By A Correspondent| The defense case in which embattled former MA Auto Suppliers Managing Director, Michael Gordon Smith faced more intense scrutiny as he was rigorously cross examined this week in court.
Smith is facing two counts of theft trust property, 12 counts of fraud and 25 counts of corruptly concealing transactions from his principal, MA Auto founder Michael Scott Asher.
State prosecutor Mr Anesu Chirenje exposed glaring inconsistencies in Smiths defence case.
On Count 14 the state alleged that Asher agreed to allow Smiths Son, Trevor Smith to purchase a Toyota Landcruiser reg no AEL 3470 from MA Auto Suppliers for US$7500.
It was conditional on, Trevor Smith paying in full prior to taking the vehicle. Unbeknown to his boss Asher, Smith release the vehicle to his Son prior to full payment being made.
Smith denied the sale price, claimed that he already owned 40% of the vehicle.
The state further referred to evidence where, Smith later sold the same vehicle to one Mr Eugene Pike for US$7500.
Smith denied the allegations that he sold the vehicle but acknowledged that it was his signature on the agreement of sale.
He denied any wrong doing claiming that the vehicle belonged to Trevor despite him only paying US$2000 towards it.
Prosecutor, Chirenje pointed out that the agreement of sale on an MA Auto letterhead was therefore fraudulent.
On count 15 he referred to the same Landcruiser having a refurbishment and extensive repairs done at MA Auto workshop.
The quotation for the work done was US$3767.32, however no payment was ever made to MA Auto or its sister company.
Smith made several contradictions in his defense case which were picked up by the prosecution.
At one point he said he knew about the job and conceded that Trevor never paid for the work done.
Smith stated there was no obligation to pay as the work was conducted before Trevor bought the vehicle.
When confronted with the quote/ job card showing it was more than a year after Trevor took possession, Smith faltered, saying he couldn’t remember dates.
On count 12 the State alleges that MA Auto suffered a potential prejudice when Smith offered Asher a chance to purchase 3 toolboxes that allegedly belonged to his friend, Tony Oatley.
Whilst Asher never bought the tool boxes,police investigations later on revealed that MA Auto had paid for the toolboxes.
Confronted with evidence which clearly showing the payment trail by MA Auto, Smith then said he personally owned them but acknowledged having no proof of the ownership.
On count 13 the state alleges that Smith channelled a payment from a customer, Ant Bown to a company Mant Procurement based in South Africa.
In his defence outline, Smith claimed he was never part of the transaction.
Smith was later on confronted with uncontested documentary evidence showing the payment was received by a South African based company,Mant Procurement,which in turn paid a discounted amount to the supplier named Gobi X with the balance being retained within the Mant Procurement account.
Smith then claimed that the payment was channelled through Mant Procurement as the supplier stated that the payments could only be received by the “account holder”.
Smith seemed confused when he was told that Mant Procurement was not the account holder. The alleged prejudice of R24 259.83 was never recovered.
On Count 27, the state alleges that Smith did another barter deal, exchanging bed nights for him and his wife’s anniversary as payment for the work done on one Mr Preston’s vehicle. Instead of receiving the payment from the customer, Smith and his Wife got 3 nights at a luxurious safari camp in Hwange National Park.
Smith had told the customer that he had settled the bill on his behalf.
Under cross examination, Smith admitted that he never settled the debt at all, but he had intended to but was dismissed from his employment before he could.
Prosecutor, Chirenje told the court that this deal was concluded in 2021 and Smith was only dismissed in late 2022.
Chirenje further told the court that during this period Smith had entered into a second barter trade deal for accommodation for him and his wife with another customer.
That bill was also never settled before his dismissal.
Smith conceded that he never advised his Principal, Asher , of any of the allegations saying he didn’t feel the need.
On count 1, the state alleges that Smith was the mastermind and financier of a company Mant Procurement registered in the name of his friend Tony Oatley in South Africa.
Despite overwhelming evidence showing that Smith injected the full start up capital of the business and was essentially running it, he kept denying his involvement.
WhatsApp voice recordings recovered by Police Cyber technicians were played in court.
Smith could clearly be heard how they would make a profit from MA Auto and suggesting they start operating immediately.
He acknowledged that it was his voice talking to one, Oatley, but still denied being part of the company.
Company accounts and records of Mant Procurement recovered from his work laptop, shows that, Smith was a 50% equity stakeholder in the company.
An E-Mail between, Oatley, Smith and Mant Procurement bookkeeper, Sara Hayns revealed that, Oatley instructed Hayns to draft an agreement showing Smith as a 50% shareholder just in case Oatley died.
Mant Procurement records further showed that MA Auto were Mant’s only customer.
Smith said Mant Procurement did all the procurement and transport for MA Auto however later acknowledged that the actual transporter was, Lloyd Sibanda and backtracked to concede that he himself still did the procurement.
Despite the state tendering invoices from Lloyd Sibanda showing a 15% of invoice value as a transport charge, Smith maintained that he was acting in the best interest of MA Auto by using Mant Procurement who charged 25% whilst still actually using Sibanda.
Smith originally said he thought the transporters name was Lloyd Sibanda but denied saying this during cross examination.
He later admitted sending dozens of WhatsApp messages to Lloyd advising him what goods to collect and from where but in further cross examination said he didn’t know Lloyd Sibanda.
The state further alleged, with supporting documents, that Smith and Oatley were charging MA Auto an additional fee which Smith acknowledged wasn’t charged by the previous transporter.
The state further alleged, referring to previously submitted and uncontested documents,that Smith was manipulating exchange rates in his favour when sending MA money to Mant Procurement.
Smith still denied any wrong doing or involvement in Mant Procurement but did concede that he never advised his principal of the specifics of the Mant Procurement deal.
Pressed by prosecutor, Smith maintained he had no involvement in Mant Procurement as his name was not on the registration papers.
He did concede however that the documents from Mant Procurement bookkeeper shows Smith and Oatley loan accounts to be exactly the same.
ZimEye is a spread out media-network market of professionals in various fields that include arts & journalism as practiced by many of its subscribers scattered across the globe. The objective is to expose at close range facts, myths, commentaries, and news-centric developments on Zimbabwe and Africa at large.
© Copyright 2024 – ZimEye.net | ZimEye.org | ZimEye.com – Privacy Policy