- 11 -
The only withdrawal of funds that can be connected to Mr. Judy is
in the amount of $24,806.83.
Petitioner attempts to avoid the consequences of failing to
corroborate his testimony. He argues that at trial he was
prepared properly to introduce in evidence bank documents
establishing Mr. Judy’s cash withdrawals, “but was not advised to
by the Court or the Respondent at that time”. “The Court was
aware of these records in my possession during the November 6,
1995 Hearing, but were never asked for.” What actually occurred
at trial was that when petitioner adverted to certain bank
records in his possession we asked him whether he had shown them
to respondent. He replied that he had not. We instructed him to
show his documents to respondent so that they could be included
in a supplemental stipulation; under these conditions, we said,
we would consider accepting them as evidence. Petitioner then
qualified his offer, stating that he was unable to obtain most of
the records because the banks “weren’t required to keep records
that far back”. Petitioner did not follow the Court’s
suggestion. Nor was petitioner unaware of the regular procedures
for the introduction of documentary evidence. He received
service of the Court’s Standing Pretrial Order; he participated
in the preparation of a stipulation relating to joint exhibits;
he had already successfully introduced two exhibits into evidence
before the colloquy described above took place.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011