The Morning Report
Get the news and information you need to take on the day.
Our reporting relies on your support. Contribute today!
Help us reach our goal of $250,000. The countdown is on!
Monday, Sept. 11, 2006 | Re: “Aguirre’s Roadshow“
I for one would urge the city attorney (whether it would be Mr. Aguirre, Mr. Witt, or Shelley Higgins) to prosecute a false claims act case against Kroll et al. I have discussed the Kroll report with several veteran, highly competent CPAs with forensic experience, who unanimously opine that we, the people of the city of San Diego (I’ve lived in the city limits uninterruptedly since 1983), got screwed because the value of the work product is no more than $300,000.00 dripping wet. We, the people, were the victims of an old third party beneficiary contract scam like I used to prosecute in a variety of contexts when in the city attorney’s fraud unit.
How does one prove fraud? Gee, I used to prove fraud for a living! Mind if I chime in? A few ways come to mind.
The testimony of one or more experts, who would opine that the Kroll report is so overpriced compared to what was required or promised that the city was in fact defrauded. The elected officials’ opinions about “getting their monies’ worth” is of no merit since the report personally exculpated them (they would have approved $40 million for personal exculpation) and they are therefore impeached as biased.
In addition, the contract itself was arguably executed, performed and maintained under duress, which vitiates the required consent for valid contracts. The duress came in the form of KPMG’s refusal to issue its own financial statement without the Kroll report, regardless of Kroll’s cost or duration.
Lastly, the doctrine of voiding a contract due to unconscionability should be applied to the entire matter.
Just to name a few; not exhaustive by any means.