[FOREX] Beware - Roger Goh Kok Keong

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ms KPOH

Recruit
Messages
9
Question to vincam,

Even if Mr. X is in the forum, it is Mr. X's word Vs Roger's word, how can you know who is right and who is wrong?

Both can argue till cow come home, the bottom line is Mr. A do not have any concrete evidence at all? he did not witness Roger sign anything, he simply trust Mr. X's words. Then how do we judge from here? Mr. A didnt even met Roger at all in the first place. Of cause Roger will deny all the way as he know there is no concrete evidence against him at all.

So what if the supplier is scammer? Its still the salesman's responsible to ensure all his products come from proper source before he sell to others. (unless there was a statement from the salesman that good sold is not refundable and he is not responsible for any defect or fake product sold). Did Mr. X produce such statement to Mr. A in the first place??

According to your theory, does it mean if the bank lose your money, the bank blame his trader and ask you go after his trader instead, the bank can run away from the responsibility and continue his business as usual?

We are not police here, the only way is since Mr. X is the only contact person throughout the whole process, from introducing forex, recommending trading their money, produce document and later lose everything, isnt it clear enough the Mr. X should be answerable to Mr. A and his investor?

I need to emphasize that i do not know anyone here and not taking side, im purely coming from the objective view from legal point. The evidence produced by Mr. A cannot prove Roger is guilty as off now and Mr. X still the main suspect.
 

vincam

Sergeant
Messages
322
According to your theory, does it mean if the bank lose your money, the bank blame his trader and ask you go after his trader instead, the bank can run away from the responsibility and continue his business as usual?



Let me ask you a closer analogy, if a trader at a bank had supplied you a signed letter from their CEO (Roger), telling you he will bear personal responsibility to you for any losses you incur from investing your money with this trader and then the trader(Mr.X) loses your money, who is responsible for reimbursing you? Then the CEO (Roger) says I did not sign that letter. While I agree the trader (Mr. X) should really be the one trying to resolve this situation as an obligation to you, if he was lax in doing so you would just automatically agree that because the CEO said he did not sign the letter he is telling the truth? At this point, the same point we are at here, it comes down to determining if the letter was signed or not and if any other proof exists that the CEO (Roger) intended to fulfill this promise.

So what if the supplier is scammer? Its still the salesman's responsible to ensure all his products come from proper source before he sell to others. (unless there was a statement from the salesman that good sold is not refundable and he is not responsible for any defect or fake product sold). Did Mr. X produce such statement to Mr. A in the first place??

What if the salesman gave you a signed letter from the owner of the supply company saying he would personally guarantee the products were real. Then you find out they are fake and the owner says I did not sign that. You would take him at his word right there even though the salesman says I saw him sign it and brand the salesman guilty of defrauding you? One of the two is not being honest but without both sides I can't say.

We are not police here, the only way is since Mr. X is the only contact person throughout the whole process, from introducing forex, recommending trading their money, produce document and later lose everything, isnt it clear enough the Mr. X should be answerable to Mr. A and his investor?

Yes but if he is lax as he seems to be, Mr. A took it upon himself to find the truth and that is why he is here, from his perspective Roger is at fault. Mr. X could have executed an elaborate scheme to access Roger's personal e-mail and respond to Mr. A through it, it would be the only explanation for the e-mails Mr. A received, which would be evidence against Roger, if they were actually from him. There still is the question of why all the e-mails Mr. A sent to Roger were sent to both e-mail addresses and only received at one. The alleged hacked account and the un-hacked account. Mr. A sent them, how could they only arrive at the hacked account location? That fact alone I'm sure makes Mr. A highly suspicious of Roger.

There is also the possibility that Mr. A is attempting to damage Roger's reputation, as Roger alleges, hoping for some money out of him just to keep quiet. I do not believe this is the case and suspect the problem lies between Mr. X and Roger but who knows at this point, I won't say anyone is a scammer at this point.

Even if Mr. X is in the forum, it is Mr. X's word Vs Roger's word, how can you know who is right and who is wrong?

I need to emphasize that i do not know anyone here and not taking side, im purely coming from the objective view from legal point. The evidence produced by Mr. A cannot prove Roger is guilty as off now and Mr. X still the main suspect.

I agree, but without even a peep from this guy you seem to have convicted him. Maybe Mr.X has other evidence? Maybe he has proof he received direction from Roger? Maybe he has another witness that witnessed the signing? His information is critical to making a conclusion and that is what I am saying, without something from him a conclusion cannot be reached and I cannot say he is guilty yet if he does not have a chance to present his side of it.

I must say that it does speak a little more to Roger's credibility to show up here and at least discuss the issue and if we can't get Mr. X to present his side, it will look very suspicious as to his role in the situation.
 
Last edited:

Mr. A

Private
Messages
33
Andi,
You such a liar !! You totally forgotten that you had replied to my company domain email address on 29 Dec attaching the scanned copy of the Statement of Intent with these guys (God knows who they are) name Ephraim (Investor Owner) and Lukas (Witness) with signature on it. That's how I know your name and signature is nowhere to be found in the letter.

And you are so rude and unethical in this forum, you post this in an open forum and how dare you insult fellow contributor into this forum by calling them names!? Are you getting impatient because the comments are jeopardising you plot towards achieving your objective?

To vincam, when I received the scanned copy of Statement of Intent, it came as a shock to me that someone will do something like this. I have to understand and analyse the motive, so I took the step-back approach.

To LaRijke, another fact is: the scanned copy of the letter is the only thing I have in my possession. I DO NOT have the original letter.

Excellent, from your statement I believe my emails were sent to your 3gcapitalgroup account. And this is the REAL Roger. Btw I just wonder why you did not get all other emails that were also sent to your 3gcapitalgroup account with the fact that email with attachment could get through, why the others did not???

I think Mr. A simply not accepting the fact that he was cheated by his 'friend' Mr. X.

This case is pretty straight forward as Mr. A and his silent investor never met Roger before but Mr. A blaming Roger lost his money by believing what Mr. X whom is the actual person should be responsible for their money.

Maybe i should give a simple scenario to Mr. A: If you bought an expensive watch from a salesman, and he shown you all the fake certificate to prove the origin of the watch, and later you found out the watch is imitation, do go after the salesman or the supplier of the watches to the salesman?

In your case, you choose to trust the salesman n you go after the supplier of the watch, and the supplier claim he did not supply any of the fake watch nor the certificate. Lol..

My point is, it doesnt matter what Roger said is real or bluff, the real person you should be after is Mr. X. He is responsible for your money isnt it as he sold you the 'dream' and not others. In fact, you should sign the letter intent with Mr. X as you dealing with him n he is actual person trading your money. Lesson learnt?

Lets be more objective in dealing with money. If you invest money in a bank, n the bank lost your money, and push the blame to his trader and ask you go after the trader instead, it simple doesnt make sense right?

Anyway, i just heard a bigger scam in this JF lennon company too.. hmm.. should i start another thread?? keke..

"If you bought an expensive watch from a salesman, and he shown you all the fake certificate to prove the origin of the watch, and later you found out the watch is imitation, do go after the salesman or the supplier of the watches to the salesman?"
You have brought the situation into such a simple analogy. If I have possessed the fake certificate and THE INVOICE, I would chase after the supplier.

In your analogy, you may say how about if the invoice is fake? The supplier may deny that too right?? Then, the supplier deleted all his bookkeeping? Don't you think it is weird? The supplier may have checked who has recorded the transaction and issued the invoice..

"Anyway, i just heard a bigger scam in this JF lennon company too.. hmm.. should i start another thread?? keke..:

It is your choice.. Seems like you are looking for some information too.. :)

Question to vincam, Even if Mr. X is in the forum, it is Mr. X's word Vs Roger's word, how can you know who is right and who is wrong? Both can argue till cow come home, the bottom line is Mr. A do not have any concrete evidence at all? he did not witness Roger sign anything, he simply trust Mr. X's words. Then how do we judge from here? Mr. A didnt even met Roger at all in the first place. Of cause Roger will deny all the way as he know there is no concrete evidence against him at all. So what if the supplier is scammer? Its still the salesman's responsible to ensure all his products come from proper source before he sell to others. (unless there was a statement from the salesman that good sold is not refundable and he is not responsible for any defect or fake product sold). Did Mr. X produce such statement to Mr. A in the first place?? According to your theory, does it mean if the bank lose your money, the bank blame his trader and ask you go after his trader instead, the bank can run away from the responsibility and continue his business as usual? We are not police here, the only way is since Mr. X is the only contact person throughout the whole process, from introducing forex, recommending trading their money, produce document and later lose everything, isnt it clear enough the Mr. X should be answerable to Mr. A and his investor? I need to emphasize that i do not know anyone here and not taking side, im purely coming from the objective view from legal point. The evidence produced by Mr. A cannot prove Roger is guilty as off now and Mr. X still the main suspect.

Off the track, taking the wrong analogy..

Let me put you in the real situation with these facts:

1. The statement of intent states that "The settlement above should at least take place on Wednesday, June 30th, 2010".
2. There was an email sent from ridzgoh@hotmail.com on 30 June 2010, on the day the settlement would have taken place
3. Mr. E and Roger were engaged in a long conversation and I was cc-ed in the conversation
4. It was until 23 Nov 2010 I sent the email directly to Roger (both hotmail and 3gcapitalgroup) and cc-ed to Mr. E.
5. There were some conversations between those times and check the reply from Roger (hotmail account) on 1 December 2010.
6. On 28 Dec '10, Roger (3gcapitalgroup) replied and he came pretending he was the real Roger and the hotmail account's is not he (see at the bottom, he included "Roger Goh", whereas the next emails, he only included "Roger" as the same with his hotmail account.
7. It took almost 1 month vacuum and yet there was no more reply from ridzgoh@hotmail.com after Roger replied from his 3gcapitalgroup account.
8. On 17 Jan 2011, the hotmail account was deleted. In the 23 Nov 10 email I sent to him, I also forwarded the email conversation from hotmail account. If Roger claimed he was the one who replied, then why didn't he find out who has hacked his email? It has been 6 months that "person" can access the hotmail account, yet Roger was still able to update his twitter account using the same hotmail address. There is a possibility that the password may not be the same, but if you know that your email address has been hacked, don't you directly contact the provider to directly block your email and other accounts related to your email? FYI, ridzgoh@hotmail.com is Roger's primary personal email.
9. JFLennon, an institution also posted the Public Notice in its website. There has to be a scam or fraud done by this person, else the company would not put that disclaimer in the front page.
10. Roger's excuse in this forum is it is not his signature. I am requesting him to scan his signature and handwriting and post it here or at least, send them to the administrator. Ms. Kpoh said her child can copy Obama's signature, true, but the level of similarity may be different.

Based on the above facts, how can we say Roger is now saying the truth. He said he did not receive the emails but I do have the sent items and delivery notifications in my inbox.

He said he could not access his hotmail account, but he just deleted the account after I posted his act in this forum. Is it possible if you know your account was being hacked, and you leave that more than six months?

If it were really not Roger who replied from his hotmail account, why would the real Roger delete his hotmail? He must have tried to find out who has hacked and replied to us to defense himself.

Let us take some time to think about these facts and what comes into conclusion.
 

vincam

Sergeant
Messages
322
I'm following you Mr. A but just from a theoretical standpoint is it possible that:

1. Mr. X supplied you a forged signature document to get you to invest with
him.
2. He had access to Roger's e-mail account and replied to you through it
to keep you stalled out till he could try to recover your money, pretending
to be Roger?

Is that situation possible at all from a theoretical view? Or is there something that makes this an impossibility?
 

Ms KPOH

Recruit
Messages
9
vincam,

This is EXACTLY what im saying. Right from start Mr. A 'accusing' Roger is scammer and even produce his pic, letter n exchange email as so called 'evidence'. After reading those so called 'evidence', but those evidence were not concrete enough to proof Roger is guilty as off this point of time. He should focus on Mr. X instead by finding more true facts to proof.

Perhaps i was educated in US, i believe a person is innocent unless proven guilty, and Mr. A believe a person is guilty unless proven innocent.

If Mr. X is purely doing 'introducing' role, he still can have an excuse that he being play out by Roger (even if its the case, under commercial n business law n ethics, he still responsible for his investor). The fact is, if i read it correctly, Mr. X not only introducing to his clients, also suggesting to trade his client's money by getting document to convince his clients to put money in, and even personally trading his clients' money, ( I wonder why Mr. X did not even introduce roger to meet Mr. A n Mr. E, dont they want to know who is trading their money?).

To me Mr. X should be FULLY responsible in this case by make use of the 'Trust' that they have on him, guilty for not providing enough evidence to ensure them that roger is the one behind their money, guilty for trading their money without being properly train, guilty for trading without license, guilty for no taking necessary action to protect his clients money, guilty for fail to answer his client promptly, guilty for getting roger to face to face settle with his client (if roger is really the man behind this).
 

vincam

Sergeant
Messages
322
I know Ms. KPOH, I just don't want to jump the gun on Mr. X either, without his say on the matter. A scheme to hack someone's e-mail account and represent yourself as them is fairly elaborate and it still does not answer why when Mr.A responded to this hacked hotmail account and CCed the other non-hacked account, Roger did not get those e-mails. I just want to hear Mr. X's side before saying his is behind it.

Should Mr. X be handling it? Yes. But because he is not does not automatically convict him of orchestrating the whole scheme.
 

Mr. X

Recruit
Messages
2
Dear all who are kind enough to generously contribute into this forum,
In honor of your time and attention upon this regard, this is Mr. X speaking.

Now that RGoh has acknowledged his acquaintance and professional relationship with me, I believe that it is safe for me to put myself forward; he can’t deny our acquaintance. Please forgive me for the delay, as Mr. A mentioned: I am out of town a lot and do not have the privilege of mobile internet on the go.

Dear all,
Please understand that I do not claim the cleanest of hands in this matter.
Ask Mr. A on any day, and he will tell you that I claim guilty, and still intending on paying everyone back when I have the capability to if RGoh doesn’t ever fulfill his SIGNED-COMMITMENT that we all foolishly believed. I introduced them to RGoh, and as was mentioned in this forum before, just because I was fooled doesn’t make me the free guy.
And RGoh, you should know this too: What you did has damaged friendships of over 10 and even 15 years. You and your brother’s quest for wealth sacrificed people; not just me, but also 2 other marketers who hold an accumulated total of 10+ clients. We all had to watch as your brother’s trades cleaned out the accounts dollar-by-dollar, and the fast heartbeats became so painful after a while. But what you did wasn’t any less bad – i had to find out from my clients that their account balances were not even enough to trade another lot with. What were you thinking..? I analyzed your positions for days, and could not even figure out what the crap you were doing; and you know what, not even your brother could!

Please forgive me if i sound rather cynical in my writings, this past definitely marks a few of my darkest days.

Now, first of all,
RGoh, hands together for u. U DO know how to make up fiction...

“Andi, my assumption is you are the mastermind and schemer of this whole deal. Why don't you come out clean and tell us how many % of the US$12k you will be getting if you managed to pull this through?
Let's illustrate, you mentioned that you are working in a tax consultant company probably earning about Rp5mil a month. From this deal you may have agreed to have 50% of the US$12k if successful, you just made a 12 month bonus!! Pretty cool right? However if this issue turns bad, you walked away scot-free because your name was not anywhere in the letter.”

WOWWW...
You should really be a scriptwriter you know, im pretty sure not a lot of people can even come up with the idea of setting up the deal u mentioned above... Tell me something, have YOU done this before that you can have an idea like this..?

“To clarify, we do not manage any client's trading account but we do provide guidelines occasionally, however it's the account owner that will decide to take or not to take our guidelines for his trades.
I believe Mr X would have shown you and your friends his trading records; you and your friends in return trusted him with your monies after seeing the potential returns. That's why you invested your money in a trading account under your friend's name which is a fact. I also believe the account was doing well in the 1st month, unfortunately the subsequent months seem to spiral down and probably started to look for scapegoat for excuses and to get back your money.”

Quick reminder: i DON’T have a trading record.. This was YOUR suggestion to me and the other marketers to use YOUR trading record... I still have the file that YOU gave for us to do marketing with, but NO, i did NOT use it to market, coz i refuse to. The reason I brought in Mr. A to this investment was because YOU AND PHILIP [yes, the guy who was mentioned by Gary Geng on one of Mr. A’s posted emails; as well as RGoh’s older brother] agreed to sign the agreement. Even better, I have about half a dozen people who will testify if we ever get to court that you and your brother on MULTIPLE occasions saying: “Just get the accounts in. If lose we pay them back! Money this easy also don’t want huh..?”  remember that..? OF COURSE YOU DON’T RIGHT..? Well, guess what, WE ALL DO!!!

“To vincam, when I received the scanned copy of Statement of Intent, it came as a shock to me that someone will do something like this. I have to understand and analyse the motive, so I took the step-back approach.”
Just one word: BULLSH*T!

“To JF Lennon, if you are reading this, be careful with this Andi. You could be his next target.”
Hey Rog, don’t post it here. GIVE THEM A CALL! They are SO waiting for you there...

“As for Mr X, why don't you print out the account history of that trading account and posted it here? So that members in this forum who are traders will be able to see how it gone wrong?”
I’m not very sure how the account history will help you clear your name because it'll only show you & your brother's strategies in play in analyzed, but now that you mention it, let me put this in reverse: why don’t YOU print out all 10+ accounts from us four marketers that were under the direction of you and your brother instead..? Because all those accounts were wiped out in very similar ways – any trader could see they were all the same positions.

“unfortunately there seem to be some unhappy ex-staff trying to get even after we freeze the operations of the Indonesian company (that we had invested in) due to irregularities and is under inquiry from the head office.”
Not just ex-staff by the way, you and your brother also didn’t pay for your hostel that you stayed for almost a month in. Good thing your brother still came to Indo one more time before you guys disappeared – FYI, it was me who told the hostel staff to come to the office and not leave before they got paid.

“I got Andi's email in my company's domain mailbox on 25Dec 2010 and I duly replied him on the 28Dec. Any conversations before that date was his conversation with a hotmail account that I admit was sabotaged. I have no idea who had been communicating with them.”
Ok, so you DO admit that the hotmail account WAS yours [well, even if not, i still have some old emails from you to your marketers using that address dating back to late May 2010 & i can publish them anyway]. So this eliminates the possibility of some one else “making” an email address under that name then.

Now to all the audience here, if you would, please refer back to the emails RGoh claims to “have no idea who was communicating”.
I read thru the whole post again from the beginning as i am writing this, and i realize as i was reading thru, some things never changed throughout.

1. “Monies”
[See emails dated June 30th’10, Jan. 3rd, 24th, 26th].
- Does ANYONE use this word around here..? Now what are the chances that this hacker also uses the same word..? Hmmmm.....

2. “Apologies for...”
[See emails dated June 30th’10, Aug.31st’10, Sept. 5’10, & to Ms.KPOH on Jan.27th’11].
- Not a very strong argument, I must say, but seems repetitive to me. Very consistent on this phrase even though there are many ways to say it.

3. “Reference to the...”
[See emails June 30th’10, July 5th’10, Jan. 26th’11].
- Just so you know, this is incorrect English. It’s supposed to be “In/With reference to...” or “Referencing”, but I guess this hacker guy must’ve had bad English too huh..?

4. Blame the marketer!
- On Dec. 1st, you wrote: “...whoever introduce you had made that promise, please refer back to the referral.”  Sure, the guy who hacked into your email is trying to clear your name! How nice of Mr. Hacker! Oh, and by the way, in case you try to claim what Ms. KPOH has said that I was the one who hacked into your hotmail account, I must be a real idiot for trying to frame myself! Oh, but wait, maybe ur gona say that I was trying to create my own alibi..?
OH, and by the way, this is also a repetitive issue yah..? How many times have you tried to say “go look for this guy instead”, and as time goes this guy gets more and more powerful: from a student-trader to showing non-existent trading records, to forge your signature AND gather all your personal infos such as your passport number, to hacking into your email... What is this..? “Catch Me If You Can”..?

Now as for the signed agreement, i have not practiced law in any part of my life, and hence i wont speak much of it. But i DID consult with a lawyer i know throughout this process, and hence i have a basic idea of its strengths and weaknesses. One strength is its validity; yes, as mentioned before, it is not as strong as a signed & notarized piece of document, but it is a legal, sufficient binding agreement. Secondly, regarding the handwriting. RGoh, as you can see on the very top of that Statement of Intent, you wrote your ID number, which is in letters AND numbers; a lot of people can forge signatures, but how about handwriting..? Handwriting strokes are a field of study on its own, and even today it is still used in business crime forensics. Don’t believe me..? Ask any Indonesian lawyer who has handled a fraud case. I’ve made my mistakes, but I also didn’t walk into this agreement deaf, dumb, and blind.

Just to make sure that I don’t send to another email account that’s “hacked” & i’m sure you’ll read this post now that you’re involved, here’s what i have to say to u:
You, RGoh, in the year and a half i’ve gotten to know you, there has been one consistent role that you have portrayed, and even more clearly now in the ways you have projected to defend yourself. You’re a coward.
You hid behind your marketers in making all these promises, carefully choosing your timing. You even hid behind your brother in meeting clients face to face [yes, his brother was the one who traveled around and lobbied clients, and even talk to them after they started incurring losses made by RGoh]. In all those emails you wrote to my clients, you consistently again and again referred to me as the guy they should be looking for – you even hid behind me. And now, you’re worse than ever: you’re hiding behind a computer screen.
If you’re really innocent as you claim to be, you should have no fears to come and face the law, confidently stating your innocence. Especially for the “businessman” that you claim to be: your reputation should be an utmost importance. But, as we all can see, you don’t even have the decency to show up in front of your ex-employees; you even deleted our contacts from your blackberry messenger and declined our repeated requests – no guts to even talk to us! So, much less my clients, much less the law.
I pity your brother who marketed around the country, showing his face, only now to not be able to show it especially in Pulau Bintan again. But you know what, at least I had some respect for him; he still had the guts to look at me and my clients in the eye, even though every promise from his mouth were also lies.
Come with your brother to Indonesia and settle this.
I don’t know what else you got, but aside from all these that have been published right here, I got at least half a dozen people who will testify against you and him.

I will admit that I was a fool; a fool for believing y’all’s promises, a fool for committing myself to a job so much that I even worked full on Christmas day, a fool for ohmygosh – trusting you.
You should note this Roger, and note this well: you have damaged lives. PLEASE do not do to anyone else what you have done to us, enough is enough.

As also has been discussed in this posting before, we are not the police – this is not a court of law, and hence my client will not be able to get his money back even if RGoh is proven guilty right here [i guess its pretty evident from seeing how RGoh has been responding so far, anything short of a legal overrule is a waste of breath].
So, if nothing else, I shall align my purpose for posting with Mr. A, who puts the word “BEWARE” in the title of this post. I hope that everyone here do not share the same, or even close to loss that we have suffered.

Once again I thank you for your time and attention, and as Mr. A mentioned earlier in the post as well, we do welcome anyone who can help us process this thru legal channels.
 

vincam

Sergeant
Messages
322
Thank you Mr. X for your reply, we've been waiting to hear from you. Other than the letter do you have any proof of any kind that you recieved trade direction from Roger?

Hopefully RGoh will respond now, at least the two parties directly involved are here now.
 

LaRijke

Recruit
Messages
5
I know you CC'd Roger's 3G address and I don't have an expaination of why these would not get to his mail, the same mail he eventually responded from, that is pretty odd.

Yeah Roger, pls explain why those email not get to yours.



I think Mr. A simply not accepting the fact that he was cheated by his 'friend' Mr. X.

Why do you dare say that it is a fact.

There's still possibility that the fraud was conducted by Roger

We are not police here

Yeah, we are not police here, so stop act like devil advocate.

Maybe i should give a simple scenario to Mr. A: If you bought an expensive watch from a salesman, and he shown you all the fake certificate to prove the origin of the watch, and later you found out the watch is imitation, do go after the salesman or the supplier of the watches to the salesman?

In your case, you choose to trust the salesman n you go after the supplier of the watch, and the supplier claim he did not supply any of the fake watch nor the certificate. Lol..

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

My point is, it doesnt matter what Roger said is real or bluff

Lol, but what if the salesman was shown the certificate, which he believed real because the supplier told so?


So, it really does matter Ms devil advocate :D


Lets be more objective in dealing with money. If you invest money in a bank, n the bank lost your money, and push the blame to his trader and ask you go after the trader instead, it simple doesnt make sense right?

a silly analogy

You invest your funds into a bank because the 'bank name', not his trader right??


Likewise with Mr. A, he invested his money because theres an assurances from Roger, not just because Mr. X.

So, it simple make sense if Mr. A go after Roger.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top