Offer To The CEO

Friday, continued …

"I might be able to convince CEO and Madam Hou as well as the national prosecutors office to accept no convictions on some, but not all of the charges. I also may have Madam Hou, on the matters that support the charge of aggravated violence against a former domestic partner not to pursue those matters civilly or criminally in Australia. Other matters, will simply have to await a decision as to which jurisdiction has the ability to pursue the charges."

"That is unlikely to be totally acceptable to my clients."

"It will be a compromise to my clients and the national prosecution service as well. My assistant here has commenced drafting the agreed facts to be presented to the court. I have been requested to have whatever we agree to approved by the national prosecution service as well. Let us sit down and get this agreed on."

They commenced reading the document, ignoring the starting details.

It Is agreed, for the purposes of finalising this matter within the criminal law system, and finalising any potential civil claims to the following in this matter.

The first defendant, Mr Lu Jinhu a citizen of both this country and Australia will enter a plea of guilty to the following matters:

• Agggravted violence towards a former partner

• False statements to police

• Corporate espionage

And all other matters whether charged or uncharged from the circumstances of the events described being withdrawn or barred from legal claim in this country.

The second defendant, Madam Lu Lin also known as Ms Yang Lin a citizen of this country will enter a plea of guilty to the following matters:

• Assault with aggravating circumstances

• False statements to police

• Corporate espionage

And all other matters whether charged or uncharged from the circumstances of the events described being withdrawn or barred from legal claim in this country.

The victims in this matter, are firstly Madam Hou Anna, also known as Ms Jones Anna, a citizen of both this country and Australia and secondly the corporation Hou Enterprises as represented by its Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of Directors Hou Yi and one director Madam Hou Anna.

The First Victim in this matter, had been in a domestic relationship with the first defendant in Australia for a period of approximately five years. Due to the period of time that the first defendant lived in Australia and was in a relationship with the first victim, without loosing his citizenship of this country he firstly became a permanent resident and then a citizen of Australia. The obtaining of his Australian Citizenship did not cancel his citizenship of this country by operation of the law.

The first victim and the first defendant separated. Neither the first victim of the first named defendant will, in these proceeding reveal anything about their separation as this is the subject to litigation in Family Law Proceedings under Australia Law. Australian Law limits the disclosure that either party can make as to the nature of the proceedings or what is being decided in them, save and except to implement any order. Government Legal Officials in this country have agreed that clearly it is a matter properly litigated in Australia given the relationship occurred there and both the first victim and the first named defendant are citizens of that country.

The first defendant obtained his marriage certificate with the second defendant in City T, and the issuing of that marriage certificate is a matter of public record, but it occurred four weeks ago, from the upcoming Tuesday. The first defendant and the second defendant subsequently three weeks ago, from this date, held a public marriage ceremony at the Key Plaza Hotel.

The first victim obtained her marriage certificate with the Chief Executive Officer and chairman of the Board of the second victim, Hou Yi on the same day that the first defendant and second defendant. The first victim and Hou Yi, have not had a public marriage ceremony, which is not a legal requirement for a valid marriage in this country, however they intend to hold a marriage ceremony in the first victim's birth country Australia.

Due to her marriage to a citizen of this country, upon her marriage which is a matter of public record, the first victim by operation of law became a citizen of this country, and consequently she was issued a personal household register.