-235-
the consulting payments constituted income assigned by Ballard
and Lisle to their children. As discussed in detail infra pp.
293-295, a close examination of Kanter’s letters terminating the
consulting payments to the children is indicative of an attempted
coverup of that question.
6. Manifestly Unreasonable Credibility Determinations
a. Testimony Offered by The Five
As previously discussed, because respondent asserted that
Kanter, Ballard, and Lisle did not disclose their kickback scheme
to Schaffel, Frey, Schnitzer, and Eulich, the conclusion in the
STJ report that The Five testified credibly that they did not
intend for their payments to IRA or THC to serve as kickbacks to
Ballard and Lisle is not dispositive of the matter.
b. Ballard’s Testimony Regarding the Hyatt Transaction
The STJ report, at 76 note 29, states that Ballard’s
testimony that he discussed the Hyatt/KWJ fee agreement with A.N.
Pritzker “dispels the notion that there was collusion between
Ballard, Lisle, Kanter, and Weaver with respect to [Weaver’s
finder’s] fees.” Ballard’s testimony lacked credibility. First,
the testimony was self-serving on its face and uncorroborated by
any other witness. Second, A.N. Pritzker seemed intent upon
keeping the Hyatt/KWJ agreement a secret, even within the
Pritzker family, and, therefore, it seems implausible that A.N.
Pritzker would have spontaneously volunteered this information to
Page: Previous 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011