On Monday, the accused former bank clerk told how he managed to withdraw NOK 75 million from Sparebank 1 SMN. Furthermore, he transferred 70 million to other banks and the IG brokerage house in Germany. The bank clerk is charged with gross embezzlement, money laundering, self-laundering and using a false document. The defendant mostly acknowledges criminal guilt, but is unsure whether he is criminally guilty of money laundering. Followed the routines The defendant said that he transferred money from the cash register system in the bank to his own accounts. On the transfers he wrote “test” or similar. He did this to see if the transfers went through, he explained in court. – I wanted to extend the time I continued with gambling and embezzlement, said the defendant in court on Monday. He also wrote in the bank’s internal log system that he was carrying out a “test” and later that the test had been completed. – As I see it, he has influenced the processes with failure by going into the cases he created and closing them himself, said CFO Trond Søraas when he testified in court on Tuesday. Those who reacted internally to the transfers received answers from the accused with which they settled down. – The defendant therefore ends up delaying our employees to understand that it was an embezzlement. The finance director believes that the bank’s routines were followed in the case. – The focus on management and control is strong, said Søraas and pointed out that the bank handles around half a million transactions every day. Defense counsel reacted to “manipulation” One of the two defending the defendant reacted strongly to the CFO saying that the defendant manipulated the system and his colleagues. – He was a hired substitute, he only had an economics degree as a bachelor and then had no opportunity to manipulate the system, says defender Christian Wiig. Søraas repeated what he had said, but did not want to elaborate more in open court. Six times while the embezzlement was taking place, the alarm went off in the bank about irregular and large transactions. – I think it is a failure on the part of the bank that this could happen, says Wiig. Defense attorney Christian Wiig reacts to the bank’s witness having to explain himself partly behind closed doors. The picture was taken on a different occasion. Photo: Sunniva Skurtveit / news Defense attorney Christian Wiig wanted to know why the bank’s department, which is supposed to uncover money laundering, settled on what the deputy explained in writing along the way. Wiig was told by both the prosecution and the court administrator that such questions could not be asked while the court was open. The defense attorney told news on Monday that he believes the trial should be open to the public, as is the practice in Norwegian justice. The court has previously decided that parts of the certificates from bank employees must go behind closed doors. if the press wishes to be present, but not to report, the journalists must complete their duty of confidentiality. It is not relevant for news to do. After three quarters of an hour, at 1 p.m., the doors were closed. The prosecutor in the case, State Attorney Eli Reberg Nessimo, says that Søraas’ explanation has given insight into the bank’s system and follow-up in general and concretely in this case. – To the other witnesses, it says that there are fewer questions than one has had as a starting point, she adds. Therefore, the trial continues behind closed doors until the day, Tuesday. Partial duty of secrecy for journalists The bank wanted the whole case to go behind closed doors, including to the press. The bank pointed out that information about control routines and security against fraud and money laundering could not be disclosed in open court. Adresseavisen and news complained to the court and received support from both the prosecution and the defense in that as much of the case as possible should go to open court. But the press will be required to remain silent during some of the certificates. news has decided that the journalists will not be present in parts subject to the duty of confidentiality. During the bank employees’ explanations, there will be information about the bank’s security system, routines for processing suspicious transactions and procedures for anti-money laundering.
ttn-69
The defendant manipulated both the system and colleagues – news Trøndelag – Local news, TV and radio
