This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/int/news/-/news/uk-england-16721243

The article has changed 6 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Redknapp and Mandaric statements 'inconsistent' Harry Redknapp trial: Quest inquiry 'shown statements'
(about 1 hour later)
Statements given by Harry Redknapp and Milan Mandaric about an offshore account were "contradictory" and "inconsistent", a court has heard. Harry Redknapp voluntarily showed his bank statements to an inquiry into football transfers, a court has heard.
Mr Redknapp is accused of receiving "bungs" from former Portsmouth chairman Mr Mandaric while in charge at the south coast club. Nigel Layton, of the Quest inquiry, was the second witness to appear at Southwark Crown Court.
Southwark Crown Court heard Mr Redknapp, now at Tottenham Hotspur, kept a secret bank account in Monaco. Tottenham boss Mr Redknapp is accused of receiving "bungs" from former Portsmouth chairman Mr Mandaric while he was manager at the south coast club.
Both deny charges of cheating the public revenue. Mr Redknapp, 64, and Mr Mandaric, 73, deny charges of cheating the public revenue.
The prosecution began the third day of the trial by asking jurors whether there was any good reason for the Monaco bank account to have been opened using the name of Mr Redknapp's dog, Rosie. The court previously heard that Mr Redknapp had a secret bank account in Monaco in the name of "Rosie 47" - a combination of his pet dog's name and the year of his birth.
John Black QC also asked whether is was credible for Mr Redknapp not to mention the existence of the account to his own accountant. The third day of the hearing began with the prosecution claiming that statements given by Harry Redknapp and Milan Mandaric about the account were "contradictory" and "inconsistent", a court has heard.
John Black QC asked jurors whether there was any good reason for the bank account to have been opened using the name of Mr Redknapp's dog.
He also asked whether is was credible for Mr Redknapp not to mention the existence of the account to his own accountant.
Mr Black told the court: "At the heart of the Crown's case is the fact that no tax was paid."Mr Black told the court: "At the heart of the Crown's case is the fact that no tax was paid."
"Both payments were employment related and were therefore taxable.""Both payments were employment related and were therefore taxable."
'Offshore bonuses'
He asked if there was any credibility in Mr Mandaric's claim to police that the money paid to Mr Redknapp had been a loan when Mr Redknapp had been under the impression that it was a bonus.He asked if there was any credibility in Mr Mandaric's claim to police that the money paid to Mr Redknapp had been a loan when Mr Redknapp had been under the impression that it was a bonus.
The first witness of the day, from HM Revenue & Customs, explained tax law to the jury before Mr Layton took the stand.
Earlier in the trial, the prosecution told the court Mr Redknapp received $295,000 (about £189,000) which he had no intention of declaring for tax purposes.Earlier in the trial, the prosecution told the court Mr Redknapp received $295,000 (about £189,000) which he had no intention of declaring for tax purposes.
He was paid "bungs or offshore bonuses" into the Monaco account by Mr Mandaric, it was claimed.He was paid "bungs or offshore bonuses" into the Monaco account by Mr Mandaric, it was claimed.
The trial continues.The trial continues.