Ms. Truong My Lan did not complain, asked for a series of huge assets: villas, yachts

Answering in court, the defendant Truong My Lan affirmed that he did not complain, only hoped that the Judicial Council would consider mitigating the punishment and hoped to receive back the assets including an ancient villa, 2 yachts and many houses on Nguyen Hue pedestrian street.

According to Dan Tri, on the afternoon of November 4, the High Court in Ho Chi Minh City continued to consider the appeal of the defendant Truong My Lan (Chairman of the Board of Directors of Van Thinh Phat) and 47 accomplices.

In the morning, the jury completed the procedures and spent time summarizing the first-instance judgment of more than 300 pages. Entering the afternoon working time, the Judicial Council began to interrogate the defendants.

After the jury asked the defendants who played a key role in the case, the court switched to asking the defendant Truong My Lan. In her presentation, Ms. Lan repeatedly choked up, and the members of the jury had to constantly remind the defendant to calm down.

In court, the defendant said that she did not complain but hoped that the Judicial Council would reconsider all her criminal acts and her own contributions to society. Since then, the owner of Van Thinh Phat asked the appellate court to consider mitigating her punishment.

The Board of Directors asked the defendant whether he used SCB's assets or not, Ms. Lan expressed her feelings about her family's journey to establish Van Thinh Phat. The defendant said that he lent personal assets to SCB to restructure this bank, denying the allegation of misappropriating money.

When the court asked the source of money to create assets, the defendant Truong My Lan testified that before 1975, her family was a famous small trader in Ben Thanh market. After that, she started a cosmetics business throughout Vietnam, expanding to countries in the region. In 1992, Ms. Lan founded Van Thinh Phat and started a business in the field of real estate and restaurants, accumulating capital for many years.

Next, Ms. Lan hoped that the Judicial Council would consider mitigating the punishment for all defendants in the case so that they would soon return to rebuild their lives. This woman said that the accomplices committed the wrong act just because they wanted to save SCB.

After presenting the contents related to the case, Ms. Lan wished to reclaim the assets that were being distrained and blocked during the investigation.

Specifically, the defendant asked the court to clear 2 buildings on Tran Cao Van and Le Loi streets (District 1) because this is her mother's property for Truong Hue Van (Ms. Lan's granddaughter), not related to the case.

At the same time, she also applied for the distraint of the old villa on Vo Van Tan Street (District 3). This was presented a lot by her at the first-instance trial. The defendant said that this is the family's private property, of great cultural and heritage value.

In addition, she asked the Board of Directors to clear the building No. 19-25 Nguyen Hue (District 1). The female defendant said that she asked for this property to rent back, get money to renovate the villa on Vo Van Tan Street because SCB has not paid the rent for many years.

The owner of Van Thinh Phat also asked for the house No. 78 Nguyen Hue (District 1) because this is the property bought for her daughter and asked for a yacht, 2 ships, 19 cars that are being distrained during the investigation of the case.

In addition, Ms. Lan asked for a series of assets such as savings books, real estate as Van Thinh Phat headquarters because they were created before she participated in the restructuring of SCB.

In April, the People's Court of Ho Chi Minh City conducted a first-instance trial, sentencing the defendant Truong My Lan to 20 years in prison for violating regulations on lending in the operation of credit institutions; 20 years in prison for giving bribes and embezzlement of property. The total punishment that the defendant Lan must serve is the first sentence.

Subordinates testified about the influence of Ms. Truong My Lan at SCB

Information from Vietnamnet, upholding the appeal, Truong Khanh Hoang (former acting General Director of SCB Bank) hopes that the Board of Directors will consider mitigating the penalty. Previously, the defendant Hoang was sentenced to 18 years in prison by the Ho Chi Minh City People's Court for the crime of "Embezzlement of property".

With the question of the chairman "how do you perceive the role of the defendant Truong My Lan at SCB Bank?", the defendant Hoang testified that when he first started working, the defendant Dinh Van Thanh (former Chairman of the Board of Directors of SCB Bank) said that Ms. Lan was the "sponsor" of SCB. Therefore, the defendant Hoang thought that Ms. Lan was a person with great influence on SCB Bank.

Regarding the reason for applying for penalty relief, defendant Hoang presented that at a time when SCB Bank was very difficult, there were loans "if you don't do it, you will only go bankrupt". Therefore, the defendant signed an agreement to lend 386 loans to 270 customers at SCB Bank.

Defendant Vo Tan Hoang Van (former General Director of SCB Bank) would like to keep his testimony at the investigating agency and at the first-instance hearing. At the first-instance session, the defendant Van was sentenced to life imprisonment by the People's Court of Ho Chi Minh City for the crimes of "Embezzlement of assets" and "Violation of regulations on lending in the operation of credit institutions".

In court, defendant Van argued that the first-instance judgment had a number of details that did not fully show the working content at the first-instance trial; the defendant did not direct his subordinates to make credit documents according to the direction of defendant Lan.

Regarding the "fruit boxes" containing 5.2 million USD that Van sent to the defendant Do Thi Nhan (former Director of the Inspection and Supervision Department of Bank 2), the defendant Van admitted that he and the driver brought the fruit box to the house 3 times to give it to Ms. Nhan, and knew that the inside was money.

The defendant Truong Hue Van (former General Director of Van Thinh Phat Group Investment Joint Stock Company) testified in 2020 that there was a Covid-19 epidemic, so he mainly carried out anti-epidemic activities, so the role and mistakes in the case were very small.

Truong Hue Van hopes that the jury will properly consider the nature and behavior of the defendant. At the same time, the defendant Van has overcome the consequences of 2.5 billion VND - an additional mitigating circumstance that has not been considered at the first instance.

Regarding the house at 21 Tran Cao Van, the defendant Van said that this was the property given by his grandmother, not related to Van Thinh Phat Group. According to the defendant, this is the only remaining property of the family, so he asked the Board of Directors to consider returning it to stabilize his residence. In addition, the defendant asked for back some personal belongings that had been confiscated by the investigation agency.

Truong My Lan needs to pay 280 trillion to escape the death penalty, how much is the compensation money now? Hoàng Phúc4 months agoOn November 25, a representative of the High People's Procuracy in Ho Chi Minh City responded to the defense of Ms. Truong My Lan (Chairwoman of the Board of Directors of Van Thinh Phat) and her accomplices.