Slashdot Mirror


Huawei's CFO Is Being Accused of Fraud, and Her Main Defense Is a PowerPoint (theverge.com)

"Today, a bail hearing was held for Huawei's chief financial officer, who was arrested in Canada on Saturday at the request of U.S. law enforcement," reports The Verge. "The CFO, Meng Wanzhou, is facing extradition to the U.S. for conspiring to defraud banking institutions, according to the Star Vancouver." The Verge reports that her main defense is "a PowerPoint presentation that Meng had once given to explain to a bank in Hong Kong that Huawei had not violated any U.S. sanctions." From the report: Many lined up to see Meng's bail hearing today, after the extremely high-profile arrest that signified the first major break in a U.S. probe that has mostly been kept from the public. The U.S. has an arrest warrant out for Meng that was issued by a New York court on August 22nd. It has 60 days from the time of Meng's arrest on Saturday to provide Canadian courts with evidence and intent.

Meng served on the board for a Hong Kong-based company called Skycom, which allegedly did business with Iran between 2009 and 2014. U.S. banks worked with Huawei at this time, so Iran sanctions were violated indirectly, and Meng therefore committed fraud against these banks. Skycom reportedly had connections to Huawei and at the bail hearing today, Gibb-Carsley argued that Skycom was an unofficial subsidiary of Huawei's, using the same company logo. "Huawei is SkyCom," he said, "This is the crux, I say, of the alleged fraud."
The hearing also examined whether Meng would be a flight risk if she was granted the $1 million bail, part of the argument Gibb-Carsley was pushing. "Defense lawyer Martin responded by explaining the Chinese emphasis on saving face, and how Meng wouldn't want her father and Huawei to look bad. Even more than that, 'she would not embarrass China itself,' Martin said."

17 of 121 comments (clear)

  1. Did she keep a calendar? by haruchai · · Score: 3, Funny

    Without it, Brett Kavanagh's chances would have been boofed

    --
    Pain is merely failure leaving the body
    1. Re: Did she keep a calendar? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The FBI interviewed several people. Everyone they interviewed on Kavanaugh's side backed him up. Everyone on Ford's side either couldn't help, contradicted her, or indicated they didn't believe her. Her own family refused to talk to the FBI. It was intentionally limited because the Democrats wanted an open, never-ending investigation like they're doing over the "Russia collusion" investigation.

      Kavanaugh got the nomination because he was one of the most moderate options under consideration (least likely to overturn Roe v. Wade) and he was Kennedy's pick. But keep it up with the conspiracy theories.

    2. Re: Did she keep a calendar? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      They didn't interview Kavanaugh nor his (if you bothered seeing the testimony: incredibly brave, who knew this would probably not do anything other than damage her life, who passed a polygraph test) accuser. Not only that, they didn't interview other friends of Kavanaugh who were more than willing to say "he was lying" (as was seen on the more right wing newspapers that aren't Fox). Of course you bring up "Russia collusion", of course you're trying to project... because the FBI never bothered talking to Ford or Kavanaugh, so that "investigation" was a farce.

  2. $1 million bail is a joke by Snotnose · · Score: 2

    She's worth much more than that, plus dad and/or the Chinese government will pay part of it. Guilty or innocent, put me in her place and I'm running home to China first chance I get.

    1. Re:$1 million bail is a joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      “Xi has thrown thousands of political enemies in Jail for fraud and money laundering charges

      See, fixed that for you.

    2. Re:$1 million bail is a joke by dcw3 · · Score: 2

      From the linked article...
      "One of China's elite prisons has become overcrowded with political prisoners..."

      From https://freedomhouse.org/blog/...
      If there is one thing that the Chinese government would most like us to overlook, however, it is the ferocious suppression of political dissent.

      Headline speaks for itself
      https://www.economist.com/chin...

      Do you need more, or are you a Chinese troll?

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
  3. Re:This is nonsensical by Sarten-X · · Score: 2, Informative

    Intoxication might also be the reason for the headline.

    When you sober up, here's a different summary: Huawei has ties to a company named SkyCom. SkyCom did business with Iran, while Huawei did business with US banks, and Huawei was saying (to the banks) that they weren't doing any business with Iran. Mrs. Meng is on the board for both companies.

    The real legal questions, then, are:

    • 1) Is SkyCom actually Huawei? The business ties seem to be close, but whether it's considered a separate entity enough that Huawei wouldn't be responsible is a complicated question, and likely needs more evidence than is available now.
    • 2) Whether Huawei (as a company) knew that SkyCom was dealing with Iran while Huawei was dealing with the US. If Huawei knew, then it's a pretty easy fraud case. If not, then there's really no case, because U.S. law is not enforceable on Chinese companies (despite the theories of the tinfoil-hat crowd).

    In short, her defense is saying that Huawei didn't know about SkyCom's dealings, and they're presenting an internal slideshow as evidence that Huawei (as a company) thought it wasn't violating sanctions. Even if that slide's statement is incorrect, it may be enough to start pushing the idea that Huawei was acting in good faith while talking with the U.S. banks.

    --
    You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
  4. Oh there is proof by SuperKendall · · Score: 4, Interesting

    From the original article linked from the summary:

    As there is a publication ban in effect, we cannot provide any further detail at this time. The ban was sought by Ms. Meng.

    There is proof, and SHE blocked us from seeing it so it must be super bad.

    Guilty.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Oh there is proof by SuperKendall · · Score: 2

      Hey buddy, it's Canada considering the evidence to extradite her - and again it's evidence we could all otherwise see, but she blocked us from seeing it.

      Once she gets here she'll go to real court. Try to keep up, I know you are an AC and naturally dull-witted, but really

      She can be grateful she's not going to be going to whatever shithole third world court system you live under where they would just shoot her in the head and throw her in a ditch. I know that's how you live but here in civilization we have process.

      I'll let you have the last word so you can gibber to yourself.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  5. I'm sorry by William+Baric · · Score: 2, Interesting

    As someone who lives in Canada, I'd like to apologize for Canada helping the US to enforce its imperialistic policies. People of the world have to understand that we Canadians do not have any kind of backbone. The only thing we can do is to submit and then to apologize, exactly like I'm doing.

    Again, I'm sorry.

    1. Re:I'm sorry by fred911 · · Score: 2

      "Canadians do not have any kind of backbone."

      Well you guys make Molsen.. oh wait, looks like we fucked that one up. For that, we're both sorry.

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    2. Re:I'm sorry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Are you a Canadian Citizen?

      If she committed a crime, whhttps://news.slashdot.org/story/18/12/07/2315243/huaweis-cfo-is-being-accused-of-fraud-and-her-main-defense-is-a-powerpoint#y do you apologize? How are you so sure she did not commit a crime?

      Do you think corrupt leaders of state run business in China would be a better partner and protector of your freedom in Canada than the United States?

      As someone who is a good friend and admirer of Canada, your comment bothers me.

      For more than 100 years Canada and the United States have been partners against all types of dictatorships and evil. So the partnership continues and it is good for everyone. Perhaps Canada has a smaller population than the United States, but we are partners and we are in this together. The world is evil. Communist China is evil. If you deny this, then I wonder if you are really paying attention to how China controls its people.

  6. Re:Why would she need a defence? by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 2

    She's until proven guilty. If you want to prove that you shouldn't be extradited and face trial, they have a lower burden. Just like a grand jury has to agree you should be prosecuted before the trial starts. They don't need to believe it beyond a reasonable doubt, that's what the later trial is for.

    --
    Your ad here. Ask me how!
  7. Useful precedent by Archtech · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As I understand it, a US court has ordered the arrest and extradition of a Chinese corporation's CFO on charges of fraud.

    Does that mean that Chinese, European and other countries' courts will now be able to arrest and extradite the American executives responsible for the 2008 crash? Between them they caused trillions of dollars of losses worldwide, not a penny of which they paid themselves. Governments had to milk their taxpayers for said trillions in order to "make good" the balance sheets and reserves of supposedly system-critical banks and other financial institutions.

    This was the biggest fraud in the history of the world, yet how many executives have been indicted in the USA? https://radiofreethinker.files...

    Zero.

      “Ron Suskind’s Confidence Men reported that on March 27 2009, just two months after taking office, [Obama] invited the executives of thirteen leading Wall Street institutions to the White House. After listening to their arguments for why banks had to go on paying bonuses (ostensibly to get the best talent to manage their money), Obama told them: ‘Be careful how you make those statements, gentlemen. The public isn’t buying that’. He explained that only he could provide them with the political shield needed to forestall public pressure for reform, not to mention prosecution of financial fraud. ‘My administration is the only thing between you and the pitchforks’”.

    - Michael Hudson, "Killing the Host", page 253

    --
    I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
  8. Re:I don't think I'd want to be an American in Chi by gtall · · Score: 2

    I'm not saying that arrest was fair, but China has a history of stealing people too. Forgetting the individuals they''ve stolen, they have also stolen Tibet, and are busing stealing UigherLand I forget what that province is called). The latter constitutes stealing because they are resettling it with Han Chinese, just like they are doing in Tibet. Taiwan is next on the agenda because the fearless leaders of the Chinese Communist Party do actually fear (1) having no legitimacy to govern, (2) a land of free Chinese, (3) that Taiwan might infect the mainland with Democracy and make the Communist Party look like a band of ignorant leeches.

  9. Re:I don't think I'd want to be an American in Chi by dryeo · · Score: 2

    Kinda like stealing Hawaii and populating it with Americans or stealing chunks of Mexico and populating it with English speakers. Or perhaps like stealing a good chunk of N. America from the occupants and doing all kinds of nasty stuff to the original inhabitants.

    --
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
  10. Re:Why would she need a defence? by dcw3 · · Score: 2

    Repeating your lie won't make it true...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    And those are only the fed. There has been a long list of governors, and mayors who are or have done time.

    Here are some CEOs for you. I won't bother you with the Martha Stewarts of the world.
    Jeff Skilling, former CEO of Enron
    Serving 24 years for fraud, insider trading, and other crimes related to the collapse of Enron
    Bernie Ebbers, former CEO of WorldCom
    Serving 25 years for accounting fraud that cost investors over $100 billion
    Dennis Kozlowski, former CEO of Tyco Serving 8 to 25 years for stealing $134 million from Tyco
    John Rigas, former CEO of Adelphia Communications Serving 25 years for bank, wire, and securities fraud related to the demise of Adelphia
    Sanjay Kumar, former CEO of Computer Associates Serving 12 years for obstruction of justice and securities fraud
    Walter Forbes, former CEO of Cendant Serving 12 years for fraud
    Richard Scrushy, former CEO of HealthSouth Serving 7 years for bribery and mail fraud
    Joseph Nacchio, former CEO of Qwest Communications
    Serving 6 years for insider trading
    Sam Waksal, former CEO of ImClone Served 7 years for securities fraud (released last year)
    Martin Grass, former CEO of Rite Aid Served 6 years for fraud and obstruction (just released this year)

    --
    Just another day in Paradise