Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai General Chat

Oh my. Not looking good for Herve. His wife testified on his behalf and appears to have gaps in her memory. These are excerpts I pulled from the article. See link for full article.

http://www.tcpalm.com/news/2011/feb/22/ ... artner=RSS

FORT PIERCE — The wife of an embattled submarine builder being sued over a soured business deal with a Dubai-based conglomerate took the stand in her husband's defense Tuesday.

Helen Jaubert told jurors in a federal trial that when her husband, retired French counterintelligence officer Herve Jaubert, in 2004 announced they were moving to Dubai in the United Arab Emirates, things moved quickly.

During cross-examination, Helen Jaubert, who was part owner of their firm, Seahorse Submarine Industries Inc., had trouble recalling specific details about the terms of her husband's employment, or what documents she signed as part of a deal by Dubai World to pay the couple $1.5 million for assets belonging to Seahorse.

Helen Jaubert was asked about a $2.3 million deposit the couple made into a U.S. bank in 2007, after her husband had been accused of misappropriating company funds. She said she couldn't recall if the account was opened so they could deposit proceeds from selling their Dubai home.

"I don't remember," Helen Jaubert told attorney Jon Cederberg. "There were other deposits, too."

Bank records showed the account was opened July 26, 2007 with $100, and on Aug. 23, 2007, the Jauberts deposited $2.3 million. Three months later, records show they paid nearly $1.2 million from the account to "olympia escrow account" for their current home in Wellington.

Makes interesting reading Bora - do you think on the basis of this he is going to lose? Whats the eta on a verdict btw?

Joe the trial is due to end today I'm not sure when the verdict will be in. I last heard from Herve on Sunday. He said he had survived the first week, was very ok but tired.

I wish him luck.

They had estimated that the trial would take 2 weeks, and it started on the 14th I believe. BM can confirm that.

I don't know if that would be the basis, but I would think it sure didn't help much. In a case like this you have to answer questions and provide answers and facts!!! I don't remember is, IMO, another way of saying: I don't want to answer that question on the grounds that it would incriminate me/Herve.

It's kind of like asking someone a question, you already know the answer to, and they don't respond, which is like confirming what you already thought.

Thanks BM. Any view on the outcome based on Bora's post?
I really don't have a view or a preference - if he did wrong he shouldn't win and if he didn't and was treated unfairly than he should. Reading the stuff about the bank accounts makes me feel the position is a bit dodgy but I really don't have all the facts.

Unfortunately one bad moment of testimony in a trial can wipe out an entire case, as it would make everything else questionable. Logic might dictate that the other 99% that was acceptable would override the 1% that is questionable, but who applies logic in certain situations?? OJ Simpson anyone??

The good ol glove. Seinfeld and I am sure others did a great sketch on that.

Wasn't it Nixon during the watergate scandal who brought the phrase "I have no recollection of that event" to fame?

Joe whatever the outcome Herve is a survivor. As far as the outcome of the case I am confident that the truth will prevail and the jury will find in Herves favour. He has told me that DW's lawyers have made many mistakes.

I feel for Herve's wife She must be under a terrific amount of pressure!

Dillon wrote:Wasn't it Nixon during the watergate scandal who brought the phrase "I have no recollection of that event" to fame?

Gee Dillon, I wish I could help you, but I have no recollection of that event.

Yes anything court related must be extremely stressful.

@Dillon - I think he did yes - I think there are some pretty amusing lines from all presidents but still waiting for Obama to make big gaff.

I tried to walk a fine line between acting lawfully and testifying falsely but I now recognize that I did not fully accomplish that goal.
Bill Clinton

A dictatorship would be a heck of a lot easier, there's no question about it.
George W. Bush

For every fatal shooting, there were roughly three non-fatal shootings. And, folks, this is unacceptable in America. It's just unacceptable. And we're going to do something about it.
George W. Bush

And there's no doubt in my mind, not one doubt in my mind, that we will fail.
George W Bush

I could on and on with Bush

You don't remember a deposit of $2.3 million? How many $2.3 million deposits did you receive on or around that time then?

Smells like a dead kipper in a submarine ...



Knight

Dubai Knight wrote:You don't remember a deposit of $2.3 million? How many $2.3 million deposits did you receive on or around that time then?

Smells like a dead kipper in a submarine ...



Knight

Well I'm pleased Herve's trial is causing you so much amusement DK and Sage. Let's hope that you don't find yourselves on the wrong side of any of the locals anytime soon.

I have.

I am still here.

In any other country it would not matter if the accuser is local or not; illegal is illegal and it is the Rule of Law that dictates crime and punishment. It is only here that the neanderthal principle of a pecking order based on either your family connections or wealth that gives locals the misapprehension that they are above the law.

I can tell you stories that would make your hair curl.



Knight

Well wouldn't you have a record of all your transactions to refer too? Especially amounts that large. Sadly doesn't look like Mrs Herve is being of much help at the moment.

Could Mr. Herve be guilty of having put his hand in the honey pot then?
And he is about to be found out? ....just wondering

Well - I hope that once all the evidence is in and the facts are clear, justice is served. Given that there is some international interest in the case, I would guess that a fair trial can be expected.

Let's not pre-judge.

That said, what's reported so far does indeed have more than a whiff of fishiness about it.

Cheers,
Shafique

Akasha wrote:Well wouldn't you have a record of all your transactions to refer too? Especially amounts that large. Sadly doesn't look like Mrs Herve is being of much help at the moment.

A case is only as good as the lawyer's representation you have in the court. The fault in this falls to Herve's lawyer. As the defending lawyer, he has to think like the plaintiff's lawyers and anticipate what will be asked by the other side and prepare his witnesses for their testimony (and vice versa). It is also the responsibility of the plaintiff and defendant to disclose information and documentation to their lawyer(s) relevant to their case. Possibly Herve's lawyer wasn't informed about those transactions? or he was aware of it, but overlooked it?

Once again: OJ Simpson. Had good lawyers who manipulated the jury to focus on a glove and took the focus off the crime and OJ walked. Years later when jury members were interviewed some admitted to making an error in voting him not guilty. Double jeopardy was on OJs side.

It could well be that Helen wasn't even with Herve in Dubai at the time the deposit was made as Herve had sent her home around 2007.
She had two young children and was seperated from her husband who couldn't leave the country. May be she was under serious pressure then and during the trial?
Lawyers will make a big deal out of anything they can dig up. Herve had sold a villa he had bought as a future home. They had never lived in it. They had a place provide by DW. He sold the villa and deposited the proceeds. So what? Where was he expected to keep the money? Under his mattress?

I once bought a place at JLT and sold it before it was built. I put the proceeds in my HSBC account. No one blinks an eye. BTW the flat I bought and sokd has still never been built, but that's the Emiratis for you.

I hear what you are saying BM. But if you were sitting on a jury and heard a witness, closely involved with the party on trial, say "I don't remember", wouldn't you question that response. If she had said "I didn't know about it" would have incriminated Herve giving one to come to the conclusion that possibly he withheld that info from her? If the money was from the sale of the villa, wouldn't she have known that? Didn't she question where the money came from for the purpose of the home in Wellington (I believe that's the place)? Even if she wasn't aware of the financial activity at the time, surely he would have told her about it when he returned to the US. Jurors would expect that the left hand (Helen) knew what the right hand (Herve) had done. I know that you are fond of Herve, but try to remove yourself from that emotion and see it as someone sitting on the jury.

I would like to see Herve come out a winner, but that testimony by Helen didn't help him, IMO. Surely he and his lawyer would have discussed it with her expecting her to be questioned about it. More than likely Helen was present during many of the meetings that took place to prepare for the trial and the testimony that they would have to give as well as what the opposing side may ask.

I guess my legal background and exposure to litigation and the preparation involved for trials, and having sat on a jury several times, is kicking in.

You are right Bora, BM is very very biased.

-- Sun Feb 27, 2011 3:26 am --

http://www.tcpalm.com/news/2011/feb/25/ ... tuart-and/