John Soh Chee Wen – the alleged mastermind of the 2013 penny stock crash – was back in court on Dec 3, as both the prosecution and defense counsels put forth their closing submissions to Justice Hoo Sheau Peng.
This comes close to six months after the long-drawn trial – which spanned nearly 200 days – stood down. In this time, 96 prosecution witnesses had taken the stand, while the defense had called upon one witness.
Deputy Public Prosecutor (DPP) Teo Guan Siew told the court that Soh’s “stories were not believable” He went on to question how an incredibly busy man like Soh would have the time to dispense advice on trades to be done.
The court had previously heard that Soh was an advisor to LionGold and had vigorously promoted shares in the counter.
He also kept a lookout for “dead and dying companies” in hopes of turning them around and eventually taking over them.
Soh and his co-accused Quah Su-Ling, were on trial for allegedly orchestrating Singapore’s largest share manipulation scheme involving three penny stocks: Blumont Group, Asiasons Capital (now Attilan Group) and LionGold (renamed ShenYao Holdings).
The eventual collapse of these counters – collectively referred to as BAL – in October 2013, had wiped out some $8 billion in market value.
Soh faces 188 charges, while Quah is facing 177 charges.
Pushing the blame
See also: 2013 penny stock crash mastermind and co-conspirator sentenced, drawing saga closer to closure
In the course of the trial, several prosecution witnesses agreed to having received instructions on trades to make from either Soh or Quah.
Soh rebutted these allegations when he took the stand.
“I want to show that these trades have nothing to do with me and the scale of which they did would have overwhelmed the market,” he said.
“I have no idea why in the world the rogues want to fix me,” he added, in reference to four brokers: Henry Tjoa Sang Hi, Ken Tai Chee Ming, Gabriel Gan Tze Wee and Leroy Lau Chee Heong — all of whom were supposedly part of his inner circle.
Gan and Lau were, at different points in time, brokers with DMG Securities, while Tai was running his own firm, Algo Capital, at the time when the alleged offences took place. Tjoa, meanwhile, was a remisier with Phillip Securities.
In his closing submissions, Teo noted that Soh had painted himself as an altruistic individual who was giving general instructions. “[Soh] was pushing the blame to everyone else” and lied that they were falsely trying to implicate him, elaborated Teo.
Teo broke down Soh's communications with the brokers - 83% or 10,662 were made by Soh to the brokers, while 17% or 2,639 were made by the brokers to Soh.
To stay ahead of Singapore and the region’s corporate and economic trends, click here for Latest Section
With this, Teo highlighted that Soh was in fact the one constantly contacting the brokers, contrary to his narrative that the brokers were the ones initiating correspondence with him in hopes of tapping on his network.
Soh’s defense counsel, N Sreenivasan disputed this stance in his closing submissions.
“My learned friend is mistaken that Soh is altruistic – he is an egoistical person,” he rebuked.
“There is no altruism there. That is the nature of people who energise, mobilise, motivate and lead. He never said he was doing charity in this instance,” he added.
Assumption of guilt
Drawing reference to the client control model, Sreenivasan went on to say that the system is based on a factual assumption of guilt.
This, he added, is seen in how Soh has been in remand for around five years.
“[The prosecution said] we will make good of our statement, instead they have said the opposite. They can’t make good of their case of what has happened,” asserted Sreenivasan.
He further noted that the amendments to the charges that were made in the course of the trial, were seemingly viewed as “inconsequential”.
Quah, who is without a lawyer, too brought up this point in her closing submissions.
“It is a travesty that I’m put in a position to defend myself on my own to defend charges that are defective – I’m only pleading for justice,” she said.
Quah also put forth her position that she had not been in control of and involved in the market manipulation scheme.
To prove this, she showed the court an email exchange in which Quah is seen questioning LionGold’s management for doling out big hangbao’s (red packets) to its management and employees during festive periods.
“Whose money are you spending?” she asks them, adding that she was always careful with how she utilised funds at IPCO International while she was CEO.
“Does this sound like I’m manipulating the market – certainly not,” she stressed.
The trial has concluded and Soh and Quah now await the verdict.
Cover image of John Soh: file photo
