The Pinnochio Court Case

Post co-Author: Windy

I wrote about having Waited eight long years for retribution

After that hearing session, the next was schedule for Mar 29th and Mar 30th. And this is what happened…

On Mar 29th.

Plaintiffs’ lawyer requested for a postponement to Mar 30th because he had to be present at the Appeals Court for some other case. Appeals Court takes precedence over the Lower Court.

On Mar 30th at 3 pm

Hearing resumed with the Plaintiff at the stand. Hearing continued with unfinished cross-examination by the Defence Counsel (my lawyer).

Two days before that, our lawyer messaged me to prepare any further evidence in four Xerox sets. His message read: “provide me with any further evidence so that I can knock the guy down”.

As counselled, I responded with some more evidence that I believed would make the Plaintiff “pee in his pants”. It would damage the Plaintiff’s business integrity, his allegations and his credibility.

What was the additional evidence?

He had issued a set of Invoices that displayed:

• the same Invoice Number,
• the same date,
• the same items sold
• the name of the Indonesian buyer
• the address of my wife’s Company

These Invoices, the value stated that the total amount was fully paid and there was nothing owing.

The Plaintiff submitted to the Court Invoices that displayed:

• the same Invoice Number,
• the same date,
• the same items sold
• these had the name of my wife’s Company and address

These Invoices the values were greater and it stated nothing was paid and therefore the full amount is unpaid.

When queried, the Plaintiff explained that I had instructed him to create a separate set of Invoices with of a false lower value to cheat the Customs Officer and gain a reduction in taxes during export.

He lied. When asked if he could prove that accusation, he replied, “NO”.

How will I rebut this accusation if the Plaintiff’s lawyer queries me about that during my cross-examination?

This would be my refutation.

• I did not give such an instruction.
• Foremostly, the export was an arrangement between the Plaintiff and his buyer.
• I have no authority to give instructions for a business that I do not own.
• I have nothing to gain by lowering the value on the Invoices because I do not pay taxes if there is export levy for the goods.
• I have no vested interest in the business in Indonesia. It’s wholly owned by the Indonesian of which I do not have any share as a partner.

The Plaintiff handed a letter purportedly issued by his ex-Company’s Directors which authorizes him to represent the Company on this Court Case. Our lawyer detected something suspicious in the Letter and then demanded that two of the three Company Directors be present at the next hearing.

(note: during the past 8 years, not any of the three Directors were present at the Court house.)

Our lawyer openly accused him of having lied in Court about his claim that he was a Director in his ex-Company.

As the cross examination progressed, there were more lies and contradictions from the Plaintiff. There was an evident shift in the Plaintiff’s handling to queries. Instead of pinning on the prime allegation that the unpaid goods were delivered to my wife’s business, the Plaintiff liberally used my name in most of his answers. For whatever he could not answer, he said that I was the cause for why he is being asked or queried.

Plaintiff shoots himself in his own feet

Apparently trying to do damage control, the Plaintiff was re-examined by his lawyer and it turned out even more worse for the Plaintiff. Having lied so much under pressure and having contradicted on several counts, he declared that I had never paid him for any deliveries of the said goods that were bought by the Indonesian buyer.

My lawyer was clearly surprised with the Plaintiff’s answer. By declaring that I had never paid for the goods, it also means that I am not the buyer in the first instance.

The Plaintiff obviously has been coached by his lawyer how to answer this time because the Plaintiff added a new one to his oft repeated answers, On several occasions he replied, “I can’t answer that”.
.
(Previously, he would use any of these typical answers, “I don’t know” and “I think so”).

So what comes next?

Our next hearing is scheduled on Apr 23rd. This time my wife will be cross-examined by the Plaintiff’s lawyer.

This cross-examination I believe will be short as my wife will clearly deny that she had ever ordered the goods and that she was not aware of such a huge sum of credit, that there were no earlier warnings from the Plaintiff of this unpaid amount until she was served a Summons to Court.

The Showdown

Obviously, the big showdown will be between the Plaintiff’s lawyer and I when I take the stand. It could happen on the next scheduled hearing on Apr 23rd or on a later date. It all depends on how much time is taken to cross-examine my wife on Apr 23rd.

What is my lawyer’s evaluation after Mar 30th hearing?

He believes that our position remains sound and unassailable with all the evidence we have produced.

He also believes that the Plaintiff has done heaps of damage to his own credibility such as:

1. He lied that he is a Director
2. He lied about his salary
3. He fabricated his evidence with a forged signature of my wife.
4. He fabricated the unpaid amount by mixing in the unpaid Invoices, seven paid Invoices from my wife’s Company.
5. He lied that he did not know the Indonesian
6. He lied that the exported goods to Indonesia was my instructions. He could not prove it when challenged.

Oh! I have lost count of the rest of his web of lies. Not important to remember. I pay my lawyer to do that for me. Ha ha ha .

What is my evaluation after Mar 30th hearing?

I think that the Plaintiff’s Counsel will try to cast doubts on the acceptability of the evidence produced in Court with the use of any of these methods:

1. That I was in cahoots with my wife to cheat the Plaintiff or
2. That in the absence of a Contractual Agreement between the Plaintiff and I, the Plaintiff had an implicit understanding that whatever was transacted it was between the Plaintiff and I and had nothing to do with the Buyer or
3. That my wife’s answers and my answers contradict each other during his cross- examination.

I do not see any other way that the Plaintiff’s lawyer can debunk the evidence already served to the Judge.

As it appears right now.

Thus far, it is apparent that the Plaintiff and his lawyer are changing their line of attack.

The now attempt to portray that I was dishonest, misled the Plaintiff and it caused the Plaintiff a loss of tens of thousand dollars to his ex Company.

They will have a difficult time at the end of the trial to weave a hastily hatched sub-plot into the main issue and demand for justice because:

1. I am not the accused.
2. In my country, the law does not permit a lawsuit to be filed for an issue that is over 6 years old.

To readers who are reading this for the first time, this is the gist of the matter being brought for Justice:

• An ex-Supplier met me and canvassed for additional business support.
• I recommended an Indonesian who wished to start his Computer business in Indonesia.
• The ex-Supplier supplied goods to the Indonesian.
• During the second half of the first year of business, the Indonesian ran into financial difficulties and was unable to make payments on time.
• The ex-Supplier used Credit Collectors to retrieve the sum owing. It failed.
• The Indonesian absconds.
• The ex-Supplier hired legal counsel to serve a Civil Suit against my wife, alleging that the unpaid goods were delivered to her.