SINGAPORE (May 13): Four of the six prosecution witnesses who have testified so far at the trial of John Soh Chee Wen and Quah Su-Ling have been remisiers. The two who took the stand last week, however, stood up significantly better than the earlier two under cross-examination by the defence lawyers.
The first two, Jack Ng Kit Kiat and Alex Chew Keng Chiow, had been meek and hesitant during cross-examination. Andy Lee, previously with Lim and Tan, and Angelia Poon Mei Choo, of OCBC Securities, stood their ground, however, and talked back when grilled by the defence lawyers.
Philip Fong, managing partner of Eversheds Harry Elias and lawyer for Quah, one of the two alleged masterminds on trial, tried to get Lee to agree that his client was merely an intermediary. But Lee was adamant in denying the assertion that Quah did not play an active role in getting him a job at Sino Construction (now known as MMP Resources) and negotiating his salary.
Lee also hit back at Fong’s point that he was not able to recall the exact details of a particular trade done. “It is unfair to me, using the basis of these few trades to [which I cannot] identify the originator, unfair to pin that on me that I am lying,” said Lee. “[I am] telling the truth of the fact. The number of trades is in the hundreds of thousands; how do I know every one of these trades?”
When Fong accused Lee of lying in his statement and in court, he retorted: “I don’t think [I have lied] in this court; I have lied in the [Commercial Affairs Department] investigation, but not here. To a certain extent, I lied to try and recover the losses after so many damn years. How can you say [that my words are] rubbish?”
Similarly, Poon also pushed back against the defence counsel’s assertions. For example, they argued that it was not Quah, but the late Tracy Ooi, who was with UOB Kay Hian’s margins department, who issued trade instructions on certain days. While Poon struggled to explain why it seemed that Quah did not contact her prior to some trades, she was adamant that Quah was the one giving trade instructions.
In Poon’s conditioned statement, she mentioned that she had always provided a trade confirmation by SMS, but there were some instances in which it appeared as if she did not. “I generally provide the trade summary to [Quah],” Poon said, appearing to backtrack on her statement. “I wish to change the word ‘always’ to ‘generally’.”
Fong later confirmed that his instructions from Quah included the fact that she gave trading orders, though he disputed their extent.
Deputy public prosecutor Randeep Singh argued that the defence counsel had failed to fully explain an exhibit, which contained some telephone records, before asking Poon to draw conclusions from it.
Only later did the prosecution reveal more phone records, which allowed Poon to connect Quah to the trades that she was earlier unable to account for.
Besides the remisiers, two representatives of financial institutions were called to take the stand on May 8 and 9. Martin Thurnham, CEO of private bank Coutts’ Hong Kong branch, said in his conditioned statement that Coutts had written off $4.7 million as a result of the penny stock crash. The cost of the crash was estimated at a maximum of $8.5 million. Adeline Cheng Jo-Ee, known to be Soh’s girlfriend, and her father, Cheng Wah, held an account with Coutts under an entity called Alethia Elite. This account enjoyed a margin of $18 million.
Coutts has a record with Singapore authorities. In December 2016, it was fined $2.4 million by the Monetary Authority of Singapore for anti-money laundering breaches related to the 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) scandal. Thurnham maintains that Cheng’s account had undergone robust checks. Further, he added that the fines were more of a “historical problem”.
OCBC Securities, on the other hand, had 12 accounts that were collectively owed $9.2 million after the crash. OCBC Securities and the remisiers handling those accounts managed to recover all outstanding debts either through the forced selling of shares, or from balances held in trust.
While under cross-examination, both Thurnham and Woon Kok Yan, head of risk management at OCBC Securities, had difficulty finding the exact wording in their banks’ terms and conditions for account holders, to support their assertions in their conditioned statements. Both institutions asserted that they did not allow third parties to trade for account holders without a formal third-party authorisation form.
Thurnham was unable to find the exact wording in the terms and conditions for the account holder. Rather than concede, he insisted that they were inferences from the various terms and conditions rather than overt wording. “I have pointed out where they are mentioned, some may be under specific points,” he said.
Similarly, OCBC Securities’ Woon struggled to deny that a third-party authorisation form was required based on the terms and conditions for an account. In re-examination, however, he backtracked on his answer and said that a written third-party authorisation form was required.
In reply to questions from the defence counsel, Woon also kept repeating “the clause is there to protect [OCBC Securities]” and “the [trade representatives] would be in breach”.
The two institutions are just the first of several expected to testify. Quah is known to have borrowed money or set up credit lines from several financial institutions and dozens of accounts, and allegedly used the money to fund the manipulation of three counters — Blumont Group, LionGold Corp and Asiasons Capital (renamed Attilan Holdings).
The accounts are held with financial institutions such as Saxo Bank, Lim and Tan Securities, Crédit Industriel et Commercial, Phillip Securities, RHB Securities, KGI Securities, Maybank Kim Eng Securities and UBS.
The trial, which was into its 13th day on May 9, is slated to continue daily for the coming two weeks. More representatives from other financial institutions are expected to take the stand and more questions raised.
