So doog,

Your point is that he has hired a SC for >$100 000 who has accepted all the evidence, just to speed things up. Either he is the world's worst SC or the evidence is rock solid.

P.s. it would be cheaper and quicker just to plead guilty.

SM,

As I understand it, his lawyer said "...there is little dispute over most of the facts and little dispute over charges."

That pertains to the facts of the charges, what they contain, etc.

It does not equal admitting to the allegations contained therein.

"....It would be quicker and cheaper to plead guilty."

I suppose you'd do that if you felt you were the victim of false allegations.

(Notwithstanding that Shadow Minister had him prosecuted way back when)

We'll see.....

P,

I quoted one newspaper, and the Age said:

"Today his lawyer Greg James, QC, told the Magistrates Court there is little debate over most of the facts of the case and little dispute over charges."

The facts of the case are the evidence, they are not facts about the charges. i.e. the use of the credit card to pay for prostitutes, with his driver's license (not just the number) and phone calls from his hotel room etc are accepted as fact.

The little weasel is trying to argue on a technicality that unless prostitutes had not been specifically excluded, that using union funds to pay for them was not illegal.

I called it a looong time ago, and am now at the point where I can say I told you so.

Remember when all this evidence came out, the weasel still had the full support of Labor.

<the case is expected to hinge on whether he was entitled to use HSU credit cards for personal expenses>

What were the conditions governing its use?

Commenting generally and not on that case.
A CEO has fiduciary reponsibility to ensure that there is regular professional and comprehensive audit of all risks affecting the company/public agency and that those risks are satisfactorily managed through a system of well designed,robust controls that are regularly subjected to comprehensive independent audit. The Accounting Standards are also relevant.

However what if the CEO isn't concerned to have the audit committee and controls in place?

Might it be that the controls applicable to the credit card insofar as the CEO is concerned and maybe senior management are weak?

It isn't principled or ethical, but many a CEO has side-stepped accountability that way and most even manage to shift blame to others down the line for not making sure the controls were strong, regularly reviewed and going even further, to blame the junior accounts staff for not making the CEO aware of his card uses.

Of course any CEO who forgets that the organisation is not there for his private benefit and that its assets are not his own would not be likely to reward any subordinate who drew his attention to those facts. But that is why such 'minor' and 'stodgy' guides as accounting standards exist, and auditors too.

Yabber on as much as you like, SM

Thomson has admitted to nothing.

Despite and overly keen media response to his lawyer's rhetoric....which is why Thomson felt the need to release the statement.

You know, the one which goes "....Despite some media reports, I am not making any admissions..."

Notwithstanding your HUGE and insatiable ego.....you are not at the point where you can call anything.

P,

Wiggle as you try, while I don't have a signed confession from the weasel, accepting the evidence as fact leaves no room for doubt.

I would give up trying to defend the indefensible.