A Seventh Day Adventist Church pastor has denied encouraging members of his congregation to lend money to a church member now on trial for an alleged $850,000 scam.
It would have been unethical for him to do such a thing, now retired pastor Melvin Trevena told a jury in the Dunedin District Court yesterday.
During the second day of the trial of former parishioner Damas Tutehau Flohr (69), on seven charges of causing losses by deception, Mr Trevena agreed his credit cards were ''maxed out'', his bank account frozen and he was not allowed to send money through Western Union by the end of 2008, when he and his wife allowed Flohr and his wife to stay with them.
Mr Trevena said the bank had already spoken to him about money-laundering concerns because of the number of transactions through his accounts and, as a result, he later talked to the police. He explained all his money had gone to Flohr, who claimed to have more than $US30 million due from an oil contract in Nigeria but needed to pay certain fees to free up the money.
Mr Trevena said Flohr had told him he was also helping two refugees trying to retrieve money.
To defence counsel Max Winders, Mr Trevena agreed that, by the time Flohr and his wife moved into their home, he believed there was $US18,508,000 in his name in a Bank of New York Mellon account. He believed a similar sum was being held in the name of Flohr's son in the same bank but funds were needed to ''sort out the hassles'' and to pay various fees and lawyers, so the money could be transferred to New Zealand.
Mr Trevena said he had been assured by Flohr more than $246,000 he and his wife had advanced to him would be repaid.
Flohr denies causing Mr Trevena and his wife losses of $246,519.31.
He also denies six other charges of causing losses totalling just over $600,000 to two other couples and four individuals, between September 2008 and December 2009.
Crown counsel Robin Bates told the jury on Monday Flohr intended to deceive the parties through stories which were not, and could not be, correct. He had knowingly represented various scenarios which were ''materially false'' and his representations had caused losses.
The trial, before Judge Michael Crosbie and a jury, could take up to three weeks.
Mr Trevena acknowledged other parishioners had provided large sums of money to Flohr but he had not asked them to do so and had refused to talk to them when Flohr asked him.
He had provided bank statements to the police, although he agreed it had taken quite a while to get things together.
To a suggestion that, by early 2009, his financial affairs and Flohr's were interlinked, Mr Trevena said he was certainly not part of the accused's business.
"We were just helping''.
He had told Flohr it would be unethical for him [Mr Trevena] to approach anybody else for money for the accused and he had definitely not suggested any names.
Mr Winders suggested the witness and Flohr were ''in this whole enterprise 50/50 by then'' in relation to getting the money back from New York, but Mr Trevena said he believed he and his wife were being used.
''We were very naive,'' he said.
He agreed he and Flohr had been at Christchurch International Airport waiting for a courier expected to bring a draft for $US3.5 million - but that did not happen.
And he recalled discussions with another couple from the church about how to handle the money to secure it when it arrived.
They were apprehensive about the fact it was not the usual way to transfer finance.
By mid-March 2009, they realised there were too many hassles involved in having a courier bring the bank drafts, Mr Trevena said.
He approached a friend at an American university about using his account for receipt of another payment aimed at trying to have the funds transferred.
Flohr had said they could not get the money through unless they had a bank account in the United States - that would release everything.
But the cheque paid in was a dud and he was concerned and embarrassed about compromising his friend's account.
There was much discussion about someone going to New York to sort out the matter. He thought Flohr should go but it was pointed out the money was in his name.
Mr Trevena agreed he had not told the police about a joint ANZ bank account in his and Flohr's names which was opened in early 2009.
He had not mentioned it because, as far as he was concerned, it was Flohr's account and it was Flohr who operated it.
He denied that what started off as loans to the accused for his ventures became a joint venture between them.
He did not expect half of any money Flohr expected to receive.
The accused had promised to repay them, to double their money.
He agreed various documents showed money from other people had gone into the account which was used to meet various payments to purported lawyers for transfers and other costs but he had very little to do with the account, ''apart from my name being on it''.
He told Mr Bates Flohr dealt with the New York Mellon Bank and did not like him and his wife asking questions or doing any of the correspondence.
He became aware there appeared to be money in the New York Mellon bank in his name after Flohr asked if he could use his name to have the funds released and he naively agreed.
And Flohr had suggested setting up the joint account with ANZ because he said he needed another signatory so, when money came, it could be distributed.
Mr Trevena said he believed the account was operated by a card. He had a card but he did not use it for any transactions.
He thought of the account as not his but Flohr's and never thought of it in terms of providing information about their involvement.
