PROFESSIONAL REVIEW
NCI NARRATIVE AND ANALYSIS
Rand Guebert
This material is strictly confidential.
It may not be reproduced in any way or shared without the explicit
written permission
of Dr. Kelly O’Donnell and Dr. Michèle Lewis O’Donnell.
*****
INTRODUCTION
This narrative follows the relationship that Kelly
(KO) and Michele (MO) O’Donnell (KMO) have had with Nordic Capital Investments
(NCI) since they were first introduced to it in 1998. NCI offered to KMO investments that
contractually paid 15% interest per annum, while also proposing to pay
additional amounts to Christian ministries.
At the time that KMO invested NCI was only offering their “special
programme” to missionary personnel and their families. There was an air of exclusivity about these
investments and assurance was given that the capital was totally secure.
Nevertheless KMO became aware in July 2007 that NCI
was failing to repay investors their capital and earned interest. KMO and other investors then contacted
government authorities, and took steps to recover their money and learn more
about NCI’s fraudulent activities. This
narrative should not necessarily be construed to reflect the knowledge or
circumstances of any particular investors other than KMO.
The case is currently being investigated in both Sweden Sweden Sweden
While the investor solicitation activities of NCI
are well understood, the actual investment activities are quite obscure. Because the claimed investments in bonds are
totally fallacious, investors do not know in what way their funds were actually
invested, if they were invested in anything at all. Because the government investigation is
ongoing, this narrative and analysis is only current as of the above date and
does not contain certain information that is sensitive. It is hoped that a solution of the case will
be forthcoming in the near future.
Factual information that has been gathered since the
fraud came to light in July 2007 is included in this narrative to the extent
that it appears to be relevant in explaining matters that have arisen
throughout the professional review, especially those related to KO’s dismissal
from YWAM. A significant amount of
information is included on Mercy Ships, which was part of YWAM until they
separated from each other in 2003, because it is specifically mentioned in some
important documents that have come to light.
Because the two men who promoted and administered
NCI both had long backgrounds in YWAM, as did KMO, the manner in which YWAM
did, or did not, respond to the announcement of the fraud is an important
subject of this narrative.
NARRATIVE
AND ANALYSIS: 1992 – 1998
Based on available information it appears that NCI was
started in 1992 in Sweden Sweden
It would appear from an analysis of the available
record that other people were also involved with KW in conceiving and
establishing NCI. Nevertheless KW has
functioned as principal and administrator of NCI in the eyes of the public and
investors, while ES was the main promoter of the scheme to KMO and other
investors known to KMO. In the case of
SDI, the available record shows ES acting as a registered principal with legal
responsibility for SDI.
The first documents available date back to November
1995 and explain the investment activities of NCI, which involve the trading of
bank debentures. This rather random
collection of documents was saved by a former Le Rucher (LR) staff member to
whom ES had promoted NCI in 1996. These
documents were never seen by KMO until they were retrieved from the archives of
the staff member in February and March of 2008.
For anyone
experienced with financial instruments the documents describe investments that
are patently bogus. They represent a
class of documents that are typical of financial fraud—they refer to the
security of investments and mention the names of well known international
banks—but otherwise the content of the documents is completely fabricated. These investments could only be sold on trust
to unsuspecting people with limited investment experience.
Another document available is a fax from KW to a
Dutchman, Rene Koopmans, dated 22 February 1996. This fax is for the attention of Rene, Arco,
Gerrold and Derek. The fax explains that
there are some problems arranging a certain investment so KW is offering two
alternatives. Offer no.2 includes the
following, “As the money is blocked only one month at a time you can use it for
other purposes any time, but during the time of waiting it produces a fairly
good profit, 3.5% net to you. From the
1% commission I will give 0.5% to Erik.
This could suit any of your contacts who have this kind of money on a
normal bank account.” This message was
also faxed to ES at Mercy Ministries in France
As far back as
1996 we see that ES is involved and receiving a percentage of the earnings from
these “investments”. It would seem to be
clear that ES especially was to benefit from what NCI was offering.
Another document available is a fax dated 1 March
1996 that was sent from KW in response to the concerns of Etienne Waechter in France
“Dear
Etienne, Thank you for the fax that arrived yesterday. I have received these kinds of articles from
different parts of the world and unfortunately it is partly true that criminal
acts have been committed in this context.
But I want to underline that there are, to a certain degree, criminal
acts in almost every area of life. Some
commit insurance fraud, others print false money and so on, but we as honest
business people must still continue to do correct business. / In the investment business, as I explained it
to you, there have been frauds committed in the past. I have heard many times of the Salvation
Army, who lost 10 mio USD (now they have got them back finally) and I have also
heard about this Henri Herrmann in Fribourg.
He is now in jail for what he did, and so many other criminals. Of course what I offer to you has nothing to
do with these things. In both cases
mentioned above investors have put money in so called trust accounts without
any security. In that moment they lost
control over the funds. So the rule
number one is never to do that, or pay any fees in advance to somebody. Whenever money moves it should to into the
Investor’s OWN ACCOUNT or BE EXCHANGED SIMULTANEOUSLY AGAINST A BANK GUARANTEE,
not five days later, or the guarantee should arrive to the Investor’s bank
before the money moves out. This is the
key of protection in every situation. / The article you sent denies the
existence of this kind of investments. That is complete nonsense! I have an article from a German magazine
(maybe I gave it to you) that confirms that this business really exists. Anyway,
I know by experience that it exists. And
when we follow some strict rules, we are totally safe. I could not afford to take any risks in this
respect.”
This letter was also faxed from KW to ES on ’96
03/04.
Also amongst the papers saved by the former LR staff
member are various documents self-described as an investments offer, loan
agreement (for project financing), letter of intent, joint venture agreement,
or power of attorney. Also included is a
‘non-disclosure, non-circumvention and cooperation agreement’. Many of the documents have a Swiss address or
mention Switzerland
It is quite
possible that the documents had their origin in Switzerland
The next document available is very similar to the
November 1995 document mentioned above and is dated December 1997 in Geneva
On 9 July 1998 ES sends KO an email that reads in
part, “Dear Kelly, the investments are placed through NCI: Nordic Capital
Investment KB. We have created a group
contract with them through which you could enroll, it all goes on the basis of
recommendation. No hidden cost, on the
contrary there are extra bonus possibilities. / The contracts are normally with
large amounts and these amounts are all covered with a bank guarantee of one of
top 25 European banks. The company
guarantees repayment of the invested capital and interest on maturity date. “With smaller amounts” like 100.000,- USD we
pool up to 1 MIO and that amount is then placed-in a scheme. / At present
everything is handled in Switzerland Europe . In Liechtenstein
It would
appear that one of the benefits of this scheme is the opportunity to avoid tax
by routing investments through Liechtenstein
NARRATIVE
AND ANALYSIS: 1999-CURRENT
Moving forward to 24 January 1999, ES emails KO,
“Dear Kelly, As far as I remember you got the info pack last time at Le Rucher
about the program we negotiated with NCI.
Answers to your questions:….We have ran these programs now for three
years and have currently about 12 contracts running. Payments are all done within contracted time
frames. I have known the NCI manager for
15 years. As far as I know a fully
reliable Christian guy who plays by the rules.
We have a recommendation from one of the Swedish Banks he works with and
also a copy of the registration in the Chamber of commerce on file. People who have invested are quite happy
about the returns.”
By now there
are supposedly 12 contracts running. It
can be seen that these investments are being offered to people who trust
ES. It is doubtful that ES has a license
to sell financial products like this.
This is more than “water cooler” or “cocktail party” chatter about
investments. This is serious, purposeful
solicitation—an important aspect for the government investigators.
The next available document is a cover letter dated
28 May 1999 enclosing an Investment Agreement dated 1 June 1999. The letter says in part, “….please direct all
correspondence concerning the above mentioned agreement to me at the address
indicated as you are part of a pool of investments with NCI negotiated by
us… Additional amounts you want to put
into the investment programme will be subject to the same conditions and you
can do this without prior notice up to six months before termination date. Within six months of termination date please
advise me your intention and I will then in turn negotiate with NCI the possibilities
and advise you.” Attached is a copy of
the first Investment Agreement signed between KMO and KW. The agreement no. is: KW-GF-ODONNELL. It should be noted that there is a
substitution in this contract no. from ES to GF when compared to the July 1998
sample mentioned above.
As these
letters seem to be the initials of people, who is GF? Also, it is apparent that
ES is not only soliciting these investments, but is claiming to negotiate with
NCI on behalf of investors. This is also
a serious responsibility.
On 17 February 2000 ES sends short letter to KMO
enclosing three originals of a new programme agreement. ES says, “If after the initial three or six
months you want to go on in the same way just let me know.” KMO sign second agreement dated 1 March 2000
with agreement no. KW-GF-ODONNELL-2/OD.
In August the two outstanding investment agreements are consolidated
into one with a value of $290,000 including accrued interest. Later in October additional capital of
$25,000 is sent and credited.
On 27 February 2001 KMO withdraw $200,000 for the
purchase of their home. In August
additional capital of $40,000 is contributed and credited. It should be noted
that each January an account statement is sent by KW showing capital and
accrued interest.
What is
immediately suspicious about these annual account statements is that amounts
are rounded to the nearest whole dollar, and they are simply typed up in a Word
document, rather than being generated by accounting software. There is not even the pretense of a proper
accounting system being in place. This
is a serious red flag.
Moving on to 2002 an additional capital contribution
is made on 25 June of $49,930.
It should be noted that two of the deposits made in
2001-2002 were not initially reported on the annual statements for those years. KMO had to ask for them to be included. According to KMO, ES never apologized or
seemed to be concerned about the mistakes when they were brought to his
attention. Further, although KO asked on
occasion how much commission/interest ES was earning from KMO’s contracts, ES
never divulged this.
On 23 January 2003 the account statement as of 31
December 2002 is sent showing an account balance of $314,282 including accrued
interest.
It is at this
time that KMO leave Le Rucher (LR) after the departure of the Brills, Hylands
and Sally Smith.
At this point in the available record is a sample
SDI Bond dated April 2003. Attached to
it is a further ownership document which begins, “Stichting Dutch Investments,
a foundation incorporated under the laws of the Netherlands, having its
registered office at Horsterweg 192, 3853 JG Ermelo, the Netherlands
(hereinafter: SDI), duly represented by Mr. J. H. Hofstee and Mr. E. A.
Spruyt;…” This clearly indicates that ES
is a principal of SDI.
Also, in early 2003 KMO ask KW to manage their NCI
account, and to be their contact person rather than ES, and he agreed. Because of the problems at LR, KMO think it
best to work directly with KW rather than through ES.
On 1 July 2003 the last capital contribution of
$45,000 is made.
During 2004 KMO receive a commission of $12,620 on
the investment in NCI made by Whiteside and Seymour, who were told about NCI
initially by KMO, but brought into NCI by ES.
The two Whiteside/Seymour contracts began on 1 January 2003 and ran for
three years.
On 5 January 2005 the NCI account statement sent to
KMO by KW shows a balance of $454,748.
Moving into 2006, on 12 January KMO email KW
reminding him that they wish to change the ministry beneficiary for the
Whiteside/Seymour account in line with previous understandings referenced in
email exchanges of 19 and 27 May 2004.
KMO propose two possible beneficiaries.
KW replies on 26 January saying that the financial
administration of beneficiary projects has been delegated to MMI (Mercy Ministries
International, which is part of LR). KMO
are very unhappy about the possibility of having to be involved again with ES
and email KW on 30 January, “Could we arrange a time to talk on the phone this
week, confidentially for some financial consultation? Michele and I have a couple important
questions concerning our NCI account and also the ministry beneficiaries
related to the Whiteside/Seymour account….”
It would seem
from the limited record available that this is the first time that KMO have
suspicion that something is wrong with NCI.
It seems that for the first time obstacles are raised, and this just
after the large Whiteside/Seymour three year agreement is renewed for a second
three-year term on 1 January 2006.
It would
appear that the funds of NCI have been depleted somehow before this date. The timing of the apparent disappearance of
the funds is an important subject in the investigations.
KW responds immediately on 30 January saying, “I
want all communication related to investments to be in writing. In this way we avoid any
misunderstanding.” KO emails back the
next day suggesting that a combination of written and spoken consultation will
be most efficient. KW replies the same
day, “I still request it must be in writing.
We have done so in the past as well…. When I say “discuss” it means by
writing as that has been so in the past.”
KO emails back that day, “We are having trouble understanding why it is
not possible to simply talk by phone, as we have in the past. In the past we have in fact talked on the
phone to clarify important items…. So, we would like to talk with you
personally to get your helpful input: 1.
Items related to our personal fund management and future 2. Items related to possible ministry
beneficiaries.” Still on 31 January KW
responds, “I have saved all our correspondence since year 2000 and you have put
questions in detail many times. I have
answered and we have kept going until everything has been clear. That’s the way I want to continue. Please give some description of your
questions in writing and I will answer first in writing and if there is a need
to clarify after that we can have call later.”
This appears
to be stonewalling, as well as a highly unethical maneuver, which was very
disconcerting to KMO. This is especially
disconcerting as it comes on the heels of the serious rift in Member Care – Europe at the December 2006 meeting. See the Member Care Narrative for details.
On 31 May KMO email KW giving their 3 month notice
that they wish to terminate their NCI investment contract as of 1 September
2006. KW responded by inventing a
requirement that such a notice had to be sent by registered post—a condition
not mentioned in KMO’s contract.
Undeterred KMO still ask that their monies are repaid when the contract
ends on 1 September 2006.
Nevertheless,
KMO are effectively put off terminating their contract until it’s next renewal
date on 1 September 2007. This whole
situation is very upsetting for KMO, especially as KO has this very strategic
meeting coming up in South
Africa
In August KW emails, “…I will any way do my best to
arrange the repayment as soon as possible after September 1. I have blocked funds to be released but I do
not know at this point exactly when that will take place. But as soon as I know I will give you the
tentative dates for payment.”
KMO want to meet KW when he comes to Geneva
It is useful
to note in this message the words “when the funds have been finally credited to
the accounts of mine I will make all payments….” It can possibly be inferred from this that KW
has no control over the funds and is simply at the mercy of others.
On 19 February 2007 KMO receive their NCI account
statement from KW showing an account balance at 31 December 2006 of $617,622.
Also in February KW emails to KMO, “I have made it
clear to you that instead of using my “rights” to keep the funds up to Sept 1,
2007 I will make the repayment as soon as possible, which actually could mean
any date before maturity date. But to be
more concrete I think it will be during the spring of 2007. We have blocked funds for several investors
and are now working on these issues. I
say the “spring” because I don’t know exactly how long it will take but let’s
say a couple of months from now on could be realistic…”
In April KW emails KMO, “Our work is progressing to
our satisfaction but I am not ready to give specific dates yet. You do not need to keep asking because I will
contact you when the time is ready for transfers.”
Then on 21 May 2007 KMO send by registered post a
letter terminating their contract as of 1 September 2007. They make the following protest, “We have
previously advised you (31 May 2006) that we wished to terminate our Investment
Agreement on 1 September 2006, but you claimed that this termination was not
valid as it was given by email. Although
we disagree with this interpretation of our contract, we hereby give you again
three months prior written notice…”
In July KMO email KW, “We are meeting next week with
several family members and others to review our NCI account. We would appreciate hearing from you about
your specific intentions concerning the payment of our money from NCI. We sent you an email again on 27 June 2007
asking for clarification, but have not heard back from you. In your 5 Feb 2007 email to us you talked
about a couple of months. It is now over
five months. We have also sent you a
registered letter dated 21 May 2007 with our specific instructions for
repayment.”
In mid-July while KMO are in the states with their
family, Jan (JP) and Henny (HP) Pauw (JHP) contact them to tell them about the
problems they are having with NCI. JHP
are a retired Dutch couple, who are former Le Rucher staff members who resigned
in 2003. They are also investors that
have lost money and have gone to the police in Holland
In August KW informs KMO, “My intention earlier to
make the refunding before September has unfortunately not worked out. Today my partner called me and it seems that
we have everything under control now and during the coming weeks transactions
will be performed to release enough funds.
It was a short call and I will get more details during the
week-end. As I have said before we do
have plenty of securities but they involve governments, banks and other
institutions which has made the process much slower than we anticipated during
the spring. I will update you during
next week with more precise info but as I see it now payments will be directed
to you in early September.”
By the second half of August KMO are in contact with
the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) in UK ,
the Fraudmeldpunt (FMP) in Holland , the Economic
Crimes Bureau (EBM) in Sweden
and the FBI in the USA
Working with
the police in Europe can be a challenging
process. There is generally little communication with plaintiffs, who are often
uninformed about the progress of their case.
Public prosecution services are often overworked, poorly resourced and
politicized. In spite of this, with
regular follow-up by a plaintiff, the police normally and eventually do their
job.
Romans 13:1-5
is very relevant, “Let every person be subject to the governing
authorities. For there is no authority
except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore he who resists the authorities
resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct,
but to bad. Would you have no fear of
him who is in authority? Then do what is
good and you will receive his approval, for he is God’s servant for your
good. But if you do wrong, be afraid,
for he does not bear the sword in vain; he is the servant of God to execute his
wrath on the wrongdoer.”
As it says,
“he does not bear the sword in vain.”
This is generally true, but it is often not timely. Nevertheless, when dealing with criminals,
who are ruthless, and perhaps violent, the involvement of the state is the best
alternative. Most ordinary citizens do
not have experience interacting with criminals and need some kind of
professional assistance. So KMO and
other investors are working with the authorities in hopes that a successful resolution
of their case or prosecution will result.
About this time KMO learn that the SFO in New Zealand
On 18 September KMO meet with Rand Guebert, a friend
from Crossroads Church Sweden
The next day RG makes an appointment to see a friend
of his at UBS Bank in Geneva
On 21 September RG meets with his UBS friend who
gives him the name of a Swedish business consultant in Geneva
Also on 21 September KMO make their first effort to
alert YWAM to the huge risks that NCI is creating by emailing Lynn Green (LG),
YWAM’s International Chair, “We are writing confidentially on behalf of a group
of colleagues and consultants to arrange a time to meet with you as soon as
possible. There is an extremely serious
matter that has been going on for some time which has come to several people’s
attention recently. This matter has and
could significantly negatively impact both YWAM staff and YWAM’s international
reputation and credibility. We believe
it is essential to share about it in person, if at all possible.” KMO offer to fly to England
At the time
KMO were totally unaware of the possible inappropriate or even criminal
connection between YWAM and NCI. They do
know that YWAM has been affected somehow, but it was not imagined at this time
that YWAM may somehow be culpable or complicit.
Regardless of the type of organization involved, it is normal that
allegations of fraud should be reported to a very senior person in an
organization. According to the
Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability (ECFA), this would be either
the Chairman of the Audit Committee of the Board or the Executive
Director. This is standard practice in
the secular world as well.
It should be
noted that at this time KMO are involved in very tense communications with Gina Fadely (GF) and Garry Tissingh (GT) over the
potential dismissal of KO from YWAM. KMO
are in a very awkward situation as they also attempt to report their NCI fraud
to YWAM.
On 22 September the Swedish business consultant
contacted by RG emails information about NCI from the corporate registry of Sweden England
On 24 September, LG responds only to KO, “I am sorry
for the brief delay in getting back to you.
My volume of communications is exceptionally high just at the
moment. I am sorry to say that I have
previous high priority obligations for these next two weeks, and then I will be
in the USA
This response
of LG is a breach of good practice and a red flag of problems. It is completely irresponsible of LG to ask
KMO to report a very serious matter to a supervisor with whom they are having a
major confrontation. Why does LG do
this??
The following
good management practices are taken from policy recommendations of the ECFA
Christian regulatory agency mentioned above, “One of the two provisions of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that applies to nonprofit organizations (the other
provision relates to document destruction) is the legal protection of
whistle-blowers. The Act makes it
illegal for a corporate entity to punish whistle-blowers who risk their careers
by reporting suspected illegal activities in an organization… Punishing a
whistle-blower is a criminal offense…. As a result of this legislation, it is
important that nonprofit organizations develop procedures for receiving and
handling complaints…Nonprofits need to create and implement a formal process to
receive and investigate complaints and prevent retaliation. As a part of this process, a confidential and
anonymous mechanism should be established to receive employee complaints….”
It is in this
context that LG’s response is so surprising and unethical. With hindsight, LG’s intentionality, rather
than simply inexperience, is beginning to show here
On 25 September KMO and RG meet with the Swedish
business consultant, who provides several further contacts, including a former
Swedish consul-general in Geneva
On 26 September MO responds to LG, asking to be
included in correspondence and saying that she has two points: 1. the serious matter and 2. KO’s dismissal, “1.
We have been advised by a few professionals to see a YWAM leader face to face
soon about this serious matter… We are hoping that you will kindly reconsider
our request to meet with you. An update
about this matter, that included the status of our meeting with a YWAM leader,
was sent today to the FBI in the USA
and Serious Fraud Office in the UK
YWAM leaders
can now be in no doubt that the serious matter that KMO wish to report is a
possible fraud. RG was very surprised
that YWAM did not deal with this matter in a more professional way.
LG responded to MO on 28 September, “…In spite of
your determination, I see no grounds that would justify my intervention between
you and Gina. I have taken counsel from
another member of our senior team and he concurs… Whatever evidence you have can be submitted
to Gina and if she thinks it requires my involvement then I will engage with
the issues. Otherwise she is both
competent enough and has sufficient seniority (and can call on others if
required) to work these issues through with you. I am sure this message will not be received
with pleasure, but I am equally sure that it is the right course of action.”
This is a very
suspicious response, and from a corporate perspective highly
irresponsible. This has nothing to do
with LG’s intervention between GF and KO.
What is going on here? Although RG is surprised at these answers all
along he is giving the benefit of the doubt to YWAM because he cannot imagine
that they could be corrupt or seriously unethical. Nevertheless, RG is advising KMO that
professionally they should only give information to someone of LG’s rank in
YWAM.
MO replied to LG on the same day, “Yes, you are
right that our message is clear about meeting with a Team3 member. This is not about Gina’s competence—we
appreciate Gina and her leadership very much—nor is it about Kelly’s
dismissal. That is a separate issue
which will receive, as we have said, a separate response. We have been advised to speak to the highest
level of leadership in YWAM about this serious matter and so we have tried, as
you say with determination, out of our concern for the organization. I hope you know that we respect you, your
leadership, and your desire to handle this matter properly. I’m asking you one final time to kindly
reconsider our request.” There is no
answer forthcoming.
Also on this day, KO prepares his first version of
“NCI Case—Relevance for YWAM”. This
document, which lists examples of how YWAM personnel and projects have been, or
may have been, “affected” by NCI/SDI, will be updated and renamed over time,
but will serve as an ongoing summary of the information that is connecting the
two organizations.
Also on this day KMO and RG have their first meeting
with Ralf Johannson (RJ), a former Swedish consul-general in Geneva Stockholm
Also, still on 28 September, JP emails KMO, “I just
had a telephone conversation with someone of the church in Ermelo. He is an auditor by profession. In the past Erik often contacted him for his
financial expertise in connection with his “business” affairs. He also has known Kristian from the beginning
in 1996. He described Kristian as a
naïve person who is still looking for the jar filled with gold on the spot
where the rainbow touches the earth. He
has often pointed them to the fact that there were mistakes or leaks in their
schemes. He has heard from Erik that NCI
money was used for paying off Le Rucher.
Kristian had also introduced him to other businessmen, one in Germany Belgium Sweden
KW does appear
to be very naïve and thus it is hard to imagine that he is the architect of
such a scheme as NCI. Yet at the very
least he is a willing promoter and perpetrator.
Having gotten no positive result from LG , MO USA
The next day MO emails JD, “I have been advised to
speak with you immediately about a grave matter which has serious implications
for the reputation of YWAM. A small
group of us (see the cc:list above) has repeatedly tried to meet with Lynn
Green; you have been copied on the three emails in the past week. This matter can wait no longer and in lieu of
meeting face to face here in Europe , I would
like to speak to you as soon as possible by phone and discuss the best way to
proceed with this sensitive issue.”
The next day, 1 October, MO telephones JD’s office
in California
Having been informed of the frustrations that MO has
experienced, JM (with her husband Jim) emails JD the next day, 3 October giving
a strong character reference for KMO and saying, “We beg and adjure you, in
your position as a Team Three Leader, to respond and join with them and others
in the investigation of this most grave situation. The secular media is already preparing its
expose. The potential, tragic damage to
YWAM’s ministry is inestimable. It is
our deepest desire to see YWAM not suffer the disgrace of not assisting those
on its own leadership team to speak out for righteousness.”
On 5 October JD replies to the Moreheads, “Thank you
so much for your letter. I do take your
comments very seriously and I appreciate your integrity and the extensive
background experience which gives you perspective on this issue. I will forward your comments to Lynn Green as
the member of Team 3 who carries the greatest concern for financial and legal
integrity within the Mission
JD passes the
subject to LG who passes it to GF for whom the subject is inappropriate. YWAM continues to be irresponsible and
unethical, and continues to disperse responsibility or take no action. Why??
Attempting to link the fraud issue to “the dynamics surrounding Kelly”
is a clear distortion of the real problems that are surrounding YWAM, ES and
others.
On 8 October KMO and RG have a conference call with
GF. GF says that she has been asked to
get details about the fraud and which YWAM ministries are implicated. KMO want to keep the fraud separate from
Kelly’s dismissal and so do not want to talk to GF about the fraud. RG explained why he thought there was a
conflict of interest. MO asked GF to
pass along their position. The
conversation ended without agreement on a next step.
Two days later JF calls and speaks to MO. JF says that the fraud matter has been passed
on from GF to him. He wants to know what
ministries in YWAM are implicated.
According to MO his tone was antagonistic rather than supportive, which
was disturbing for MO in the context of their losses. JF has heard from GF that KMO are concerned
about a conflict of interest. JF says
that KW and ES are no longer in YWAM, and that Team3 see no need to speak with
MO until they have evidence that this was a matter they needed to deal with. MO agrees in the end to organize a call when
others can be present with her.
KMO well knew that JF’s wife, Romke, was the sister
of Garry Tissingh’s wife, Anke, and that Romke was Director of a humanitarian
organization, Agrinas, that had received money from LR. So even JF’s involvement represented multiple
conflicts of interest. KMO were
completely stifled by YWAM in their efforts to report the NCI fraud in a
proper, professional manner.
On 11 October RJ emails KMO from Sweden
On 21 October JP reports to KMO on a meeting that
Paul van Wachem (PW), another Dutch investor, had with JF, who was apparently
shocked to that NCI would appear to be fraudulent. JF indicated that he would contact FMP in Holland
RG and NP exchange emails during these couple days
discussing the relevance of the criminal prosecution in putting pressure on the
defendants to repay the monies that have gone missing. RG thinks that ES would take whatever steps
are necessary to avoid going to jail.
During these days RG is also giving KMO and DS
(Donna Seymour) advice about how to prepare dossiers of their cases for
presentation to the authorities.
It is
astonishing that the investigators never make any attempt up until now to
systematically gather evidence from the investors. Perhaps the police have already acquired all
of the evidence they need from others, but this is unclear and KMO/DS are left
to wonder if they have done all they can to assist the police.
On 26 October Niels van Nimwegen (NN) emails KO
giving an update on the programme that TROS, a Dutch TV station, is making on
NCI for their crime show, Opgelicht. NN
wants to interview KMO for the show. NN
says that most of the Dutch investors are still in denial.
About this time RG does an internet search to find
out who was in the executive leadership of YWAM in the past. This search led to Floyd McClung, Executive
Director, International Operations for YWAM in 1986, who wrote a magazine article
entitled “Authority: Its Use and Abuse”. The article begins, “Because good but
sometimes immature leaders can respond to selfish or needy people with
overbearing authority, and because cult figures can have so much influence on
unwary young people, it is important to be aware of some of the unhealthy
extremes leaders can go to in exercising their authority…”
It is not
necessary to be selfish, needy or young to be subject to overbearing authority
as KMO are experiencing. Authoritarian
organizations exist in every type of society and have the potential to deny
people their legal and human rights. It
was still not clear how pervasive this authoritarianism was in YWAM.
On 27 October RG emails KMO regarding next steps,
“Big question for you two: Why did ES
start this scam, as Niko asks below?
Niko does not know ES like you two do….
I do not think he did this for personal gain. So WHY???????? What is the motive behind this? Any ideas?
Is there a YWAM-related motive or motivator in the background? The fact that ES and KW both have YWAM backgrounds
would lead one to believe this somehow.
There would be a narrow group of people above ES in YWAM in the 1990’s
when this started. This group could be
the focus of attention…”
Already in
October KMO and RG were thinking on constructive lines, but, as so often
happened in this story, distraction set in and focus was lost. This “focus of attention” was not to be
followed up for another eight months.
Effectively stonewalled by YWAM, and with very little information coming
from the police, it was very difficult to know what to do. Doing nothing just did not seem like an
option.
On 28 October RG emails KMO reiterating that he is
working for them, KMO, as a consultant.
RG wants to work as a consultant in a professional way.
On 5 November, JP informs various investors,
including KMO, about Cees Schaap (CS), a professional fraud investigator, whom
they met in the course of the filming of the Opgelicht programme. CS is a partner in a forensic accounting
firm, SBV, based in Holland
Also this day, Paul van Wachem (PW), an NCI
investor, emails fellow investors to report on a telephone call he has had with
JF of YWAM, “Jeff Fountain has called the FMP, but he has not gone to the
station although invited to do so. In
his telephone conversation he stated that he has all the confidence in the
world in Erik. He was not convinced that
Erik is doing something wrong. I called
some friends of mine in the evangelical world and none of them show any
interest, so I do not continue my warnings.”
On 7 November Lieske Simon, daughter of JHP and an
NCI investor herself, emails other investors, “It seems that they (TROS) have
visited Erik and his reaction was: “I’m
only the mailman” or with other words the facilitator… Erik has told my parents
conflicting stories about the activities of NCI…. The programme maker thinks
Erik has not enriched himself a lot with NCI, but has sent a lot of money to
charity in order to seem important….”
The same day KMO send Lieske more details about how
ES is more than a mailman. ES is in fact
“running” NCI programmes and “signing” SDI contracts amongst other points.
Also this day GF calls KMO’s house and tells MO that
she would like to speak to KO. GF then
asks MO if she can record the conversation.
MO agrees. GF says that the fraud
issue has been delegated to JF and wants to talk to KO about YWAM issues. MO says that they will not speak to her
unless face to face with witnesses. MO
wants to proceed in a professional manner.
GF says that KO is “not obeying leaders.” MO says GF can write to KO. The telecon ends with GF and MO praying for
each other. [See YWAM Narrative for more details.]
On 8 November PW informs various investors that he
and JP will go to a notary on 12 November and take steps to form SOR (Seeking
Our Rights), an association of NCI investors seeking the return of their
funds. This is a day before the meeting
with CS.
On 13 November the Opgelicht programme airs on TROS
and the Algemeen Dagblad newspaper runs a front page story, “Christian
investors lose millions of Euros”. That
same day the Nederlands Dagsblad also runs a similar front page story.
This is a much
anticipated watershed event as the NCI fraud is made public. KMO and RG thought that this would lead
quickly to an unraveling of the fraud as well as personal and pastoral support
by YWAM for NCI victims. However, this
does not happen as those around ES either continue to support him or remain
silent.
The next day JF posts a notice on an e-mail forum
for all members of the YWAM Global Leadership Team (GLT), “…We need to believe
in our brothers’ innocence unless proved guilty. The police are still investigating and as yet
there are no official charges…. There seems little chance that the money will
be repaid. Millions of euros are
involved. I believe Erik and Kristian
have been unwittingly used by criminal elements to lure in trusting investors
from the evangelical networks…”
So, who are these
“criminal elements” that he refers to?
How does JF know that millions are involved? Why is there no sympathy for the people
connected with YWAM who lost money? Why defend ES and KW rather than propose to
investigate any possible impact on YWAM and other related organizations? In the circumstances this is a highly
suspicious announcement. What is really
going on here?
On 15 November KMO watch the Opgelicht programme as
a download from the TROS website.
Although still only in Dutch the show is very powerful.
On 16 November PW emails investors about the meeting
with CS saying in part, “Essential is confidentiality. Do not discuss information about actions we
are planning to undertake with anyone.”
He confirms that CS will work pro bono.
On 17 November RG emails KMO saying that he thinks
the case has traction now, but, “We need to continue to combine purposefulness
with patience. I thought about this when
you were mulling love of virtue versus hatred of wickedness…”
The same day KO receives an email from Delon Human
(DH), Board Chairman of LR, asking for more information about NCI. [See LR Narrative for more details on DH
involvement.] KMO respond to DH simply
encouraging him and others to cooperate with the investigation.
On 18 November MO send Nederlands Dagblad article of
17 November to RG and others. According
to this article ES has lodged a complaint against KW; ES’s lawyer, Van Eersel,
and fellow church member, Bram Gouman, express support for ES; and KW says that
Euros 10 million is involved. It should
be noted that Bram Gouman is also a board member of Mercy Ministries in The
Netherlands.
On 20 November RG emails KMO offering a rationale
for NCI. He describes the investors
funds as “loans” to NCI, who will use this money for projects. Investors will be repaid with future
donations to these projects. RG surmises
that somehow donations never materialized and the funds are probably contained
in projects or property.
This concept
was on the right track, but the possibility of a large amount of the NCI/SDI
money being diverted to a major Christian project/ministry (such as YWAM/Mercy
Ships) was not yet imagined.
On 24 November JP emails KMO, “Two members of SDI
went to Geneve to meet Kristian Westergard.
Kristian failed to convince, which convinced SDI also that Kristian
Westergard is utterly unreliable as far as NCI is concerned… We start to think
it is better to cooperate with SDI than being competitors.”
With reference to JP 24.11, RG emails KMO the same
day saying that the objective should be for all creditors to be treated
equally, not for some to be paid and others not.
On 26 November CS writes to ES asking for his
cooperation in the return of funds to NCI investors.
On 29 November RG sends a letter to the elders of Crossroads Church
In a letter to friends dated 4 December ES writes to
defend himself giving a history of NCI and explaining his actions. Since 2005 payments gradually decreased and
stopped in 2007.
Various parts
of this letter are not consistent with the known record.
On 9 December the Menorah
Church in Apeldoorn ,
Holland posts information about ES on its
website, “The elders have been summarily informed about the status with regard
to the accusations against ES some days ago by Bram Gouman and Luc Markies,
members of the board of Mercy Ministries Nederland
On 12 December KO receives his YWAM dismissal letter
from GF and for some time this issue dominates the thinking of KMO. NCI is pushed into the background for some
time and some of the ideas that had surfaced slip from view.
RJ began the new year by sending to RG information
about a respected Swedish journalist, Anna Sandberg, who had written an article
in a Swedish newspaper about a church that had gone bankrupt in Sweden
On 15 January KMO would learn of the death of MO’s
brother, Roger, which leads to a hurried trip to the States for the KMO family.
On 17 January ES writes to CS, in response to CS’s
letter of 26 November, saying that he will have no contact with him. ES does say in the letter, “Finally I am
considering right now my position, both morally, legally and financially.”
On 18 January NP writes to KMO and the SOR Group
saying that LG’s letter to Sean Collins of 28 December 2007 (see YWAM Narrative
for details) is not that important, “What you need, my friends, is plain
evidence which can be used in earthly courts of law. This is just showbiz.”
Following receipt of the 17 November letter from ES,
CS writes to KW on 22 January demanding repayment of monies owed to NCI
investors.
On 28 January KO writes to various friends and
supporters in the USA
On 30 January KO emails NN asking about the status
of an English subtitled version of the Opgelicht show which can be used to
inform networks and churches outside of Holland
On 31 January Tanya Pit, daughter of JHP, emails KMO
regarding confidentiality telling KMO not to contact anyone without the
approval of CS. SOR is concerned that
KMO will undermine strategies of CS and the Dutch investigators.
RG is
disappointed in the lack of action plans and timelines coming from a
professional advisor like CS.
On 2 February Jeltje Spruyt, wife of ES, sends out
their February newsletter headed Le Rucher Ministries. In one part she says, “Not all of you may be
aware that problems have arisen with investments that we and others have made
with a company in Sweden
On 4 February Todd Johnson, a researcher located at
Gordon-Conwell Seminary in Boston and long-time consultant to YWAM, sends a
page from his book World Christian Trends, which lists the largest Christian
fraud cases of the 1990’s. In terms of
monies involved NCI would be among the larger cases on this list.
Then on 7 February another watershed event takes
place, this time unexpectedly. On this
day, Lars-Olof Svensson (LO), a lawyer with the Wistrand legal firm in Stockholm who has been contacted by DS, emails to DS a
five page letter that was sent from an Austrian Court Swedish Court Salzburg Leon
and the patriarch of the family, was for many years president of the World
Sephardi Federation and is well known in the Geneva Holland
The next day DS emails this document to KMO and
RG. During the next few days KO, DS and
RG search the internet for information about the people mentioned in the
Austrian document. People mentioned are
involved in a wide range of dubious activities, financial scandals and legal
cases around the world.
On 13 February RG meets with RJ who explains more
about the document as he is able to read the German text. In an email later that day to KMO and DS, RG
asks KO what he knows of the history of MS, “Is it, was it, part of YWAM?” Later that day KO forwards article from the
February 2004 edition of International YWAMer announcing the split in 2003
between YWAM and MS. In the article, Don
Stephens, the founder of MS explained that it was time to happen, both groups
had adequately matured. There is no
mention of the apparent serious conflicts at the time between Don Stephens and
YWAM leaders. KO also sends at the same
time a six page summary of basic information on YWAM and its top leaders,
including contact details.
The next day 14 February KO receives an English translation
of the Austrian document and forwards it and nine pages of information on LR
statutes and Board members to RG and other friends and supporters. In the cover email KMO make note of their
memory that in 2002 ES had spoken of his involvement in raising $10 million for
MS.
On 19 February RG meets with Pierre Christ (PC), a
Board member of Mercy Ships Switzerland and also a member of Crossroads Church Geneva
banking community and his brother is a well known Geneva
On 20 February RG sends out his 11 page analysis of
the Austrian document. The analysis
describes the commercial transaction referred to in the document and some
scenarios into which the transaction could fit.
The Austrian
document was important. At the time it
was just not clear in what way it was important. Again there were high expectations that the
case would break open now, but again there was disappointment that the pieces
didn’t quite fall together yet.
This document
turns out to be a treasure trove of information, but why would ES and KW want
to secure a $100 million bank guarantee? Why is the major YWAM ministry of
Mercy Ships mentioned in association with KW and ES? And why be involved with someone like Nessim
Gaon and his brother Leon, two of whose Geneva-based trading companies had gone
bankrupt in recent years—Granadex in May 2002 and Provvidenza in 2006. One of Provvidenza’s business objectives was
providing health care resources in West Africa . Was this relevant? Was this transaction to
raise the $100 million bank guarantee ever consummated? Private attempts by KMO
and DS to learn more about this Austrian case have not borne fruit so far.
On 21 February NP sends his comments on RG’s
analysis, “My guess is that the whole matter is a lot more down to earth than
you describe.”
On 22 February KO prepares the first draft of a six
page document entitled, “NCI/SDI and Beyond—Relevance for YWAM, How is YWAM Affected? (personnel and
projects)” This was prepared also to
help KMO and RG prepare a response to YWAM in the review of KO’s
dismissal. See YWAM Narrative for more
details of the dismissal review process.
Also this day JHP send report of the meeting they
had the previous day with NN of TROS to talk about an Opgelicht sequel. They continue, “Another suggestion/proposal
may be to have a meeting with the Ermelo and Apeldoorn Evangelische churches
together with Cees and present them with the Austrian document, showing Liza
got her contract after Erik had his doubts, that Erik suggested investors to
make use of “offshore” financial constructions to evade tax, Erik’s lie he had
gone to the police to report the NCI fraud, and whatever arguments Erik had
used to mislead these churches and people.
If we are able to convince the church leaders we could ask them for
cooperation with us…. For the above action it should isolate Erik, and is a
nice introduction of the SOR letter to YWAM.
The letter to YWAM may even go at the same time as the meetings with the
churches….”
Liza, a
Christian worker in the Middle East, only started her contract on 1 June 2006,
long after ES knew that the NCI money was disappearing. It would be almost another six months before
CS writes to YWAM, and JHP renew their efforts to confront the Dutch churches.
On 24 February KO emails RG about MS, “Trying to
track this huge donation to Mercy Ships (Africa Mercy ship project? In 2001 or
2002). Plus other info that might be
helpful…Veronique on staff at LR was on loan from Mercy Ships to do the book
keeping at LR. She was a YWAMer with
Mercy Ships. She left LR around
2004.” KO also observes that in the 2002
MS annual report Mercy Ships–France is shown at the same address as LR.
This was the
first time that the Africa Mercy is mentioned,
but the pieces in this possible scenario still were not quite falling together.
Also on 24 February KO emails SOR to report on a
meeting he has had with a fellow Crossroads member and NCI investor who has
come by his house. As quoted from the
email, this fellow investor has told him, “About a year ago ES spoke at a
Christian Businessman’s lunch. ES stated
that LR was funded by three primary sources, including NCI and two
foundations/sources from NL. He said he
did not need to solicit funds for LR because of these sources… ES said on
another occasion that NCI/SDI money was used to help pay for LR…”
Also on 24 February KO sends SOR a list of six
possible ways forward: 1. Help from FMP,
FIOD, TROS 2. Former/Current LR
Board 3. Cees/SOR 4. YWAM
5. Media 6. Research.
NP responds later that day to KO’s six point list
with this comments. He says in part,
“FIOD’s investigation is directed at Spruyt and maybe (in cooperation with Sweden
On 25 February NP in an email to SOR expresses the
thought that a second TROS programme would be good to show the bad faith of ES
and KW. He also says, “So this tv
program could be used to stir up the heat around YWAM. Not to set them on fire. They must think that it is likely that, if
this continues, they eventually might get burned, but so far they still can
escape. That I believe is our best
chance for a speedy and not too expensive solution.”
Next day Tanya Pit emails KMO and RG a translation
of a message from CS who does not want any private investigative work done by
KMO and RG as this will alienate FIOD, “My request, let everything rest until
FIOD has taken up the case. After this
we could give them additional information, but I think this is not really
necessary….”
KMO and SOR
are on a collision course over KMO’s ability to properly confront YWAM on the
issues pertinent to KO’s dismissal, one of which is NCI.
On 1 March KO emails to RG and SOR the scanned
documents from 1995-1996 that he has just received from Sean Collins. These are the documents that are referred to
at the beginning of this narrative. On
seeing these documents from Sean, Tanya Pit emails back with the information on
Rene Koopmans that is also included earlier.
On 4 March, with reference to the Sean Collins
documents, RG emails NP, “As I look at the stream of fraud schemes that
Westergard was promoting I am more convinced that there is an architect above
Westergard and Spruyt. This is also
reinforced for me by the presence in the Austrian document of the names of Leon
Gaon and Dominique Demaurex—two well known and wealthy Swiss businessmen. We also have the presence of YWAM and Mercy
Ships. I guess two big questions are (1)
who is the “architect” of this scam and (2) where did all of the money go—did
it go to the architect?”
NP responds to RG the same day, “To me it is clear
that neither Westergard, nor Spruyt, knew and know what they are talking
about. In these matters they both are
absolute amateurs. So there must be one
or more entities ‘behind’ them in whom/which they believed. It is very likely that at least part of the
stolen funds went to these entities…”
Also on 4 March KMO has a conference call with Delon
Human and Marcus Orsi of the LR Board.
Delon and Marcus are either past or current elders of Crossroads Church USA Holland
When SOR learns of these contacts with Delon and
Marcus, a brief email debate arises between Tanya and RG over the effect these
contacts may or may not have on the FIOD investigation. RG feels that CS is imposing far too many
restrictions on SOR members, like KMO, who do not know what CS or the FIOD are
doing anyway. Tanya is concerned that the whole case might be lost because of
“indiscretions” on the part of KMO. KMO
and RG know that they will have to be able to discuss NCI with YWAM in the
context of KO’s dismissal review, so the decision is taken for KMO to withdraw
from SOR as graciously as possible.
On 24 March the SOR Board send KMO the following
email, “With this email we like to confirm our recent telephone conversations
about SOR…. We have pointed out that if you do not strictly follow Cees’
instructions, you are a liability to SOR.
We do understand that you are in a very difficult position and that a
lot is at stake. However, we would ask
you to reconsider carefully everything that has been said in our telephone
conversations and let us know if you are still able to comply with these
requirements with all due consequences.
We hope to hear your answer soon.”
On 27 March KMO respond to the SOR Board with a
brief review of the situation and continue, “So with all of the above in mind,
this is our suggestion which we would like to discuss by phone. We would like to take a break from SOR for a
month or so and then speak together and reevaluate SOR involvement towards the
end of April 2008.”
It was also on 27 March that KMO send 15 pages of
documentation to Iain Muir of YWAM as part of the review of KO’s dismissal.
[See YWAM Narrative for further details.]
KMO wanted to
withdraw from SOR for one month so as not to be constrained in any discussions
with YWAM. KMO need to be free to
challenge YWAM over the fraud without being associated with SOR’s efforts to
get money back from YWAM at the same time.
Finally on 15 April KMO email the SOR Board formally
resigning from SOR effective from their withdrawal on 28 March 2008.
On 16 April KMO receive an email from Ian Muir
saying that their request for an appeal of KO’s dismissal has been rejected.
On 24 April, RJ emails RG to advise that the NCI
case has been handed from the Dutch investigators to the Swedish fraud
office. This is confirmed in an email on
30 April by the Swedish police who advise that the case has been passed to the
EBM in Malmo , Sweden
Also on 30 April KMO download from the Registry of
Commerce in Vaud current corporate registration details for Association Mercy
Ministries based at chemin de la Fauvette 98 in Lausanne
The
significance of this document was put aside at this time as KMO were involved
in the aftermath of the rejection of their “appeal” request by YWAM and the
problems they begin to encounter with YWAM-Garden Valley
Nevertheless
this document seems to tie together ES with YWAM in a very clear way that
continues even into this year.
On 12 May KMO are advised by
YWAM-Garden Valley YWAM-Garden Valley YWAM-Garden Valley
On 18 May KO meets with Trevor Davies (TD), also a
former member of Crossroads
Church
When KMO and RG meet the next day RG learns what TD
said the previous day, and also that Don Stephens’s wife, Deyon, is the sister
of LG. From this time onward KMO and RG
begin to investigate the history of MS.
On 24 May MO emails to RG a listing showing that
Steve Goode is an international Board Member of MS in addition to his roles on
the YWAM GLT and the Board of Mercy Ministries-Switzerland. The listing also shows that Steve’s brother,
Ron, is Secretary of the main MS Board.
On 26 May KO discovers that in the MS 2002 annual
report a $10 million matching grant was given to MS by The Oaks Foundation
(TOF) based in Geneva Geneva
A review of
TOF’s website indicates that a grant of $10 million is much larger than any of
their other grants. Also MS does not
seem to fit easily into any of their giving categories. Thirdly, there is no mention on the TOF
website of this very large grant. All of
this seems somewhat suspicious. Is it
possible that all or most of the $10 million was “given” to TOF to forward to
MS, perhaps by a “donor” who wanted to remain anonymous. This is a current working hypothesis. RG and KMO are reluctant to investigate this
directly for fear of generating suspicion towards themselves in the community.
On 2 July KO emails information about Mercy Ships
and TOF grant to the EBM in Sweden
On 12 July RG emails KO saying that he has an update
on the working hypothesis. On 15 July RG
emails KMO explaining his theory that NCI was set up by leaders of MS as a
vehicle to raise money that MS can use to secure loans for financing
purposes. Around this time the idea
arises to acquire copies of Don Stephens’s book, Ships of Mercy, which was
published in 2005.
On 19 July RG emails KMO describing various roles
that people in the leadership of YWAM and MS would need to play to make the
operation of NCI work without exposing it to public scrutiny. RG theorizes that in 2002 the original idea
of using NCI funds as collateral for loans was compromised by the leaders, who
diverted the capital itself into MS, thus removing NCI’s ability to repay
investors. Since money was still coming
into NCI after 2002 there was still some money available to make payments to
investors who requested it—this is how they were able to continue to make payments
up to 2005.
Also on 19 July, KO is in England
On 20 July RG emails KMO with thoughts on
approaching different people who could perhaps give more information on
MS. One suggestion is to learn more
about Rob Burg who was Executive Director of Mercy Ships-Switzerland from
1988-1997 and who was instrumental in expanding the fundraising of MS
throughout Europe. Rob was also a good
friend of ES. It seems that Rob is
currently in the USA
On 25 July RG reads Ships of Mercy. KO and RG both take note of the following
statement referring to the 1990’s on page 150, “We also knew that buying a big
ship was going to be much more expensive this time around, so we began meeting
people and courting corporations, hoping to build up a healthy bank balance
towards the purchase. Then in 1998…”
From reading
the book KO and RG could see that MS was chronically short of cash, but had big
plans to build a “fleet” of hospital ships.
From his work in the oil industry RG knew that operating ocean going
ships was a very capital intensive business with large operating and
maintenance costs.
If one returns
to the bottom of page 13 of this Narrative, RG was asking KMO on 27 October
2007 what the motive was for NCI. Here
is a possible motive—funding MS. Perhaps
it is not the right motive, but it is a specific motive that requires millions
of dollars.
But how can
this be further investigated?
On 1 August KO prepares a three page summary of how
NCI/SDI money might be involved with YWAM/Mercy Ships, especially the Africa
Mercy.
On 3 August RJ informs KMO and RG of the names and
contact details for government investigators in Sweden
On 21 August KO sends out documents written by
Frontiers, a Christian organization in the USA
RG surmises
that there is a race on now as to who breaks this case. Will it be the
government investigators or will those involved confess, perhaps under pressure
from friends and colleagues?
No comments:
Post a Comment