05/07/2025
I did some digging this morning 🧐.
The original post was on my personal page. As mentioned, all new posts will be on here.
10 years later…
I read the article posted by the prosecution. They referred to two bank accounts; however, there were actually three they had sight of. Minor little issues.
The real problem lies in the “Obtained” and “Attempted to Obtain”! They are wrong! I knew this, and my accountants (two directors from Moore Accounts, previously Moore Stephen’s Accounts) knew it too.
Why is this important? It affects the reparation I had to pay, which is noted in the Verdict and Judgement Record.
The truth is Jacques and Tusar (Moore Stephens Accountants) were to give evidence at trial, which rattled the prosecution. They even made a 590 application before the trial to have it excluded. The application was dismissed.
The prosecution finished their evidence on the Friday.
We were due to start the defence on the Monday. On Monday, before we went into court, they called my solicitors and barrister aside.
They knew Moore Stephens were up that morning, armed with their audit report. The audit report would have caused at least “Reasonable Doubt”! A jury cannot convict when there is reasonable doubt.
So, they said if I got off, which I was, they would go after my ex-wife. That would have meant she would have a three-year court battle on her hands. I asked her if she had the strength for it, and she didn’t.
We would have used the same report in her defence. However, she couldn’t face the process and the stress.
She and I agreed that I would plead guilty just to bring the matter to an end.
Count 1 under the indictment, which is Count 1 on the Verdict and Judgement Record, relates to a property bought by a company owned by my wife. The company, Gorlyn Building Consulting Pty Ltd “GBC”, bought 18 Abbot Court, Guanaba, QLD for $1,250,000.00. The transaction included GST, which GBC was entitled to claim back from the ATO.
When the claim was made, all the documentation was provided to the ATO, audited, and found correct.
The prosecution referred to false spreadsheets and invoices. The statement is false and fake. The problem was they had no documents to point to that were false or fake. It was purely speculation.
Why was I charged? When the Bulldog matter (which was full of cover-ups) blew up, the ATO started an investigation.
They called both my ex-wife and me into an inquiry. We refused to cooperate.
They then drew an inference based on the information they had.
I should have let Moore Stephens give evidence! One of the biggest mistakes I ever made!!
Kindest and stay safe 🙏
!!MrB!!