- 5 -
While petitioners felt a moral obligation to repay these
funds, neither Mr. Latief nor Mr. Tandiono ever asked for, or
expected, repayment or any interest in petitioners’ businesses.
John Park met with Mr. Latief on numerous occasions during the
years in issue. During those meetings, Mr. Latief informed John
that he did not expect repayment. Mr. Latief was insulted and
angry when John insisted on paying him back with interest, and
told John “this was not a business transaction.” Similarly, when
David Park met with Mr. Tandiono, Mr. Tandiono did not want
repayment, because he intended only to help David. In addition,
Mr. Tandiono believed it was inappropriate to require repayment
from someone experiencing financial difficulties and that God
would bless him for helping someone in need.
Respondent was suspicious of the inconsistencies between
petitioners’ lifestyles and their reported income and believed
petitioners were “skimming” money from several of their cash-
intensive businesses or from a Presbyterian church they
established. Initially, petitioners lied to respondent about the
source of their funds, saying they had received the funds from
their father. Respondent was not satisfied with this response.
Petitioners eventually informed respondent that Mr. Latief and
Mr. Tandiono provided them with the funds. Respondent’s Criminal
Investigation Division found no evidence of “skimming” and could
not disprove that Mr. Latief or Mr. Tandiono was the source of
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011