Truong Hue Van: Entangled in prison still asks for a reduction in sentence for her biological aunt, revealing that there are still many unknowns

On October 7, the Ho Chi Minh City People's Court continued to hear the case related to Van Thinh Phat Group Joint Stock Company, with arguments between defense lawyers for the defendants. Defendant Truong Hue Van asked for a reduction in sentence for his aunt for shocking reasons!

At the beginning of the trial, lawyer Bui Phuong Lan, defending the defendant Ngo Thanh Nha (Ms. Lan's sister-in-law), presented her client's point of view.

According to the allegations, the defendant Ngo Thanh Nha was assigned by Ms. Truong My Lan to be the General Director of Van Thinh Phat Group, Chairman of An Dong Company. Ms. Nha carried out Truong My Lan's direction, signed all legal documents and documents on the issuance of bonds of An Dong Company, thereby creating 2 bond codes issued in 2018.

Lawyer Bui Phuong Lan said that his client admitted to the crime, tried to overcome the consequences, and returned the money to the victims. Regarding the penalty, the defense counsel for the defendant said that it was too strict, and suggested that the Judicial Council consider it.

Ms. Nha's defense attorney argued that her client committed a crime due to being dependent on and trusting her sister-in-law (Ms. Truong My Lan). The process of performing the act of not being aware of signing the documents is helping Ms. Lan to appropriate the property.

The lawyer said that the defendant Nha had not finished high school, had not been trained in human resources, finance, and did not know about the issuance of bonds by An Dong Company. During the investigation and in court, Ms. Truong My Lan also admitted that the above issues were decided by the defendant.

In the defense, the lawyer said that the defendant Nha was currently in poor health, and had to be hospitalized in an emergency during the detention process. In addition, lawyer Lan said that the defendant Nha has many mitigating circumstances such as having a good character, excellent achievements in the process of work, sincerely declaring, etc., so he hopes that the Judicial Council will consider giving his client the lightest sentence.

The defense lawyer for Truong Hue Van, the nephew of the defendant Truong My Lan and the former General Director of WMC Company, presented his client's defense view.

Accordingly, the defendant Van participated in the implementation of the bond issuance policy directed by the defendant Truong My Lan, signed fake contracts and documents for WMC Company to transfer VND 13,000 billion to An Dong Company.

This money was used to issue two bond codes ADC-2018.09.1 and ADC-2019.1 of An Dong Company, in order to appropriate VND 13,000 billion from 20,623 investors.

VKS accused the defendant Van of being an accomplice to Truong My Lan in this case.

The defense lawyer for the defendant Van presented that because the defendant had sincerely admitted his behavior and responsibility, the lawyer agreed with the crime and sentence proposed by the HCMC People's Court. According to the lawyer, this sentence is humane, clearly showing the differentiation of the role of the defendant compared to the mastermind.

Therefore, the lawyer said that the next opinions are not for the purpose of debate, but for the Judicial Council to further consider the nature and extent of the defendant's behavior. According to the lawyer, the defendant Van was only involved in two bond packages worth VND 13,000 billion. Although this is not a small number, compared to other bond packages of An Dong Company, it is still the smallest amount.

According to the lawyer, because the defendant Van and the defendant Chu Lap Co - the husband of the defendant Lan, are close relatives of the defendant Lan, right from the 1st stage of the case related to Saigon Commercial Joint Stock Bank (SCB), the defendant had to bear a very heavy level of responsibility.

The lawyer said that using the "lens of Ms. Lan's nephew" to assess the extent of the defendant Van's crime was "unfair" and emphasized that the role of the defendant Van in the case was "completely obscure".

The lawyer also pointed out that, at the time of the bond case in 2018-2019, the defendant Van was the legal representative of Van Thinh Phat Group Joint Stock Company. Therefore, from the perspective of the investigating agency, the defendant is considered to play a very important role. However, the lawyer affirmed that this is not the case, the role of the defendant in the case is insignificant.

According to the lawyer, at this time, Van was not aware of the nature of the case until working with the investigating agency.

The lawyer presented that Van once testified that "when it comes to the interest payment periods of bonds, I once heard my aunt complain about lending An Dong Company to Nguyen Phuong Hong to issue bonds". According to the lawyer, at this time, Van began to visualize the activities of the group.

The lawyer said that some of the contracts signed by the defendant Van were urged by the secretary to sign quickly, while on these contracts there were signatures of the deputy directors in charge of administration - who Van believed they ensured that everything was arranged according to the process.

According to the lawyer, about "running cash flow", "Van also has no consciousness or concept", "I don't understand why I am a scammer, with such a large amount of money".

The lawyer also expressed that his client also showed sincere repentance through his concerns, saying: "Hue Van once said that now that everyone in the group is arrested, who is the one to pay the debts to the victims".

From his defense views, the lawyer suggested that the jury consider the role of the defendant Van as a passive and limited accomplice. The lawyer hopes that the Board of Trustees will not declare civil liability for his client.

Agreeing with the defense lawyer's viewpoint, defendant Van would like to add 2 more opinions. Firstly, the defendant would like to consider and exempt the defendant Chu Lap Co. Defendant Van presented: "Mr. Chu Lap Co is the uncle, teacher and father of the defendant...".

Secondly, the defendant Van said: "The defendant deeply regrets all his hasty signatures, in the ambiguous context of issuing bonds, leading to the arrest of the defendant, affecting many other families. There are families who have lost their loved ones such as Ms. Nguyen Phuong Hong, Mr. Nguyen Tien Thanh... The action from 6 years ago has led to the consequences that are too terrible today. Please consider it for her because there are really many other unknowns that the brothers and sisters have passed away forever. Please consider your role and responsibilities so that you can get the highest leniency of the law."

Bà Trương Mỹ Lan khóc, không nhận tội, được vợ Thanh Bùi gọi là mẹ, hé lộ 1 điều JLO16:31:31 11/03/2024Ngày 11.3, HĐXX tiếp tục phiên tòa vụ án Vạn Thịnh Phát với phần xét hỏi bị cáo Trương Mỹ Lan (cựu Chủ tịch Tập đoàn Vạn Thịnh Phát) và Nguyễn Cao Trí - cựu Chủ tịch tập đoàn Capella.