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?
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.
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. |
No comments:
Post a Comment