TO: TPI legal team » 0 Tanggapan

Saya baca kontan hari kamis 21 jan 2010 soal pk ke MA dg bukti baru. Sesudah saya membaca berita itu saya menjadi terheran2 dengan kwalitas orang2 dari pihak plaintiff. Terus-terang hanya di Indonesia orang2 spt ini bisa mencapai posisi top pada perusahaan besar.Dari bukti baru tsb jelas sudah terlihat what sort of person SW is, sebab SW malah membuka peluang lebar2 untuk semua pihak menuntut dia dg tuduhan penipuan. karena saya teringat SW itu membuat ijasah palsu SH dari universitas trisakt, yang setelah melalui proses pengadilan telah terbukti secara sah bhw SW adalah pembuat ijasah palsu tsb, Terus saya cek ulang situs2 lama dan SW disitu secara implisit mengakui hal itu (...saya tidak pernah menggunakan gelar tersebut..., dan mengenai seorang officer dari fakultas hukum trisakti mengkonfirm bhw SW tidak pernah kuliah di trisakti,dan ijasah itu benar palsu). Di article Kontan hari ini dibilang pada point satu soal SW and partners yang melakukan correspondence dengan BNI pada December 1996. I assume SW and Partners was a law firm. Punch line: Bukannya seorang dengan ijasah SH palsu akan punya masalah besar jika membuka law firm? Sama dengan seorang dr medis palsu tetapi membuka praktek dokter. Dan seluruh pihak yang pernah berurusan dengan SW dan partners bisa menuntut SW dan partners oleh karena penggunaan ijasah palsu (kasus penipuan) dan apapun produk dari law firm tsb akan bermasalah didepan hukum, let alone before the Supreme Court, the highest law in the land. Terus kedua saya baca mengenai SBC a huge european banking house, menyatakan bersedia membeli sub bond tsb, dan dalam waktu satu hari, sebuah surat dari SBC menyatakan telah membayar bond tsb, walaupun suatu hal yang rada aneh karena arranger bond tidak disebut2 dalam confirmasi pembayaran tsb. PErtanyaanya, banking house macam apa mau membeli sub bond yang, sampai saya menulis ini, tidak jelas coupon rate nya berapa. Assuming it was true the SBC did buy that weird bond, i can only think one thing why a well regarded banking house willing to do that: because it was a back-to-back transaction. Guess whose money SBC used to purchase the bond? How about, "the one whose name you shouldnt say". Maybe it is wrong, i hope it is wrong because SBC is in such a big mess if they do acquire this bond. I can give you a question out of so many question that come out of this, that is: the BOD and stockholders of the SBC will ask the executive committee in the next stockholders meeting: What the heck you were thinking acquiring some weird bonds with no coupon rate over its entire lifespan, and it is not a zero coupon either, since you bought them at face value. Well, the mollah gone to austrian banks in 98, certainly those people aint respect SBC taking all those extra steps to serve its probably most important wealth management client at that time. so Honestly, with this PK, the plaintiff moving into very dangerous waters by putting SBC name for PK to the supreme court. If I were the defendant I would go straight to SBC and demand them to show me the legal papers acquiring the bonds and go straight to Financial Times or NYT feeding the journalists how bankers acquiring those worthless bonds in terms of returns, and lets see how hell break loose at SBC, not to add the flavour of dubious money finding its way into SBC. If SBC cannot refuse to cooperate, citing all shits like agency relationship and all that, because its name is in the PK. So, if they dont comment about that that it is true that bought the bond, and it has dire consequences in financial community. So if SBC said no never bought it even we did consider to buy it, then the novum is a trash and SBC gonna sue the plaintiff. Not in this time not in any time, a well-respected banking house will let itself exposed before the entire world. Therefore,there is only one scenario left: the PK to the supreme court must have wrong novum. Because there is no way SBC can be that stupid 14 years ago. It lead to one question; Why SW can be so reckless putting SBC name at the novum? The answer is obvious. (only if i knew at that time that I could end up as a CEO of a top corporation with that ijasah palsu) (btw a dude with ijasah palsu really show his value) and one other possibility left: SW is just a small guy, the one/s behind him was/were the one who gave the order. Let SBC deals with them. And could someone tell SHR that she looks even more pathetic, even more than during the busang brouhaha, but hey that is not TPI problem. SO: hit SW hard and square because he exposes his jugular with that SW and Partners thing. And someone should go to switzerland to give them court order to show before the Indonesian Supreme Court. It is gonna be fun. but you need to do it now, while it is hot and dont make assumption nor underestimating your opponent ridiculousness because with this PK they proof themselves for being determined. What to do to a determined opponent? Give them a legal fatal blow. Because they will do this again if you let it go, like what happened after that soft treatment from the ijasah palsu round.

Beri Tanggapan Laporkan