Cedric K. and Madelyn D. Nunn - Page 12




                                       - 12 -                                         
          allegedly purchased from Agama Systems (Agama).  When asked if              
          the invoices were valid receipts, Mr. Nunn testified that he                
          reconstructed the invoices.  Mr. Nunn further testified that he             
          reconstructed the invoices because he paid cash and did not                 
          receive a receipt for the equipment purchased from Agama.                   
               Katherine Lam (Ms. Lam), an employee of Agama, testified on            
          behalf of respondent.  Ms. Lam testified that the invoices                  
          petitioners submitted were not legitimate Agama invoices and                
          contained multiple inconsistencies with actual Agama invoices               
          issued in 1993.  Ms. Lam and three of her associates reviewed all           
          of Agama’s invoices from 1993 and were unable to find any record            
          of equipment sold to Mr. Nunn.  On cross-examination, Ms. Lam               
          testified that there is no way to purchase equipment from Agama             
          without generating an invoice.                                              
               Petitioners submitted three invoices for car repairs                   
          allegedly for services rendered by Fondren Toyota Service.  The             
          receipts contained discrepancies in the odometer readings when              
          compared to other receipts for the same vehicle.  The three                 
          receipts resemble each other but appear to be different from                
          another receipt provided by petitioners from the same company.              
          Mr. Nunn testified that he may also have reconstructed the three            
          receipts.                                                                   
               The Court found that Mr. Nunn attempted to deceive                     
          respondent and the Court with false documents.  Overall, the                






Page:  Previous  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011