Rebekah Brooks charged in court for concealing documents, PwC Senior Partners remain free.

Rebekah Brooks and her husband, Charlie, have been charged with conspiracy to pervert the course of justice over the phone-hacking inquiry....In a third charge, Mr and Mrs Brooks, Mr Hanna, Mr Edwards and Mr Jorsling are accused of conspiring to conceal documents....


The ongoing trial in the Kuala Lumpur High Court began in August 2011. At the start of the trial, PwC's Senior Partners decided to conceal 162 sensitive e-mails, letters and documents, and in fact manipulated matters so that there was no Discovery of Documents before the trial.

This concealment of documents became untenable when other parties, including us, the Group of Six, received evidence from certain PwC insiders, which was hitherto hidden. As the pressure to reveal the full truth became unbearable, PwC Malaysia was ordered by PwC International to reveal what had been hidden from the courts and the counter parties in the lawsuit.

The documents were revealed in January 2012, and with its addition, we have a body of evidence that paint a clear picture of the litany of misdeeds and fraudulent behaviour by PwC over the years; more than enough for a bestseller or two.

What interests us at the moment is the difference we see in how the concealment of documents is handled in Malaysia, when compared to other Commonwealth countries.

In the News of the World phone hacking probe, we see how it's Editor, Rebekah Brooks and other key executives are charged in the Westminster Magistrates' Court with conspiracy to pervert the course of justice, with the third charge relating to the conspiracy to conceal documents. This relentless pursuit of justice happens even though the Brook's are close friends of British PM David Cameron.




Rebekah Brooks, charged with conspiracy to conceal documents, amongst others.

 But the same situation is not seen in Malaysia, even though we are modelled after the English Justice System.

We have instead, PwC running riot over the KL High Court rules, and even using fabricated documents while they were hiding the real documents in the trial.

In any other country, PwC's Senior partners would have been charged in court by now, and not even David Cameron would have been able to give them a "Get Out of Jail Free" pass.




Faiz Azmi and Sridharan Nair, if the Courts did charge your Senior Partners with conspiracy to conceal documents, will you find the corridors of your office strangely silent, with not a creature stirring?


PwC Malaysia, "Sepandai pandai tupai melompat, akhirnya jatuh ke tanah juga".

PwC Malaysia MD's witness statement would have sent him to jail in most other countries

We have just obtained these latest explosive documents from our PwC Insider, relating to the trial which is set to resume on the 22nd of May, 2012.

In the witness statement by PwC's MD, Chin Kwai Fatt, that we have received from our PwC Insider, Chin Kwai Fatt claims no knowledge of the Dow Jones Documents.



PwC Malaysia's MD, Chin Kwai Fatt, claims to have never seen the Dow Jones Documents, which use Chiron's Method to decipher the movement of the Dow Jones Index.

 Chin Kwai Fatt, was the Quality Assurance Director for the assignment, which is why he is being sued in his personal capacity as the third defendant in the lawsuit.

The Dow Jones Documents (the "Dow Jones Flow Charts" and "The Workings For The Dow Jones Flow Charts") are 200 flow charts, the Intellectual Property of the client, which are deciphered using Chiron's Method, to presage the movement of the Dow Jones Index, and formed the basis for the total valuation of RM 75 million given by PwC Malaysia to the client.



PwC Malaysia's Internal Valuation Checklist, with the handwritten notes by PwC's partner Jayaram Krishnamoorthy, which clearly states that they have identified the Intellectual Property of the client (Including Chiron's Method) as well as how its value is manifested.

 Let us recap for the moment. PwC Malaysia has given a valuation of RM 75 million to the client, based totally on the 200 flowcharts which make up the Dow Jones Documents, which are deciphered using Chiron's method, which they have even identified in the internal Valuation Checklist, and which the Quality Assurance Director for the assignment, Chin Kwai Fatt, the MD of PWC Malaysia, claims to have never seen, and says further that neither were these documents required for the assignment.

There are no tangible assets in the valuation. The sum of RM 75 million reflects the value PwC Malaysia identified only on the Intellectual Property of the client. Now, how do you identify the intangible assets, without seeing it, and furthermore, how do you arrive at a figure of RM 75 million if you have never seen it?

Chin Kwai Fatt and Jayaram Krishnamoorthy, how do you identify it as Chiron's method, and ascertain that the value in the Intellectual Property manifests as cash flows, and give a valuation of RM 75 million, then claim to have never seen it?

What sorcery is this?

What magical methods does PwC Malaysia use to arrive at a valuation of 75 million Ringgit, without even laying eyes on the very documents which were mysteriously identified in their very own internal Valuation Checklist? And we have now witness statements by the very person whose handwriting is in the Valuation Checklist, Jayaram Krishnamoorthy, and the Quality Assurance Director for the assignment, PwC's MD Chin Kwai Fatt, that the documents were never in their line of sight!!

This intellectual property, i.e Chiron's Method as identified in the Valuation Checklist, and the Dow Jones Documents which uses Chiron's method, are the only assets in the RM75 million valuation,. There were no tables or chairs or any other inventory or fixed asset in the valuation.

But now, after having valued it at RM 75 million, with no amortization mind you, PwC Malaysia through its MD, Chin Kwai Fatt, claim to have never seen the documents.

In most other countries, PwC's MD will now be behind bars for perjury, the giving of false testimony.

The trial is set to resume on the 22nd of May, 2012, in the KL High Court.

Why PwC Malaysia cannot afford Jayaram Krishnamoorthy and Chin Kwai Fatt to take the witness stand - Part 1

Paul Boorman, we have asked you many questions, which we hope has given you much food for thought. Here are some more questions for you to ponder open.

Paul Boorman, we are sure that you are familiar with the internal document that PwC Malaysia uses, called the Valuation Checklist. What this Valuation Checklist contains is all the facts that PwC has confirmed and verified for clients, as a part of the Valuation process.

Now, in the facsimile of the Valuation Checklist that we have received, we can see that the client's Intellectual Property has been verified and confirmed.

The client's Intellectual Property, in the form of 200 diagrams, had been checked and confirmed, and PwC has concluded in the Valuation Checklist, that the client's Intellectual Property has a 80% probability of working. You with us so far, Mr Boorman?

On the basis of what they had checked and confirmed, the client was given a valuation of RM 75 million based primarily on his Intellectual Property.

The trial started in August 2011, and the Valuation Checklist we are referring to was one of the 162 concealed documents which PwC claimed was not in their possession.

The decision to conceal these 162 documents, including the Valuation Checklist, was made by Chin Kwai Fatt, Johan Raslan and a few more senior partners of PwC Malaysia.

During the trial, when Chin Kwai Fatt (the ex Managing Director) and Jayaram Krishnamoorthy (now a Partner in PwC) put their witness statements in court, they were absolutely confident that the Valuation Checklist will never be revealed.

To their utter dismay, PwC Malaysia was forced to reveal these documents in January of 2012, 5 months after the trial started.

They have identified, with handwritten notes, from this internal document of PwC Malaysia, that they had tested and identified the client's Intellectual Property, and gave it a valuation of RM 75 million.

When both Jayaram Krishnamoorthy and Chin Kwai Fatt, in their confidence that the documents will never be revealed, stated in their respective witness statements that they never saw the client's Intellectual Property, nor had they taken it and tested it, they took a huge risk, because if the documents were ever revealed, they will also be revealed as liars. 

Now that the witness statements of Jayaram Krishnamoorthy and Chin Kwai Fatt clearly contradicts their internal Valuation Checklist, they cannot take the witness stands, as they will only be doing so to perjure themselves.

Paul Boorman, the Valuation Checklist is document 173 in PwC Malaysia's bundle of documents. Please read the witness statements by Chin Kwai Fatt and Jayaram Krishnamoorthy, and the internal Valuation Checklist, and ask yourself this question. Is this not perjury?

Paul Boorman, you have a duty to PwC, to ensure that perjury is not added to the litany of misdeeds and fraud perpetrated by PwC Malaysia.

One final note Paul Boorman, this latest chapter will be one of the stories told in the upcoming book, one we think has all the ingredients to become a bestseller.

Shearn Delamore's Nad Segaram allegedly suffers from police brutality during the Bersih 3.0 rally

On behalf of the Group of Six, we would like to extend our sympathies to Shearn Delamore's Nad Segaram for being allegedly hammered by the police, to the extent of having cuts that needed stitches on his head. Must have been some experience.

Nad Segaram is the right hand man, the go-to guy, for Shearn Delamore's Rabindra Nathan, who is the counsel for PwC in the ongoing civil suit in the KL High Court.

We were very sad to hear that he had allegedly become a victim of police "brutality" at the Bersih rally recently, to the extent that he is now sporting stitches on his person.



Shearn Delamore's Nad Segaram, before Bersih 3.0

 But now is not the time for mushy emotions, but for some hard hitting (forgive the pun) questions.

Nad Segaram, you and your mentor, Rabindra Nathan do work for GLC's and UMNO linked companies, but yet, you attended Bersih 3.0. The very same rally our Prime Minister Najib has called an attempt to overthrow the government by certain parties form the other side.

Leave aside the irony that PM Najibs brother, Datuk Johari Razak is a Senior Partner at Shearn Delamore, how do you justify your attending the rally as an active participant to the extent that the police had to cast their baleful glance upon your person?

Where is the congruence between what you do from 9 to 5, and what you attempted to do last Saturday? Why will you even be a part of an attempt to overthrow the very Government that gives you a reason to go to the office everyday?


Rabindra Nathan, were you there at Bersih 3.0 as well? Have you disavowed your pro BN Stance?

 Rabindra and Nad, if you actually believe that the government has to be overthrown, then walk away from your 9 to 5 jobs, and wear yellow wherever you go. In fact, Nad Segaram, you should now file a suit against the Polis for the alleged brutality you suffered, being a lawyer and all that.

The bigger question is this, should Rabindra Nathan and Nad Segaram continue to represent PwC who are 100% behind the PM and BN? Or was this a case of a Shearn Delamore partner hedging his bets in case PR takes over the government?

Do Rabindra and Nad Segaram agree with the PM's statement that Bersih 3.0 was an attempt to overthrow the government? Have the two of you disavowed your pro BN stance?

While we cannot confirm this, several PwC partners were also said to be near Nad Segaram when he took his hits, but as we said, we cannot confirm this, so no names will be mentioned.

Walk your talk, and don't be different things to different people. What explanation are you going to give Datuk Johari Razak and the other Senior Partners when they find out you are trying to bat for the other team on the sly? For that matter, what are you going to tell your clients, PwC Malaysia?