http://www.gulfkeystone.com/ The firms exploration programme in Algeria is going well and "the shares look good value", say the Investors Chronicle. Your comments please. goal.

scaramouches court report....thanks to him.






Hi everyone,

It has been a very long day but after much deliberation this is my summary of today’s session of the Excalibur court case.

Please note though that ALL CAVEATS APPLY as the following is only my RECOLLECTION of events, as discussed on the train home with my friend Steve who went with me today. I did not take detailed notes, like some do, preferring to try to take in the gist of what was being discussed, and these are only the points that I found particularly pertinent. My apologies if I have missed anything others might regard as especially important, or if my recollection is imperfect. There was a great deal to take in!

First, for those that have not been, going to Commercial Court is a fascinating experience. Court 15 has around 40 spectator seats at the back and side of the room. Those on the left were behind Team Excalibur and those on the right were behind Team GKP. There is however no indicative affiliation to one team or the other. You just sit wherever you please.

The vast majority of spectator seats were filled, predominantly with GKP investors I would imagine, and in front of us were a large array of computer screens at which members of each legal team were sat. This of course leads to some sight limitations wherever you are seated.

On the left, where we were, we had a clear view of Rex and the Judge, but only a small glimpse of Jonathan Gaisman (JG), the GKP QC. JG spent the day cross-examining Rex with only the occasional interruption by Simon Picken for Excalibur. I must say that JG was excellent and his stamina extraordinary (nearly 3 hours in the morning with only a short break, and 2 hours in the afternoon also with a short break at half time). I very quickly felt that GKP’s defence was in great hands.

From the word go, JG dissected Rex’s evidence and frequently put him under intense pressure. But, contrary to my expectations, Rex was actually very resilient and certainly not daft as is frequently portrayed, although somewhat inclined to go off at a tangent, elaborate unnecessarily, or seemingly avoid answering the question he had been asked. As an example, the Judge did have to point out to him that we were all aware that the Republicans were an American party! (cue laughter from the cheap seats).

In the morning session, JG began by challenging Rex’s contention that it would be easy to gain funding. Rex confidently maintained that, although Shaikan was originally a wild-cat exploration well in an unexplored new frontier, it would have been relatively easy to raise “billions of dollars” to finance it, since GKP was a listed company. He also maintained that he had a number of funders lined up, but was only able to mention a few names of people he had conversed with over the years who had been ‘interested’.

He ultimately declared that, although the potential pool of funders might be small, it would be easy to attract large investment if the asset was good enough as Shaikan had proved to be, at one point stating “well, that’s what they are doing now”. IMO there was a clear demonstration that this was a serious case of being wise after the event!

JG then proceeded to pull apart Rex’s claims regarding the Collaboration agreement.

The 2nd draft of this document was discussed, which showed only an agreement between Excalibur and Texas Keystone. Rex contended that, although he had reviewed it with Counsel (by which he meant his attorney brother Eric), it did not occur to him that the fact Gulf Keystone was NOT mentioned meant that they were not party to the agreement. His repeated phrase throughout the day was that he always understood that “all 3 were in it together”.

Much the same comments were applied to the final signed agreement in which it was highlighted that the wording showed that Texas Keystone had “the right to introduce Gulf Keystone” (i.e. at a later date) so could not have been party to the original collaboration agreement. Rex continued to assert that he always took it that Gulf Keystone were in fact party to the agreement even if not directly referred to on it.

A series of emails were also discussed which repeatedly showed Texas Keystone as the sole party to the Collaboration agreement with Excalibur, including one with a Texas Keystone heading which referred to an offer of an 80/20 split having been referred to the “Directors and Shareholders of the Company” (singular). Rex contended that he always believed that the letter in fact implied that it had been agreed with “Gulf Keystone’s thousands of shareholders” (JG) as Todd wore both hats. Naturally, JG contended that this could not possibly be true.

At the end of this passage of play, the Judge made a very pertinent comment. He asked why, as an experienced business person (Rex said he had an MBA) he would believe that “an agreement which was actually between three parties on a document would refer to only two”. Rex simply repeated his contention that “all three had always been in it together”.

The morning session ended and, to me, Rex showed the body language and demeanour of someone who had been seriously very much under the cosh. But at the beginning of the afternoon session he appeared to have recovered much of his composure.

The cross-examination then focused on Rex’s concept of his responsibilities and obligations if hypothetically Excalibur had either 30% of the Shaikan PSC, or an indirect interest in 30% of it.

With GKP required to pay a signature fee of $25 million on 6 December 2007, JG pointed out that this would hypothetically surely have entailed Rex coming up with his share of the cost, despite not having funds avaialable to do so. However, although agreeing that he would have been obliged to provide the funds, Rex categorically stated that he would not have been dictated to by ‘Gulf’ regarding when the payment was required.

Rex made reference to relations between himself and Todd having soured in November 2007, which probably contributed to this comment, but JG spent some time dismembering this aspect of a supposed commercial agreement.

Indeed, JG made reference to the fact that Rex was clearly intent on “hanging on to the coat tails” of the key player, and suggested that the reality was that he simply expected to have a free carry.

Throughout the session, JG continued to demonstrate how the contention that Excalibur always believed they were really dealing with GKP rather than TKI made no sense. This included a letter from Excalibur to the KRG which referred to a meeting to which “the president of Texas Keystone and some technical staff” would be going. It did not mention GKP at all. Rex maintained that GKP (the key player) was implicitly covered by the term “some technical staff”. JG said that surely the main participant would have been specifically mentioned.

Near the end of the afternoon session came perhaps the most intriguing point of the day. JG referred to a series of emails that had been found in which Eric (a tax attorney) and Rex had discussed how to avoid paying tax that year to the IRS. This included the declared dates of acquisition and disposal of their interests in Shaikan, for which ownership for one full year before disposal would somehow change the tax situation. JG contended that this was evidence of an intention to defraud the IRS, which Rex categorically denied.

While I cannot profess to understand the full implications of this ‘find’, there is no question that it added some spice to the day’s events, and appeared to throw further doubt upon the credibility of Rex’s and Eric’s claims. As the session closed, Rex went up to greet someone who looked like Eric who had been seated just in front of me, with the look of someone who had only just avoided being eaten alive.

It is ONLY my impression, but Eric (?) too looked decidedly uncomfortable, and Rex quickly wandered off saying audibly to his legal team “I cannot talk to you guys”.

In conclusion, I can only say that in some ways I admired Rex’s resilience under what had been a very intensive all-day cross examination. But, while it is still only relatively early days and I fully acknowledge my natural GKP bias, I got the clear impression that JG had successfully dismantled many of Excalibur’s arguments against GKP, and succeeded in painting Rex and Eric as being far from reliable witnesses.

The repeated reference to Rex “bigging himself up” and making claims which could not be substantiated came from JG – it was hard to disagree, but then I suppose I would say that, wouldn’t I!

Finally, if anyone does get the chance to go in the next few days, I would thoroughly recommend it. It was an experience I won’t forget in a hurry, and it has definitely given me a much clearer understanding of some of the key players in this EXTREMELY compelling drama.

AIMHO and please DYOR
GLA, scaramouche

court report by, the old trout, on iii.....thanks tot.


JG started by stating that he wanted to explore the tax treatment by the US Government of any buy out of Excal's interest. He referred to an e-mail from EW to RW in December 2007, in which Eric advised that ''If and when you agree a deal you must make sure that the document states that they are buying your share in the Agreement and not the Shaikan field.'' He pointed out that CGT tax in the USA was much more favourable where an interest had existed for more than one year and clearly any direct interest in Shaikan would be short lived.


Rex was extremely evasive under cross examination of the issue so JG went on to refer to another e-mail containing a draft letter for Rex to send to David Williams of Cadwalladers, who were his lawyers at the time. This to the effect that: ''It looks like we need two letters, one for settlement and one for origination. The 'settlement' letter must make it clear that you have held an interest for more than one year, with no mention of a Shaikan sale. However the 'origination' letter should acknowledge the closing of an agreement to buy out Excalibur's interest in Shaikan.''

JG then stated that ''In other words you wanted to establish your interest in Shaikan for the purpose of selling it, but wanted to diddle the IRS?'' Rex said he did not want to comment as it was a matter for tax lawyers.

JG then indicated that Eric came back with an improved draft and stated to Rex that '' You clearly worked hand in glove with your brother on this scam.'' Rex responded that he thought it was all above board and legal.

JG then referred to EW's revised draft including the words ''sale of the Shaikan partnership, which I currently have no interest in'' and a 'memo to self' from EW: ''Draft submission to US tax authorities: 'Excalibur sold all its contractual rights to Gulf Keystone and never owned a share in the Shaikan block'. '' Another e-mail from EW stated that Rex needed two documents, one for legal purposes, another for tax, and included a draft letter to the effect that ''Gulf Keystone acknowledges that it has purchased all contractual rights in the Shaikan block''.

JG said that it was very clear that the tax authorities were to be sold a different story, so there was a clear intention to defraud and put Rex through the hoop under cross examination of this issue. All Rex could really say was ''Sounds like I need to refer to tax counsel ''

So there you have it. They must be very worried men now IMHO. Painful shoes or what?

Now I know that at least one of our court attendees has had enough of posting on here, owing to the attitude of some on this board, but I hope that at least some of those attending today will be able to keep us informed of the latest development and that others will be encouraged to go along and do their bit for the cause.

GLA,

Tot

i assume that final comment applies to iii board ...... it really has been a fascinating little drama and the reports never fail to show that the EXC boys are just carpetbaggers - now where have i heard that word used before? :-) - who look likely to get their comeuppance with a bonanza if IRS starts getting its teeth into them

Two significant pieces of news today from CC. First one on the IRS/tax posted earlier from 'The Old Trout' on iii ...

.... and now this from iii :--

17:53
Court Notes Pm
dgfrog

Finished job interview early and caughth the PM session

I was hoping we would get past the Nov 2007 bust up and into what TK did or didnt do to try buying out Rex. We had gone back to 2006 and the relationship with oil minister Hamrawi.
JG scored points big time with email evidence and questions about meetings with H where Rex was essentially ignored. The issue with having a US company in front of the consortium became a non -issue in summer 2006. The KRG had their O&GL up and running in about 6 months!

Quite a bit about an advisor Franckies? who was doing some freebie work for Rex during 2006 and doubted whether a sensible investment case could be made. Shows Rex to be a bit of a bully but a weak point coz Rex did nothing during this period ( aug- nov 2006) . Very boring -- had 5 min kipp

Just before the break, JG had recent email from H saying the Rex had no credibility as he had not delivered and had poss. been involved in some shady deals in 2006. Rex had no reply to this. Dynamite , i think

Session cut short at 4:00 pm -- We may not have any hearings next week
---------------------------------------------------

Many thanks to dgfrog and all who report from CC



EDIT:--
Immediately following the post above on iii, Radetzky1 added this to the post on H email:--
"Rex responded that the email content was not how it read and inferred that it was CODED to which Justice Clarke invited him to decode it................deep gulp, M'lud it's not code as such to which he withdrew the remark, and accepted that Excal was barred from any future deals as it stands."


That is priceless !

Before everyone gets too excited, it's worth remembering that our QCs cross examination of Rex is going to be the high point of our case.

A very good post from a solicitor on iii the other day.


"A few general points intended as general guidance.

1) As a general rule the high point (i.e. strength) of ones case is at the conclusion of cross examination (by ones counsel) of the principal witnesses of ones opponents. Equally the lowest point of ones case is at the conclusion of cross examination of ones own principal witnesses. This is especially so, in cases such as this where the credibility of these witnesses is central to many of the main issues to be determined by the court.

2) It follows, that if witnesses (of ones opponents) have not been discredited during cross examination, it is a very difficult position from which to recover. This is because when ones own witnesses give evidence they are vulnerable and open to attack, and unless significant gains have already been made during one's opponents weak / vulnerable periods it is unlikely that they will when our witnesses give evidence.

It is therefore very encouraging that successes are being made at this stage by our cxx of RW and long may it continue. The more important the issues that these relate to the stronger our case will be at the conclusion of the plaintiffs evidence, and the more we can afford the odd, (relatively speaking) hick up when TK gives evidence.

But please be under no illusion, that the above is tantamount to victory. Be prepared, and brace yourselves for a hammering of TK during cxx. Expect plenty of difficult questions and ammunition to be thrown at him for this will be the low point of our case. Let us hope that our low is not as low as that of Excalibur. Moreover, let us hope that TK is aware of this and does not conduct himself (towards SP) in the same manner as he apparently did to shareholders during the last AGM.If there is one thing guaranteed to turn a judge against you, its arrogance. At the end of the day victory (judgement) will be bestowed on the party least injured and respect and humility whilst answering questions under pressure of cross examination goes a long way.

As an important aside and indirectly related to what I have said in the preceding paragraph, (assuming the accuracy of what was recently reported) it was (for obvious reasons) unwise of TK to apparently ask members of the public gallery if they were enjoying the show, but it was the height of foolishness of whoever reported it on this forum, to have done so.

I do not understand some people. Was it not obvious to you that this was really foolish....talk about scoring an own goal. PLEASE do NOT ever report again anything said by TK (or for that matter anyone else connected to GKP) to members of the public gallery, especially when you know that the opposing legal team are closely monitoring this forum.

I can only hope that our team are also monitoring it and have already had words with TK (and other witnesses) about any further contact with members of the public.

If you really care about our investment, and you really want us to succeed, please do not do that again and also do not report any conversations you have had with any member of the GKP legal team.

If anyone connected to our legal team has given advice (e.g. not to report certain matters) and you want to pass it on to this forum, there is absolutely no need to attribute that request to a specific (i.e identified.) person. After all there is always the possibility that you have misunderstood the true nature of that request. Attributing that misunderstanding to a specific person might cause needless complications. Always remember that as a general principle, the more detail you report (matters not in the public domain) the stronger the potential ammunition you give the other side.

There is an important distinction between faithfully reporting your recollections of court proceedings which are inalready in the public domain, and which assist those of us unable to attend (thank you!) and reporting private converstaions between you and our witnesses or legal team on a public forum....you don't have to be a lawyer to understand that ....surely you can see that distinction and the potential damage the latter can do.

Elikkos"

">

3669 -what an excellent and intelligently constructed post

My thoughts too,hope his attourney(JG) has a word with TK.

http://af.reuters.com/article/energyOilNews/idAFL5E8M270A20121102

I like the sound of pumping.,.

I wonder wheather we'll get an RNS informong us of the above,as part of their normal(usually monthly?)operational update??

Gulf Keystone restarts Kurdistan production
MONDAY, 05 NOVEMBER 2012 09:03
Kurdistan-focused independent explorer and producer, Gulf Keystone is said to have restarted its operations in the semi-autonomous region of Iraq.The UK-listed company has been inoperative in the region for at least half a year due to a request from the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) to down tools as it worked out its differences with central government in Baghdad over oil exports and payment.Reuters reported that the company, which says that it holds one of the largest licences in the region, is now pumping between 5,000 – 7,000 bpd for the local market. It is currently developing its Shaikhan field to increase its overall output to 40,000 bpd by the middle of 2013, some of which is export-bound."They are doing 5,000 bpd-plus to the local market," the newswire quoted an industry source as saying.An industry source told Pipeline that Gulf Keystone which originally expected to bring its production back online in February next year, also said that the company could initially be pumping 10,000 bpd.
Kurdistan-focused independent explorer and producer, Gulf Keystone is said to have restarted its operations in the semi-autonomous region of Iraq.

The UK-listed company has been inoperative in the region for at least half a year due to a request from the Kurdistan Regional Government to down tools as it worked out its differences with central government in Baghdad over oil export payments.

Reuters reported that the company, which claims to hold one of the largest licences in the region, is now pumping between 5,000 – 7,000 bpd for the local market.

It is currently developing its Shaikhan field to increase its overall output to 40,000 bpd by the middle of 2013, some of which is export-bound.

"They are doing 5,000 bpd-plus to the local market," the newswire quoted an industry source as saying.

Another industry source told Pipeline that Gulf Keystone which originally expected to bring its production back online in February next year, also said that the company could initially be pumping 10,000 bpd.

Oil and Gas News | Middle East

Pramp Pramp.........

Latest e mail.

EW. -RW
Stop dealing with these 5th century camel jockeys!

JG - why send emails like that ?

RW - I didn't think it would end up in british high court"

rom PJ66 on iii

JG took a little time with pi's outside the courtroom and apologised for the time consuming questioning . His views are he's got another week on Rex at the least .

Today concentrated on more emails between RW and Iain Kinnaer regaring the collab agreements . Lots of mentions of Azad , DABIN, David Clarke ( I think local agent in kurdy for excal who helped indentify the area but had no geo experince ) , many emails between Hawarmi . Ashti.

Mention of QTC ( Qatar) who rex had a failed venture with .

JG slaughtered RW imo who couldn't recall many emails and conversations -

JG- all your emails are lies and all you've done is to 'big up excal'. Not the first time your emails have been inaccurate have they mr wempen-

More later - bigger picture was also busy scribbling .

Pj. - on the lash !

http://www.iii.co.uk/investment/detail/?display=discussion&code=cotn%3AGKP.L&it=le&action=detail&id=10157748

from page 13 of my notes)

Rex Wempen had agreed that he wanted to set up a fund, otherwise others would 'jump ship', and then:

GKP barrister: "You wrote 'we have to come up with the 30%...(...)...except that we will be faced with the terrible capital call'"

He then repeated the following statement twice, according to my notes:

"This shows that you were alarmed that a done deal would bring with it heavy financial commitments"

and he then went on:

GKP barrister: "Why was it a terrible call?"

Rex Wempen: "Can't.....why I used that word" (I wasn't able to keep full pace with what he said)

GKP barrister: "If Excalibur was party to a PSC it would have had financial commitments"

Rex Wempen (said something about 30%, I couldn't catch it exactly)

GKP barrister: "You thought you had an indefinite carry at LIBOR plus 2%. What forfeiture provision would you have agreed? You realised that Excalibur's ability to meet these capital calls was difficult and that's why you called them 'terrible'"

Rex Wempen: "I appreciated that capital would be needed"

GKP barrister: "What is a capital call?"

Rex Wempen: "Under terms of agreement the Operator calls (for money). We were trying to get some funding ahead"

GKP barrister: "In Spring/early 2007 you were trying to 'raise funds' ahead of a signature deal?"

Rex Wempen: "I agree. In view of the high-risk nature, the backers advised us to get a deal first in Congo, Uzbekistan or Kurdistan"

(then there was a break)

So it seems to me that it's the same old thing, over and over again. Excalibur had no money to invest, but had gone for a 30% position rather than a Finder's Fee. But there was no asset - so anyone putting money into a fund would not know what it was going to be used for - and they would presumably have no control over such use. Therefore the asset would have to be acquired first. But that would mean that Todd Kozel would have to arrange for the 100% to be put up, with Excalibur then on a "carry" at LIBOR plus 2% until some undefined future period. And suppose the well was a dry hole? How would they then raise the funds to pay Todd Kozel's company/companies back? How could one possibly get funding for a dry hole?

but imho DYOR etc as always, given in good faith, this is not legal advice I am not qualified to give it

no, but it makes for a fun read!
i look forward equally to the defence's turn to trash the GPK management who, from what little i have seen, look to be similar "wide boys" - except they hold the asset

20:32
Court overview
seebeearrgh
34
As you've probably gathered I'm not a great note taker or reporter so from today a brief summary

JG has hardened up and is more pressing with questions and has spent further time addressing the GKP and TKI relationship according to RW. When it suits to have GKP as main company thats fine but when TKI need to be named its always on the understanding that the also mean GKP.....repeated in lots of varying senarios

I have not heard one answer that causes me concern, quite the contrary, at best a very poor and waffled response, at best (for us) almost contemptable answers.

Rex once again vehemently denies any wrong doing as far as Us dept of commerce is concerned regardingnot naming GKP as main partner instead showing TKI which is documented partner thus showing 100% US consortium?

Emails that misrepresent or tell untruths are once again described by RW as motivational, in order to provoke action!

Some more provocative lines by JG
-that isn't true so why don't you admit it
- these weren't witness statements, they're more of a sales pitch
- I'm suggesting that you're being a bit slippery
- You would have been recealed to be a charlatan
- presenting an investmentment bank with dross and get them to turn it into gold

The Judge has intervened again several times today in order to try and elicit a straight response from RW

During the afternoon brief interval we had a short interaction with TK and JG and I am as sure as I can be that we have nothing to be concerned about. TK is well aware of his surroundings and understands the protocol of being on the stand. I am under no illusions what the defense team thinks of RW and his evidence.

With regard to the Jewish chap. He is clearly something to do with RW/EX but who knows? We are looking into this as we can recall his face and will report any findings.

Had a few beers with bobobob and chewed the fat, no doubt he will do a verbatim mega blog on the other channel.

a4tlo has just arrived so gonna have more beer.

imo- JG has a lot more to bring up and a lot of banked stuff to recap on....turn up the heat please

nige

----------------------------------------------------------------------

18:16
No meat update
pauldb71
110UP


Just before Todd left in his Range I had a very quick word with him. It was a quick fire question and a short but passionate reply. Not sure it's my place to repeat ( yes I know people are sick of statements like that ) but what I will say is I can see why he hasn't gone for a settlement of any kind. He, in my opinion, wants not only to defeat RW but now wants to bring him down to ground zero. It was good to look him in the eye and I loved what he showed and said in his reply.
Oh and our main learned friend representing GKP, he is a multitasking duracell bunny pitbull, great to watch.
And for those who remember Newman & baddiels History Today 'that's you that is' sketches, the judge is new and character.
Thanks to John earlier for posting my lunch report, although the dufus got my ID wrong the 3G during the breaks is pants and I couldn't get to post, could be a reason why we don't here much during the breaks.
I plan to go again when Todd takes the stand, I suggest others go when ever they can, it's good theatre albeit with serious repercussions for the losing party.
To recap simply, i sit here happy with my investment

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

21:36
court - It was
reebar
3UP


most entertaining as usual and is giving the tv a run for its money. I don't even even miss Bargain Hunt or Shaun the Sheep any more. There was at least two GKP note takers at hand so better to leave to them, to post the important stuff.

Big Rex, ( may peace be upon him) was in his corner with a fresh suit and no sign of any strain on his face. I for one, have to give him credit for being the best fibber I have ever seen in all my years. JG keeps keeps trying to award him fib points but he just refuses them.

When caught out on one of his emails that was an undeniable fib, he almost admitted it. He came out with " I did gild the lily a bit ". A great big whopper was reduced to just a bit of the old gilding. Very slippery is Big Rex. The catch the greased pig competition I seen once at a county fair comes to mind.

I notice he has stopped using " in the Abstract " and has come up with another dandy. This is another one for the wife. Several times he started his answer " in the hypothetical ". Had me bamboozled as I thought the old ears were playing up. That was until our fine judge asked him to stop using the word in his answers. Then he asked Rexy if he knew the meaning of the word so I guess we won't hear that little confuser any more.

His other favourite is " I can't recall ". This phrase was used by President Reagan 88 times in eight hours when he was called to give defence testimony in the Iran-Contra affair interspersed with another favourite of Rex " I can't remember ". Reagan was 79 years old at that time and had started to develop Alzheimer's. What excuse can Rex give.

The jewish gentleman was there and from the body language did not look happy. I have no idea who he is but he seems to be important to everybody on the Rex side. In the afternoon he closed his eyes and leaned back in his chair. This was at a bad period for Rex as JG was landing some heavy blows. I think he may have been praying for a miracle.

He is short and stocky, about 5 foot 6, scraggly salt and pepper beard, shorted sighted, and big feet. He also has an unhealthy cough. Anybody know him?

As he walked by me later I could almost swear I heard him mutter something about flesh. Must have been the old ears acting up again.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quite frankly, I don't know where to start. I have 22 A4 pages of notes from today.

So, let's start at the very beginning, a very good place to start. Up pops the Excalibur barrister, with a complaint to the Judge (though it wasn't a complaint - because black is white, don't you know?) about expert witness statements. He didn't like the way that they were continuing to arrive. He wanted to have a discussion with the Judge about it, some time later in the week.

But the GKP barrister didn't see the point, since the Judge had not yet read the expert evidence, so how could it make any difference if more of it had turned up? And an expert report received yesterday by Clifford Chance was actually a report on Mr. Wempen's earlier evidence.

The Judge was having none of it.

But the Excalibur barrister came back. seeking the Judge to agree a timetable to discuss the issue of the expert evidence.

The Judge slapped him down; the Excalibur barrister kind of troed to reply with some half-hearted comment and the Judge said "We'll see how we go".

And the day's business began.

Judge 2, Excalibur Barrister 0 (yellow card)

From the small hours of the morning.


What's the next thing I should mention?

Let's go to the bottom of page 6 of my notes, (H20 5345 I think) Excalibur's application to the US Department of Commerce. The following is an outline, in good faith, with some abbreviation and paraphrasing.

GKP barrister: "There was no need for 'optics' as far as the US Department of Commerce were concerned? Yes or No"

Rex Wempen: "No need for 'optics'. Seeking US advocacy for a US branded proposal"

GKP barrister: You've confirmed that you were not concerned with 'optics'"

Rex Wempen: "Want to be careful to explain what's...."

GKP barrister: "No (something) to tell the US Department of Commerce to tell them anything other than the real issue"

Rex Wempen: "No need, Department of Commerce were advocating for US companies, as US flag consortium"

GKP barrister: "They wouldn't have been interested in providing support for a consortium in which the majority partner was not US. You represented that this was a wholly US initiative"

Rex Wempen: "I don't believe the document is untrue"

GKP barrister: "It said 'From December 05 we have been working with Texas and Dabin'. 'Texas as operator and Excalibur as financial investor'. Why no mention of Gulf? You are talking about your consortium?"

Rex Wempen: "Wanted support for the consortium"

GKP barrister: "You said in 5/6 May emails that is was 3-way"

Rex Wempen: "Yes"

GKP barrister: "Why did you not mention this in the application to Mr. James? (bob: the man at the Department)"

Rex Wempen: "It was a US consortium"

GKP barrister: "You would only get US advocacy if you could confirm that it was a totally US consortium"

Rex Wempen: "It would be a US consortium supported by Gulf"

GKP barrister: "You were lying to the US Department of Commerce"

Rex Wempen denied this.

GKP barrister: "'We are requesting advocacy to level the playing field against non-US companies'. What non-US companies?"

Rex Wempen: "Russia and China, state-owned Middle East companies"

GKP barrister repeated the question "What were the non-US competitors?"

Rex Wempen: "Moscow, Dubai..."

GKP barrister: "Not Gulf"

Rex Wempen: "No"

GKP barrister: "We'll see how we go. Evidence #5348. You certify the content of this document to be true"

Rex Wempen: "It was true"

GKP barrister: "Look at #5349. Description of (something). A completely US consortium consisting of Texas and Excalibur, based on Texas Keystone administered field survey conducted... Which survey did you have in mind?"

Rex Wempen: "Gulf had done some. Texas administered. Personnel on the ground from Gulf"

GKP barrister: "Who administered it?"

Rex Wempen: "Mr. Kozel. believed they had been doing some work on the ground. In Mr. Sammarai's (written evidence?). All under the administration of Mr. Kozel, who puts his Gulf hat on, and then puts his Texas hat on"

GKP barrister: "Why did you not mention Gulf? You described it as a completely US consortium. You must have known this was untrue. You have claimed it to be 3-way. How can you say it was 2-way?"

Rex Wempen: "2-way in (something) operator and branding. All thre members of the consortium, Todd would have split it 35/35 or 65/5 or whatever..."

GKP barrister: "Question 8: are you bidding in a consortium or (something). You answered 70% Texas, 30% Excalibur. You had mentioned Dabin"

Rex Wempen: "I just don't see the contradiction here"

GKP barrister: "You don't (something)"

Rex Wempen: "I was not telling a lie to the US Government"

GKP barrister: "#5352. I asked you if competitors included Gulf. You said 'no'"

Rex Wempen: "I see RAK is included here as a competitor. If RAK had not...."

GKP barrister: "Why did you mention RAK Dubai as potential competitors, other than as a potential part of GKP? You were not seriously concerned that RAK was a concern *other* than if there was a takeover of GKP (bob: by RAK). This is exactly what you were concerned about. Your communication of 5/6 May 'Arabs in their flowing robes would turn up in Erbil'. I'm wrong am I when when I read the #5352, reference to RAK as having anything to do with Gulf"

Rex Wempen: "You are wrong to read it that way"

GKP barrister: "Looking at it now in retrospect, is it surprising that there was no mention of Gulf?"

Rex Wempen: "No"

GKP barrister: "Not in the slightest?"

Rex Wempen: "No"

GKP barrister: "Don't you think that the transfer facility TKI-GKP was relevant to the Department of Commerce?"

Rex Wempen: "Not at the time"

(and so it goes on. Previously stated caveats apply to the above)