BVI Trial Part 2 – Day 2 – Questions in English, answers in Mandarin

October 21, 2009 · 0 comments

This entry is part 8 of 13 in the series Diplomatic Fraud

Lennox Linton’s Morning Report

Former Ambassador to Beijing David Hsiu is expected to tell the Court through a translator today, why Government does not own the majority shares of his Rich Victory subsidiary that was transferred by director’s resolution in 2006 but never registered.

Hsiu, the partner of Grace Tung in the 80 million dollar Layou River Economic Citizenship scandal, does not speak or understand much

English and will therefore address the court in Mandarin

Hsiu’s testimony will follow completion of the cross examination of Accountant Kieron Pinard Byrne who stands accused of cooking up stories about undocumented, unsigned conditions that were not met as reasons for his refusal to register the share transfer.

Queens Counsel Reginald Armour

In response, Pinard-Byrne made the startling suggestion that his action to abort the Rich Victory transfer of its majority shareholding in the Shangri-La International Holding to government was done on behalf of the Prime Minister and in the public interest of Dominica.

But the auditor, mediator and share transfer escrow agent put nothing in writing about his alleged campaign against giving government a poisoned chalice until April fools’day 2008 – more than two years after he signed as witness on the instrument of transfer for 69.3 million dollars worth of Shangri-La shares.

Pinard-Byrne confirmed under oath Tuesday that he has no financial interest in Rich Victory and is being paid for his testimony before the BVI commercial court. Indeed, his reasons in writing as to why the government does not own the shares surfaced after he was engaged to support the bid by Rich Victory to liquidate the Shangri-La behind the back of the government.

The most surprising disclosure from Pinard-Byrne on the stand Tuesday was that Dominica’s former ambassador to Beijing David Hsiu, widely believed to be the mastermind of Rich Victory has no interest in the company. It presents the intriguing situation of this major court battle over ownership a Rich Victory subsidiary company taking place without any representation from any shareholders or directors of the parent company.

The lawyers will no doubt find this alleged absence of a David Hsiu interest in Rich Victory very interesting indeed.

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: