Your comment is awaiting moderation.
I think must pay up before the Appeal can be valid and this payment would be an ILLEGaL issue.
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
The treatment of the properties as an expense was deliberately
design for a criminal motive as ignorance, sloppiness or carelessness is
not on. If you go to the Sandakan Dialogue the next day after ASC, KK,
AVCF was speaking like an expert ‘accountant’ or well seasoned
bookkeeper or bookcook as he mentioned accounting/bookkeeping
transactions. So AVCF knew what he was doing and no excuse. AVCF knows
all the lop holes to fill up his pocket with ill gotten gains.
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Quote from the SC 1 March minute ““OUR APARTMENTS IN BANGKOK WOULD
GIVE US RENTAL RETURNS BETTER THAN INTEREST WE GET FROM FDS.” “AND WE
ALSO EXPECT CAPITAL GAIN IN THE FUTURE”Questions : Has any rental returns come back to ADOS in the Audited accounts? How do we expect capital gain in the future when the assets in Bangkok and elsewhere are not shown as fixed assets or capital assets for the ADOS? So AVCF was mans reas as a “criminal”.
Also much losses were incurred for the Anglican Sulaman Church building costing more than RM4m being vacant most of the years already.
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
What is perjury in Court? Is the sworn Affidavit if found to be
untrue or perjury, what is the next thing we can do? Would some learned
lawyers take up this case now to nail AVCF for sure and permanently.
So end the BISHOPGATE. Praise God.
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
The Constitution of ADOS does not allow AVCF to have anything to
do with outside the area of the Diocese as defined by the Constitution.
The Bishop of Sabah (registered trustee) also deemed illegal cannot own
any properties outside of the ADOS. The properties in Bangkok are
registered in his personal name using church money.I believe AVCF also purchased properties in KL and elsewhere and in whose name were these properties registered?
All these are CBT items and AVCF must hand over all those properties so obtained /purchased back to ADOS in cash or in kind. AVCF must account every piece of properties he had mishandled since 1980s that should strictly belong to the church.
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
About the Polls on the publication of the PAC report, the Nos has
been 12 since 24 hours ago while the YES has been rising. Is it not
convincing enough that PAC report be published now? Why wait?http://thetrutheng.com/2014/02/13/how-bav-violated-the-constitution-lied/comment-page-1/#comment-9599
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Going through the SC minute of 1st March, 2009, one person said it
all and there were no dissension or comments from the members of the
SC. So what is unsigned minute means? All illegal!!! All violations
of the Constitution of the ADOS and no attendance was recorded in the
said minutes and undated. Show us the proof that AVCF is not guilty of
all things done PREROGATIVE. Elohim Amein.
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Extract from ‘libelous’ Affidavit of AVCF–In the above premises, I pray for an order that the Plaintiff’s Summons in Chambers be dismissed with costs of RM50,000.00 on the ground that the Diocese had been put to suffer substantial legal costs in engaging solicitors on urgent basis and on the further ground that this action was brought frivolously, vexatiously, scandalously and an abuse of the process of the Court.
My question is – Did the Diocese pay for the massive legal costs? If so how is this seen in the ADOS account?
No comments:
Post a Comment