael Khoo)
There was no, evidence of Chew's dishonesty. Neither was there evidence of his involvement in a conspiracy during the period highlighted.
Said Mr Michael Khoo: "After resigning as director of Xtron (in 2004), Chew had nothing to do with the money after Xtron received it."
His appointment as a financial advisor was made with the CHC executive members' full authorisation.
As for the "sham bonds" that the prosecution alleged, the entries were actually recorded correctly and accurately in the chirrch's books to reflect the transactions that took place. They were not removed.
News, The New Paper, Wednesday, April 9, Pg 12
Verdict ? ?
-
will decide got case or not on 5 May