- 18 -
needed cash to purchase items at auctions.
Mr. McAllister testified that each of the 101 loans was
evidenced by a separate IOU. These IOU's supposedly were used by
Mr. McAllister to create the computer-generated summary which was
offered into evidence. Mr. McAllister testified that he gave the
IOU's to Mr. McGirl when the latter signed a consolidated note
for $63,500, the amount Mr. McGirl allegedly owed to Mr.
McAllister after a $10,000 payment. However, Mr. McAllister told
Ms. Berg and Mr. Burgess that he never returned any IOU's to Mr.
McGirl. Petitioners did not offer the IOU's into evidence.
However, respondent offered into evidence IOU's created by Mr.
McGirl which were given to the MDR's criminal investigator, Mr.
Erickson, by petitioners' representative at the time, Mr. Brown.
At trial, Mr. McGirl admitted that he made up the IOU's and
forged Mr. McAllister's signature on them.
The consolidated note for $63,500 was put into evidence. It
is a demand note with interest at 10 percent, dated July 7, 1992,
with no stated maturity date or payment schedule. The
consolidated note has no interest on the amounts advanced since
September of 1988.
Mr. McAllister's testimony that he lent Mr. McGirl $73,500
over a 3-year period was vague, incredible, and contradicted in
part by his statements to Ms. Berg. The alleged documentation
for all 101 loans was missing. No payments were ever made on the
loans until a single $10,000 payment was made in July 1992, after
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011