Often Partisan

The Carson Trial – Day 14

Key prosecution witness Roderick Sutton continued to give evidence from the witness box as the trial of Carson Yeung on five counts of money laundering entered its fourteenth day.

Hong Kong Daily News reports that Mr Sutton made further remarks and comments on the defence submission with respect to Carson’s wealth in the period in question.The defence contended that Carson had invested HKS15million (approx £1.27million) in the Venetian Macau and Wynn Macau casinos in 2007, in addition to other investments via SJM Holdings.

Mr Sutton criticised the defence submissions about these investments in Macau casinos, pointing out that most of the documents provided by the defence dated from 2008, one year after the period of investigation (2001-2007).

He went on to point out that the defence contention that Carson had earned money from equity investments was contrary to his analysis from information provided

South China Morning Post also reports on the trial, stating that from looking at travel records Sutton showed that Carson wasn’t even in Macau when he made most of the requests for cash cheques in 2004 and 2005.

The case resumes on Tuesday, June 4 at 12:00pm (5am BST) to allow the defence more time to prepare to cross-examine Mr Sutton and to study new documents.

Tags: , ,

52 Responses to “The Carson Trial – Day 14”

  • Lee says:

    Send him down, I can’t begin to say how much I want him to go down, the longer the better, I need the phone number of his investment broker, be nice to put my hands on 81million in a couple of years time

  • Jim Hatton says:

    How long before the defence put their case forward.

  • daza says:

    Big thanks again for the updates, kro

  • Jim Hatton says:

    Cheers mate

  • Oldbluenose says:

    After yesterday, when the defence [ appeared ] to score, The prosecution appear back on track, ??.

  • KRM says:

    Didn’t HSBC launder money for the Mexican drug cartel, sanctioned nations, and possibly “terrorists” organizations as well? They got fined a months earnings and not a single person went to prison… They should just do the same for Carson and let us all move on with our lives.

    • pete says:

      Move on with our lives…. Bit dramatic. I love the club but can’t say my life has been on hold.

      • KRM says:

        How dare you! If you’ve not been absolutely glued to your computer screen during every second of this enthralling drama, then you’re simply no real supporter…

        Or perhaps I wasn’t really insinuating that all of our lives have been placed on pause this entire time, and instead was just pointing out that a banking corporation (namely HSBC) has laundered billions for nefarious parties with only a fine ordered for the transgression, and that relatively speaking Carson’s alleged act was nowhere near as malicious in comparison, thus should be sorted by now with far less a penalty, and he should be allowed to get back to his life…

        • almajir says:

          Or – you might have compared apples with grapefruit…

          • KRM says:

            So laundering money isn’t comparable to laundering money?!?!

          • almajir says:

            Well for a start it’s different jurisdictions – US law and HK law are somewhat different.

            For two, there has been MASSIVE criticism over the speed of the issuing of the fine

            One is corporate by a company, one is by a person.

            Completely, utterly different scenarios.

          • KRM says:

            Laundering money is laundering money; makes no difference if it’s done in Hong Kong, the USA, the UK, or Deep Space 9; whether it’s done by a single person, group of persons, a corporation, or a demi god, it’s the same act… Laws are different everywhere, I’m aware. Point was that there shouldn’t be a place in this universe where a corporation gets off with a single months fine while a single individual faces getting raked over the coals for doing the same thing. Laundering money.

            Yes the “scenarios” are different, but I’m speaking to a much larger point… Corporations (globally) being held to a far lower standard than actual human beings.

        • pete says:

          How dare I? Well let me put it this way, I have been going to blues for over 20 odd years gone and away and I yes do look at my computer screen plenty. However, on terms pod being something to move on from setting your wife spend 2 years on hospital beating cancer and having your soon having to yet through it was a but more of a challenge and put my life on hold a bit more I guess then I am bit a proper fan then.

          • pete says:

            Please excuse spelling.

          • KRM says:


            I thought it was entirely obvious that I had tongue firmly in cheek with my “glued to computer” bit, as to be honest, I’d fail that test as well because I’ve personally paid very little (to no) attention to Carson’s trial… That aside, I’m sorry to hear that your family has had to doubly fight cancer in recent times, and I sincerely hope all are now well in remission, and never have to fight that devil again.

        • ChrisG says:

          KRM I think you’ve totally missed the point here, HK law is HK law, US law is US law, & UK law is UK law, for example you can’t give someone the death penalty in the UK just because they have it in parts of the US (more’s the pity) even in parts of the US you can’t give the death penalty & thats the same country! !HSBC were NOT tried in HK & CY IS NOT being tried in the US, understand? or to put it even more simply you can’t charge someone in one country on another countries law.

          • chudlt says:

            (Mores the pity) Maybe it’s because we are more civilised that we don’t have the death penalty.

          • KRM says:

            As I mentioned previously, I understand laws are different from country to country (and as you’ve pointed out state to state in USA), and I don’t need for you to speak slow and simply for me to grasp it (though I thank you very much indeed)… MY POINT was that nowhere in this UNIVERSE should there be a place (Hong Kong or otherwise) where corporations get held to such a low standard as HSBC has (months fine and no prison time), while human beings get held to a standard which may find them stripped of all they own, broke, and imprisoned…

            HERE IS THE POINT… In the USA, UK, HK, etc. money launderers (single individuals) more often than not find themselves in prison and/or fined far more than a months earnings… I believe that if Carson was a ranking official within one of HK’s most important banking corporations accused of money laundering, he’d find himself in far less trouble.

            The point is that rights for global corporations have superseded the rights of man ACROSS the PLANET.

            Without trying to get all into that, I was simply taking the position that it is wrong.

  • zxcv says:

    Well if Carson is to clear his name he has to provide documentation for the period of investigation as the onus is on him to do so. The only documents submited by the defence are for 2008 the year after the period in question. So is CY saying he cant prove his case by not being able to prove where his funds came from ? What i dont understand is how on earth did he get the 81 mill to buy BCFC.and will he have to prove this to the court? wonder if he will be called to the stand to give evidance, ? loads of questions

  • Mac says:

    Wouldn’t it be great if the court said the blues were bought with stolen money and made Gold and Sully give it back lol

    • Pedant says:

      No it would be complete crap, I made about £5000 from selling my BCFC plc shares to Grandtop at £1 each (having bought them at 20p each not long before). I ain’t paying any court in Hong Kong.

      Anyway Carson Yeung only bought about 15% of Grandtop shares when the club was bought – 85% of the money came from a public share offering, and this is not the subject of money laundering charges. And the court can only make CY pay for the proceeds of crime.

      • Mac says:

        Get a sense of humour – I was only joking –(Lol = laugh out loud)

        For goodness sake!

        • Bluenosesol says:

          Hi Mac,

          I made the same point previously, Gold went on Piers Morgan and sniggered as he said that the money he conned out of CY and Co would prove to be the best deal ever done in football. In other words he was laughing at our expense whilst implying that by ripping off the Chinese investors, he was trousering an unbelievable profit and endangering the future of BCFC.

          It would therefore be truly hilarious if the courts could have any sway on Gold and his co-horts dirty money.

          Could see WHAM in the Conference and Gold on Benefits!

          • chas says:

            Gold wasn’t saying that at all..It wasn’t, and isn’t , Yeung’s fault the shit we find ourselves in, it is purely down to the Players we had at the time..If they had tried to get one more point from the Cup Win to the end of the Season, we would have stayed up..Blame the right people.

  • Tony says:

    Well the defence has been picked apart by the witness Mr Sutton, he states the submissions are for the year 2008 one year after the inquiry date.
    This is Carsons worst day so far and its looking bleak for him.
    Slightly of topic does anyone agree with my dream team of Mcleish and Savage management once we get sorted with new owners?.

  • Tony says:

    mmmmm is quite close I see

  • Tony says:

    Can sympathise with KRMs point, HSBC have hardly been paragons of virtue in their dealings in the past. However as has been explained a little different.

  • twobobsandatrev says:

    Robbie Savage! I remember him before the Blackburn match on the last match of the first of McLeish’s two relegations saying he wanted us to go down. A real King Canute of a man. And he sounds like the Clitheroe Kid. Stick with Clark. This time next year he’ll be our hero as his kids avoid the drop on the last day of the season with 53 points.

  • JohnBond says:

    Couldn’t afford Caddis couldn’t afford Taylor’s wages who next?? Really wish Zigic would just say yeah I’m not helping the club if anything iv done them a lot of damage my time is to leave now.. Then maybe we could bring in 3-4 freebies and still be 10-15 grand better off on the wages side of things really frustrates me.. That way we coukd have a good push for promotion, cant wait for his contract to run out by then the parachute payments will be gone and he would of left us in sh*t street, I hope I haven’t annoyed anyone just bugs me

  • JohnBond says:

    I know it’s not all his fault but I just find him a poor excuse of a 6million 50-70k a week, 6ft 8 inch football player.. Shocking bet Valencia are laughing

    • chudlt says:

      How come this thread as been hijacked into I hate Ziggy thread?

      • tmsblues says:

        Cos he and his salary are a major drain on the club. Next Season we’ll be 8 down and 2.5 up. He needs shifting now but like the other freebies we have on offer who’ll take on that salary? Maybe not his fault but it doesn’t help when his agent makes fun of the Clubs situation re his contract being worth 5 others that could replace him. And as usual before any ‘Window’ we get the Mail running the ‘Ziggy- Oh I’m so happy in Birmingham, my family just loves the place’ story rolled out… wouldn’t we all just love 60k per week (maybe 70k for the final year!) and only working part time and barely breaking sweat through most of it too!!

  • StevieW says:

    I think what Yeungs defence (Defense) are trying to say is sorry but the dates in question we do not have a scrap of evidence (Evidance) to prove otherwise but we have been good boys since those dates and wikipedia can back that up.

    Also as a side note the Bham mail has some words about potential buy out by Mr Yu.

Leave a Reply

Personalised Gifts for a Bluenose
Haircuts and League Cups
Open Tax Services
Corporate Solutions UK
PJ Planning
Rodal Heating