PROSECUTORS have started to call brothel owners to give evidence in their case against former MP Craig Thomson, who is defending allegations he used union funds to pay for porn and prostitutes.
Prosecutors allege Mr Thomson used union credit cards to hire escorts, pay for X-rated movies, withdraw cash, buy cigarettes and pay for interstate flights for himself and his wife.
Brothel owner Peter Lazarus, who owns A Touch of Class in Sydney's Surry Hills, told the court services cost $300 an hour plus a 10 per cent fee for credit card payments.
The court heard a $660 transaction was listed on a credit card used by Mr Thomson while he was HSU secretary.
The amount was recorded as being paid to "Staff Call", the merchant name of A Touch Of Class, the court heard.
Earlier, the court heard Mr Thomson has access to several credit cards and was the only union official who could withdraw cash from at least one of the cards.
HSU honorary national president Lloyd Williams told the court union cards didn't have the facility to allow users to withdraw cash.
He said he learnt Mr Thomson could withdraw cash from his card following an exit audit conducted after Mr Thomson left the union.
"I was flabbergasted. It was unheard of," he said.
"I didn't understand why a union official would need to withdraw cash."
Who's been a naughty boy, then? 
Gerard Curtin, a vastly-experience forensic accountant, was the third prosecution witness to be heard today. Mr Curtin, a CPA, has worked in accountancy for over 30 years — and he has worked with Victoria Police for over 25 of those in finding evidence related to proceeds of crime for presentation into court. As an example of this work, Curtin has spent significant time tracing the murky trails left by the money laundering of drug barons so that prosecutions would succeed.
Mr Curtin testified that he had done an extremely through investigation of not only the HSU’s accounts and electronic books, but also the personal bank and credit card accounts of Craig Thomson and his former wife.
“The analysis [undertaken by Mr Curtin] went far beyond the charges,” said the magistrate.
At that point, this writer felt certain that if any proverbial smoking gun was going to be displayed to the court, then Mr Curtin would be the one person who could find it.
Ms Taylor questioned Mr Curtin in detail about his forensic financial analysis, which led to at least the following being tendered into evidence:
- Exhibit 7: a spreadsheet of transactions on Craig Thomson’s personal bank account.
- Exhibit 8: a spreadsheet of transactions on Craig Thomson’s personal (i.e. non-HSU) MasterCard.
- Exhibit 9: a spreadsheet of transactions on Craig Thomson’s HSU MasterCard.
Many other forensic accounting exhibits were also tendered — in relation to the HSU’s MYOB system, various Diners Club credit card statement summaries, Craig Thomson’s joint personal loan accounts held with his partner and so on. Mr James had no objection to these being entered into evidence as long as the privacy of the non-union bank statements and Mr Curtin’s summaries of the same were respected.
As part of the process of his auditing, Mr Curtin told the court that he would enter and list the transactions in his summaries that he discovered under broad category headings that described the nature of the expenditure. Some examples of these headings were ‘entertainment expenses’, ‘travel’, ‘accommodation’, as well as others.
Mr Curtin testified that the Exhibit 9 spreadsheet he created had entries totalling $5,993 under the category of “escort services”.
Mr James asked the witness who it was who had suggested that certain transactions were listed under this heading.
“The informant,” replied Mr Curtin.
According to Mr Curtin’s evidence, the informant (DS Tyquin) also suggested that certain entries discovered in his comprehensive audit and examination of the Union’s MYOB data were listed in his summaries under the heading of “escort services”.
The preeminent thought in this writer’s mind after hearing this, was “prejudice”.
Originally, the witness testified, some unreconciled cash expenditures were entered under such headings as ‘meeting – National Office’, ‘entertainment’, and ‘teleconference’ on the MYOB database.
As an aside, it may be worth recalling what the notorious FWA report previously had to say about cash withdrawal transactions.
However, this writer cannot recall Mr Curtin making any mention of any figures anywhere close to $100,000 in relation to cash withdrawal transactions in his testimony yesterday.
Is anyone shocked by this?
This writer believes that Mr Curtin’s audit was far more thorough and credible then that done by FWA.
According to my notes, Mr Curtin stated to the court that out of a total expenditure of $164,556 on the card, of which $35,634 was in cash withdrawals, around $21,000 of cash expenditure was not able to be reconciled.
I just puonched. 
because that's what the argument boils down to lol.
Part 1 - some things to consider
This article is obviously a little dated, however makes for some very interesting reading
The major saga embroiling the Federal Government at the moment, besides the curious Peter Slipper and James Ashby affair, is the Health Services Union (HSU) debacle.
Firstly, let me start by saying that I do not endorse anyone spending over $6,000 on prostitutes on a union credit card — that is reprehensible behaviour. Nor do I endorse not declaring vast amounts of money to the Electoral Commission on election campaigns. However, these allegations are yet to be proved — and are vigorously denied.
In any case, I think I smell a rat.
Union whistleblower Kathy Jackson has been ripping into both the Labor Party and the former (until February 2012) President of Fair Work Australia, Geoffrey Giudice, for months now over the goings on within the embattled Union and the investigation resulting from her claims.
Kathy Jackson has caused the union movement untold damage and brought the Federal Government to the brink of collapse. One would assume that the public may be interested in knowing a little more about her and any conflicts of interest she may have.
One vital piece of information that is not widely known about her is that her partner is a man named Michael Lawler.
Who is Michael Lawler?
For starters, according to reliable sources, Michael Lawler is friends with a man named Tony Abbott. Apparently, the two of them socialise regularly. Conveniently, Tony Abbott is also the leader of the political party making so much ground out of the claims Michael’s partner is making.
Michael Lawler works for an organisation called Fair Work Australia, where he is a Vice-President on a salary of $400,000 a year. The only person higher than him at that organisation is Iain Ross, who just replaced Geoffrey Giudice – the one who Tony Abbott and Lawler’s partner Kathy Jackson were attacking daily – as President of Fair Work Australia.
@icyfroth wrote:I just puonched.
because that's what the argument boils down to lol.
Because what is what the argument boils down to?
Would you rather not ever find out the truth about what happened?
What is he is not the rip off merchant. Did you read the bit about him not owning any companies that got paid by the union, unlike the whistle blower who did?
