By Michael O’Farrell
Investigations Editor
THE Irish Mail on Sunday has obtained sensational new video footage appearing to show members of the Quinn family demanding millions of dollars in relation to a shopping centre in the Ukraine.
The recording appears to contradict testimony by Seán Quinn Jr to the High Court on the day he was jailed.
The tape also shows both him and Peter Darragh Quinn repeatedly demanding payment of sums up to $5m from a pair of Ukrainian businessman.
In the recording, Peter Darragh Quinn is seen clearly saying that the money could be sent to ‘accounts’ and that he was ‘not f*****g willing to go to jail and get no money’.
This Thursday, Seán Quinn Jr and his father will appear in court once again in relation to the alleged stripping of assets from their global empire. They are expected to be questioned for the first time about the alleged schemes in Russia, India and Ukraine.
Both have been jailed already for contempt of court by Judge Elizabeth Dunne – who said they were guilty of ‘outrageous’ contempt of High Court orders, and of failing to co-operate with attempts to reverse stripping of assets, including a shopping mall in Kiev.
Equally, the Ukrainians involved have found themselves criticised by a High Court judge over their role in a deal that has led to legal battles in courts all over the world.
In the new video revealed today, Seán Quinn Jr appears to contradict evidence over a payment of €100,000 from Ukrainian businessmen that he supplied in an affidavit to Judge Dunne on the day she sent him to Mountjoy.
Giving an account of the meeting in an affidavit, Quinn Jr says he had sought only $500,000 from the businessmen. But the new video footage appears to show him demanding $5m.
But it is his cousin, Peter Darragh Quinn, who dominates the conversation in the new tape.
Peter Darragh, who fled Ireland rather than be jailed for contempt and is now living in theNorth, is seen banging the table, rejecting $100,000 and demanding $5m as ‘due’ and offering to arrange for new bank accounts when told injunctions are preventing payments.
He then tells the Ukrainians; If the injunction causes that much trouble, maybe we’d better call the whole deal off.’
Later, when the Ukrainians speak of their wish to follow the letter of the law, Peter Darragh Quinn is dismissive: ‘Balls. Lookit, I know…You were well able to get money to Russia when you were getting the most of it, so you were, so I have no doubt that you’re able to get money over to us. Well, let’s come up with a deal and send money somewhere else.’
In return, he is told that beforehand ‘there was not a lot of problems like now’. At this, Peter Quinn becomes even more forceful.
‘I don’t give a f***. I don’t care. I want to know, when is he telling me I’m going to get my money?’ When he is given a date at the end of February, he again raises the possibility of calling off the deal.
‘Lookit, we may go home. We can see what he’s doing.I have cases against me personally in Northern Ireland, in the Republic of Ireland, and if I’m getting no money… tough luck. I am not willing to sit… I am not willing to f*****g go to jail for this and get no money. And that’s where he’s trying to put me.’
Again, the Ukrainians say they want to do everything correctly. ‘We want everything to be by law. Sort this out, sort that out, and get money after. Does he want a police chasing him?’
In response, Peter Quinn appears to demonstrate little regard for the law.
‘I don’t mind about the injunction and I’m in the jurisdiction in there,’ he says.
Significantly, the new recording shows a previously unreleased part of a restaurant meeting in which Peter Darragh Quinn famously told his Ukrainian associates he would not be ‘overly worried’ about lying in an Irish court.
It puts into context the first video – published by the MoS in July – which showed the Quinns accepting $100,000 in cash from Ukrainian businessmen.
Shortly after it was published, Seán Quinn Sr, Seán Quinn Jr and Peter Quinn were sentenced to jail for breaking court orders not to move or deal in their assets.
Peter Darragh Quinn absconded and remains a fugitive from justice in Northern Ireland.
Specifically, the High Court found that the Quinns had moved a Kiev shopping centre controlled by their companies out of reach of Anglo Irish Bank through a series of complicated asset transfers.
Anglo claims that the move was ‘asset stripping’ and that the shopping mall was used as security for the Quinns’ huge debts.
Now the latest video shows the Quinns demanding access to a $5m sum resting in the account of the Ukrainian mall.
It confirms that the Quinns believe they are entitled to access the money as final payment for a secret deal in which they signed over control of the $60m mall to Ukrainian businessman Alexandr Orlov.
During the recording, an increasingly exasperated Peter Darragh Quinn demands that he be paid the millions he is expecting.
‘Lookit,’ he tells the Ukrainians. ‘I know very well youse have been able to bulldoze through every single court case so far. So youse have done everything and proved that youse can do everything – except give us our money.’
In response, the Quinns are offered part payment.
‘He will give you now hundred thousand dollars,’ the translator says.
At this point Seán Quinn Jr interjects to ask about the funds in the shopping centre. ‘How much is there?’ he queries.
‘Nearly six million dollars,’ his cousin answers, adding: ‘That makes me even more worried. The fact he can take out a hundred thousand dollars from the shopping centre and give it to us, but he won’t give us the money we’re due.’
When the Ukrainians protest that they were beset with problems caused by injunctions and need time to come up with the cash, Peter Darragh Quinn responds: ‘We are not asking for their money. We are asking for the money that’s on the account in the shopping centre.’
The Ukrainians point out that they cannot be seen to send money to accounts that have been injuncted. ‘We will send it somewhere else,’ is Peter Darragh Quinn’s answer. Later, he expands on this. ‘We can give you a different account.’
During the contempt proceedings, the Quinns denied engaging in asset-stripping. In an affidavit last July Quinn Jr said that he only demanded money in relation to a company called Cranre.
But the new video footage appears to show him demanding $5m – specifically in relation to the shopping centre deal. In his affidavit he admits receiving $100,000 but says it was part of a bill owed to Cranre.
‘The payments being discussed were unpaid monthly instalments in relation to the Cranre service contract and totalled some $500,000 as at the date of the meeting in January 2012,’ the affidavit reads. ‘I had inadvertently understood at the time of the meeting that this sum was a euro sum and that it equated to approximately 5 million UAH [Ukrainian currency]. It was this sum that we sought payment of.’
The new video now casts doubt on that claim. Only in the last few seconds of the 13-minute conversation does Sean Jr introduce Cranre, clearly prefacing his comments with: ‘The other thing is…’
Up to that moment, the amounts discussed by Peter Darragh and Sean Jr are clearly dollar amounts.
Crucially, the new video provides the missing context relating to the €100,000 payment that the Quinns were caught accepting in the first recording.
In Mr Orlov’s sole interview with the MoS, he maintained that the reason he offered the Quinns $100,000 was that the deal had been beset by a series of injunctions in Ireland, Northern Ireland and the British Virgin Islands which the Quinns had never informed him about.
He claims it was belief that the Quinns attended the Kiev meeting in the expectation of receiving $2m towards the $5m they said they were due under the shopping centre deal.
The new video also supports claims by Mr Orlov in a recent interview with the MoS that far from having no involvement in the deal, the Quinns show that after their row about ‘$5m due’ to the Quinns, they move on to a discussion about whether the Ukrainians would be attending forthcoming court hearing in Belfast.
Seán Quinn Jr sums up the situation with the translator, Larisa Puga.
‘Just two things, Larisa,’ he says. ‘They were saying it was two million cash, but they can’t pay it to the company.
‘A hundred thousand euros…we will take it. But it’s nothing.
‘To us it’s not showing much good faith.’
In response, Miss Puga says: ‘Make things better, then you will receive it.’
‘You wanna that they pay to Cranre?’ Miss Puga asks.
Both Peter Darragh Quinn and Seán Quinn say yes with Peter Darragh adding: ‘Just get it done! Get it done!’
The video then abruptly ends. To this day, the Quinns deny the deal outright; saying their signatures were forged.
However, the Ukranians themselves have also been criticised by a court for their role.
Judge McCloskey in the Belfast High Court ruled just last week that one of the men in the recording, Mr Zaitsev, and another business partner ignored, frustrated and jeopardised an injunction against any transfer of debts surrounding the shopping mall in Kiev.
The judge said their defiance of court orders was flagrant.
In order to verify the video referred to on this story it was sent in its original unedited form to Grant Fredericks – an instructor of forensic video analysis and digital multimedia evidence processing at the FBI’s National Academy in Quantico. Mr Fredericks had previously verified an earlier video of parts of the same meeting which we published in July 2012.
Mr Fredericks said this week that the ‘second video is authentic’ and ‘was recorded by the same device and at the same event as the first one’.
The MoS also obtained a certified translation of the Russian-language elements of the new video and a second proof read from Word Perfect Translations in Dublin – the translation firm used by gardaí and the Courts Service.
All this material – the video, transcript and certification report – were sent to the Quinns in advance of publication.
In response Sean Quinn Jr issued a statement to say;
‘The release of this tape four days prior to Quinn family members giving evidence in the High Court is curious to say the least. The Mail on Sunday and/or their source, has refused the Quinn family’s request to provide a full, unedited recording of the entirety of the meeting.
‘The selective video clips published have been carefully edited and manipulated to create a false impression of the meeting with the sole intention of further damaging the Quinn family’s credibility. As we have consistently maintained, the Quinn family are not in control of the disputed assets.’
*******
Transcript of conversation between Peter Quinn(P) for Innishmore and Sean Quinn (SQ) junior, and representatives of Lyndhurst Investment Vladimir Gurtovoj (V), Dmitrij Zaitsev (Z), Larisa Puga (L) as translator.
Meeting took place on 21 January 2012 at a Fellini restaurant in Kiev.
Text in brackets (……) represents translation from the Russian language.
Due to poor recording quality, some phrases or words cannot be positively recognized and therefore are not presented in this transcript.
Time 17:47:00 UTC+2
17:47:22 P- It’s not important to you because you are here, it’s important to me because that’s where I fucking live [banging table]
17:47:30 L- Он говорит, что это для него важно, но не для Киева. (He says that it’s important for him, but not for Kiev.)
17:47:37 P- Lookit, I know what’s in force in the Ukraine, I know what’s not. There is no reciprocal law between Kiev, between the Ukraine, and Northern Ireland.
17:47:46 L- Он прескасно понимает, что для законодательства здесь это не имеет никакого отношения… (He understands perfectly that it has no significance for local legal system …)
17:47:51 V- Но судья это принимает…, как это не имеет значения…? (But the judge is accepting it…, what does he mean that it has no significance…?)
17:47:59L- Да, он принял, но это только бумажка… (Yes, he accepted, but it’s only piece of paper…)
17:48:00 Z – Да, но я то тут причем? Мы главная компания и у нас проблемы(Yes, but what has it got to do with me? We are the primary company and now we have problems)
17:48:05 P- Lookit, I know very well youse have been able to bulldoze through every single court case and youse have won every court case so far. So youse have done everything and proved that youse can do everything – except give us our money. That’s the only failing….so
17:48:21 L- Он как бы все понимает, и готов сделать, но так как он не делал… (He understands everything and was ready to do it, but since he hasn’t done it …)
17:48:27 Z- Так мы же сейчас деньги даем, но пусть он тоже понимает что нам теперь месяц нужен… (But we are giving them the money now, but he must understand that now we need a month…)
17:48:34 L- He will give you now one hundred thousand dollars. One hundred thousand for show that we are going together to people.
17:48:50 P-Lookit. That’s not much use. You can take the hundred thousand out of five million in the shopping centre or from six million of the shopping centre. It does not show me any good faith back.
17:49:00 L- Он говорит , что дать сто тысяч из пяти миллионов имея в наличии такой шопинг центр такой стоимости это неправильно. (He says that to give one hundred thousand out of five million, having a shopping centre worth so much is not right.)
17:49:17 Z- Так мы не понимаем…, у нас нет шопинг центра, у нас есть война за долги… (We don’t get it, we don’t have a shopping centre, what we have is a war for its debt…)
17:49:27 L- He is talking about that we do not have shopping centre…they just have problems.
17:49:32 P – Lookit, I don’t believe for a minute that that money did not come out of the shopping centre.
17:49:39 L – Он говорит, что это деньги из торгового центра… (He says that this money is from the shopping centre…)
17:49:41 P- You know that, I know that.
17:49:51 SQ – How much is in the shopping centre? What cash is there?
17:49:54 L- Five or something…
17:49:56 P-Nearly six million dollars.
17:50:02 P- That shows me no…that shows me….that makes me even more worried. The fact he can take out a hundred thousand dollars from the shopping centre and give it to us, but he won’t give us the money that we due. It makes me more worried. Youse have no problem taking a hundred thousand dollars out of shopping centre and giving it to us but youse won’t give us the money – the five million – that we’re due.
17:50:32 Z- Что значит не трудно… Мы еще ничего не забрали. Мы имеем кучу проблем…(What does he mean it is not difficult?… We haven’t taken anything yet. We are having a lot of problems already.)
L – They do not have…they have nothing…they just have problems. They do not have…
17:50:44 P- We are not asking for their money. We are asking for the money that’s on the account in the shopping centre.
17:50:58 Z- Будет… (It will be…)
17:50:59 L- Так когда? (When?)
17:51:01 Z- Как это когда? Вот смотри, вот это…, вот это (What they mean “when?” Look at this…, this…)
17:51:03 L- This problem, this problem…
17:51:05 Z- Бивиай инжанкшен…(the BVI injunction)
17:51:07 L- BVI injunction for Lyndhurst.
17:51:13 P- We will send it somewhere else.
17:51:20 P – Lookit, youse have been able to solve every court case in Ukraine, so I don’t believe an injunction in Northern Ireland or BVI is going to prevent youse.
17:51:32 V- Нет, когда мы договаривались мы не знали, что вот это будет. (No, when we were negotiating, we didn’t know that this would happen.)
L – When they entered agreement for this…they didn’t know that this would…
17:51:51 P- Ok. We’ll maybe we’d better call the whole deal off. If the injunction causes that much trouble, maybe we’re better calling whole deal off.
17:51:59 L- Говорит что если инджанкшен создает для вас столько проблем, давайте отменим все. (He is saying if injunction causes for you so much problems, let’s cancel everything.)
17:52:02 Z- А как мы можем уже все отменить…?, у нас нет вариантов, или идти вперед или… (How we can cancel it now…? We have no options. We either move ahead, or…)
L – It’s impossible….. has caused a lot of problems..
S – That’s fine. We’re happy to call it off.
17:52:17 P- He is saying the injunction causes huge problems, so maybe we just call it off and we’ll go our separate ways.
17:52:27 L- Давайте предложения какие-то… (How about some proposals?)
17:52:32 Z- Подожди, мы уже вложили три миллиона. (Wait, we have already have invested three millon.)
L – They have spent a lot of money already..
17:52:39 P- But the injunction. What about injunction? It causes them a huge problem.
17:52:45 Z- Да, создали кучу проблем. Мы сейчас не можем деньги перевести…, мы деньги переводим на компанию и их арестовывают. (Yes, it has caused a lot of problems. We cannot transfer money right now…, we transfer money to the company and it gets frozen.)
17:52:55 L- How do they send it. They send money to Lyndhurst, Lyndhurst has an injunction and how do they can send it from another company?
17:53:07 P – You’ll have to send it somewhere else. We can give you different account, it doesn’t have to go to Lyndhurst.
17:53:14 V- А основания? Чтоб его посадили или что? (On about grounds? Does he want to go to jail or what?)
17:53:18 Z- A основания? Нужно регистрация, свидейтельство нац.банка. (On about grounds? We need registration, a certificate from the national bank.)
L – (Inaudible)
17:53:32 P- Balls. I don’t believe that. Lookit I know..You were well able to get money to Russia when you were getting the most of it, so you were, so I have no doubt that you’re able to get money over to us. Well, lets come up with a deal and send money somewhere else.
17:53:55 V – А кто это будет в суде легализировать? Тут уже есть проблемы. (And who is going to legalize it in court? Right away, this is a problem.)
– Several people talking simultaneously. [Inaudible]
17:54:15 Z- Ты ему скажи, что мы тоже закрываем те вопросы по перечислениям которые были. В чем проблема? (Tell him that we are solving his problems with previous transactions. What is his problem?)
L – When they sent to Russia there was not a lot of problems like now..(more inaudible)….
17:54:28 P- I don’t give a fu… I don’t care. I want to know, when is he telling me I’m going to get my money?
17:54:40 Z- Ну я хочу чтоб он получил их как можно быстрее. Я тоже хочу как можно быстрее, потому что мы не можем дальше двигаться. (Well, I want him to get paid as soon as possible. I also want it as soon as possible, as we can’t move ahead.)
L – He wants that you receive all this as soon as possible.
17:54:54 P- No. When? (forcefully) As soon as possible. When?
17:54:56 Z- Я думаю что где то в конце февраля. (I think sometime around the end of February.)
L – End of February.
17:55:03 P- Lookit, we may go home. We can see what he’s doing. I think he wants to call the deal off. He’s obviously..three big injunctions..
17:55:15 P- I have cases against me personally in Northern Ireland, in Republic of Ireland, and if I’m getting no money. Tough luck. I am not willing to sit… I am not willing fucking go to jail for this and get no money. And that’s where he’s trying to putting me.
Translator talking [inaudible]
17:55:40 P – Is this funny?
L – No he’s not laughing. He’s just…
17:55:53 Z- Секундочку, когда у нас рассмортение ингжанкшена…. десятого… двадцать первого февраля. (Wait a second when is the hearing on the injunction… the tenth… February twenty-first.)
17:56:03 P- I’ve been instructed by court in Northern Ireland…
17:56:05 L- Twenty first February there will be court meeting about injunction in BVI.
17:56:15 Z-Пусть почитает. (Ask him to read it.)
17:56:18 P- I’ve read it. I know all the fucking…(inaudible)
17:56:23 V- Хорошо, почему он не хочет… Вот мы хотим чтобы все было по закону. Отменить это, отменить это, после чего деньги переводить. Он что, хочет чтоб за ним милиция бегала? (Fine, why doesn’t he want… We want everything to be legal. Cancel this, cancel that, and then transfer the money. Does he want police chasing him?)
17:56:40 L- You will be having problems from Lyndhurst…
P – I don’t mind about the injunction and I’m in the jurisdiction in there.
17:56:54 P- What legal company have youse got in Northern Ireland?
S – What solicitors?
P – What solicitors – what lawyers – have you got defending Lyndhurst in the injunction case on the twenty sixth of January?
17:57:14 Z- Вот ищем. (We are looking.)
17:57:17 V- Нашли уже. (We have already found one.)
L – Some lawyers will go…[inaudible]
P – OK. So they have lawyers going to the court case on the twenty…no, no no the one in Northern Ireland?
17:57:32 P-So you are going?
17:57:34 V- Yeah
P – I’ll see you at it. (mockingly)
17:57:36 L- You will be there?
17:57:37 P- Yes of course. I have to be there.
17:57:40 V- Еще один момент очень важный. Он думает только о деньгах, а у нас есть ответственность перед вами и перед ними. (One more very important thing. He is only thinking about money, but we are responsible to you and to them.)
17:57:50 P- You know that you can’t go to the trial?
17:57:52 V- Мне будут помагать еще специалисты…(There will be other specialists helping me…)
17:57:55 L- Somebody will help from Northern Ireland…
17:57:59 P- Who?
17:58:01 V- Я не могу этого сказать. (I can’t tell you)
L – He would rather not say.
17:58:03 P- Why not?
17:58:05 V- Конфликт интересов и конфиденциальность. (Because of a conflict of interest and confidentiality.)
17:58:10 P- Lookit, I know he doesn’t have one.
V – Ha Ha. (nervous laugh)
P – No. Because if he did have one you’d tell me know who he was. There’s no room for…
17:58:24 V- It is not Northern Irish company, it’s another company.
17:58:30 P- Is it UK company?
17:58:35 V- Какая ему разница? (What difference is it to him? Why does he need to know?)
L – Why you wanna know this?
17:58:40 P- Because I want him to tell me the truth. Do you know you have to go on record…that you’re solicitor has to go on record and has to put in an appearance before that, so that they’re even allowed to appear on the 26th of January? Obviously not.
L – (Russian – Inaudible)
P – Confidentiality is fine, but it goes on public record who your solicitor is. So I would know if you had a solicitor. I am party to this case, so I would know, so you are lying. (forcefully)
17:59:15 V- Они вступят, они появятся только на заседании. Они есть в реестрах, информация на них публикуется, поэтому мы их покажем только потом, потому что у них там все хитрые и на них будет какой то поклеп. Они появятся за день. (They will appear, they will only appear at the hearing. They are in the registers, information on them is public, so we will introduce them later, as others are very cunning and they may get nobbled. They will appear the day before.)
L – Inaudible….one day before trial…
17:59:35 P- You can’t do that.
17:59:40 V- А он знает, что мы общаемся с судом напрямую, а не через агентов как у них там принято? (Does he know that we are communicating with the court directly, not through agents, as they do there?)
Pause, V is looking for letter.
L – Do you know that he is communicating with the court…directly by email
P – Ha Ha Ha…
– all parties discuss amongst themselves (inaudible)
18:01:01 SQ- Just two things Larissa. They were saying it was two million cash, but they can’t pay it to the company. A hundred thousand euros..we will take it. But it’s nothing. It’s not..To us it’s not showing much good faith.
L – Make things better then you will receive it.
SQ – The other thing is there are four or five invoices outstanding for Cranre. There are four or five hundred thousand euro invoices that could be….so there’s things youse could be doing to make us feel happier.
L – You wanna that they pay to Cranre?
S – Yes
P – Yeah
L – …starting from I don’t remember?
P – October, November, December, January. There’s four or five hundred thousand dollars..
L – Inaudible in Russian and English.
P – Just get it done. Get it done.
S – If Lyndhurst is a problem we can set up…
Recording ends.
*******
POSTSCRIPT
The Panama Papers expose of April 2016 threw further light on the way the Quinn’s €60m Ukrainia shopping centre was put beyond the reach of the IBRC and into the control of a British Virgin Islands company called Lyndhurst.
Leaked files from secretive Panamanian firm, Mossad Fonseca, confirm that Aleksandr Orlov was – as we reported – the beneficial owner of Lyndhurst from the beginning of its involvement in the Quinn’s Ukrania shopping mall.
The leaked papers also show that Mossad Fonseca was concerned about the possibility of being dragged into the legal dispute between IBRC and the Quinns as both sides battled over control of former Quinn assets.
The Irish Times – a member of the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists which oversaw the Panama Papers leak – reported the Mossad Fonseca link on April 6, 2016. Those reports – by Colm Keena – can be viewed at the following links;
Panama Papers firm linked to legal fight over Quinn property
