- 9 -
calculations. Agent Gannaway’s report, however, is fatally
flawed.
First, in determining the total amount received by
petitioner, Agent Gannaway relied on information obtained from
Hood. Hood, the only witness testifying as to how much
petitioner received, was not credible. His testimony was self-
serving and laden with prevarications. In addition, for purposes
of determining the profit percentages attributable to petitioner
and Hood, Agent Gannaway relied on information obtained from
certain members of the charities. Although Agent Gannaway
testified that the members were certain of the percentages
petitioner and Hood received, at trial their testimonies
contained numerous inconsistencies and, to varying degrees, were
not credible. We also note that some of those charity members
were inappropriately receiving a portion of the bingo proceeds.
Furthermore, Agent Gannaway’s report did not include
corresponding deposit slips to support his calculations of
approximately 40 entries (i.e., relating to Ruritan Club). With
respect to Handicaps Unlimited, the original financial reports
were lost prior to trial, and no copies of such reports were
proffered by respondent. Thus, respondent’s determinations are
critically flawed, and virtually all the testimonial evidence was
not credible. As a result, the Court is required to accept
respondent’s incorrect determinations, recompute the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011