Archive for the ‘Kevin Han’ Category

CHC Trial 22, September, 2014 (Day 78-Day 31 Tranche 5)

http://www.citynews.sg/2014/09/city-harvest-trial-contents-of-chc-board-meeting-minutes-questioned/

http://www.citynews.sg/2014/09/city-harvest-trial-auditors-fully-aware-of-both-chc-and-xtron-accounts-reiterates-finance-manager/

Ah, glad to hear Sharon Tan stood her ground in the midst of cross-examination by the prosecution.
That is to be expected. The church keeps her in prayer, after all.

Now COC communicated something to CAD which started this whole investigation.
SC N. Sreenivasan argued that the defense should be allowed to see this communication.
Prosecution resisted it.
The judge ruled that the communication should be shown to the defense.

Ok, things are getting more and more interesting.
Let the truth from CHC leaders be out.
Let the truth of this communication be out too.

CHC Trial 29, January, 2014 (Day 38-Day 12 Tranche 3)

http://www.citynews.sg/2014/01/chc-trial-fir-under-intense-questioning/

The defense would like to see First Information Report (FIR) regarding the charges brought against CHC leaders.
Yet, times and again the prosecutors objected.
The defense asked why there was 2 years delay between the report (in 2008) and the investigation (in 2010).
The prosecutors objected again because this this and that.

Seriously, what are the exact charges against CHC leaders?
How come even the defense were not allowed to see the documents?
Dear defense team, please do your best to appeal so you can see the documents.

CHC Trial 28, January, 2014 (Day 37-Day 11 Tranche 3): Start of 13th Witness’ Testimony

http://www.citynews.sg/2014/01/chc-trial-investigating-officer-cad-did-not-seize-all-relevant-audit-working-papers-from-baker-tilly/

Today the 13th witness, Kevin Han, began his testimony.
He was the officer in charge from CAD and he recommended that charges be brought to the church leaders.
He did not seize certain financial records from the auditors.
I heard it was a matter of debate in the court today.

The defense would like to know why he did not seize the documents.
The prosecutors argued the documents did not affect the investigation.

Now, I am reaaallly wondering what is going to happen.
If the documents reaaaaalllly do not affect the investigation, why would the prosecutors object them?
After all, wouldn’t everyone want to know the truth regardless of its relevance???
Why not let the judge decide whether or not the documents are relevant???