In a message dated 3/6/2008 9:50:04 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,

solebaciato@googlemail.com writes: solebaciato@googlemail.com

Frankly, "the evidence" holds no water, by implication it is slanderous, in

real fact it amounts to nothing. Jimbo - filed an expense, it was rejected,

he paid - where is the story? It happens to executives every day of the week

everywhere, nothing criminal,nothing remarkable.>>

----------

Not to take a position one way or the other, but the allegation is that Jimbo spent large sums on travel, then was so delayed in presenting the receipts that he had to cancel a later trip in order to find his receipts and give them to the auditors because it was delaying the audit. Jimbo eventually *repaid* $7000 of denied expenses.

That is a significantly different sequence of events than paying for a trip out of ones own pocket and later being denied reimbursement for some expenses. One of the implications is that Jimbo would not have repaid the Foundation for the unallowed expenses if the auditors had not insisted on proper documentation. Another problem is that by recording the repayment as a donation rather than a reimbursement, Jimbo may have been able to take an improper tax deduction for those expenses. (That is, if my church writes me a $1000 check to go to a faith building seminar and I only spend $800, I don't get to count the $200 repayment as a separate donation.)

I do believe the Foundation's current assertions that they have improved financial reporting procedures, and there is no reason to hang Jimbo or the Foundation out to dry over what are essentially teething pains. (I do think Jimbo should think about amending his tax return, though.)

Thatcher