Where is Michael's Money?

We've read the stories ad nauseam. After his tragic death in a ritzy Sydney hotel, stories began circulating: the money has disappeared. Cries of foul play, allegations of nefarious activity, suspicions of hidden pots of gold and of course the men in the middle of it all - Andrew Young and the elusive Colin Diamond.

To say the world's media has been chasing Mr Diamond is an understatement. His family has been staked out and harassed, planes have been chartered in pursuit and one intrepid journalist has even slept on an airport lounge on the basis that Mr Elusive "has to come through here at some time". Involving oneself in a domestic dispute is arduous at the best of times. When that domestic dispute involves millions of dollars and unresolved family problems, being the man in the middle can prove to be one of the world's most hazardous occupations as Mr Diamond has discovered.

AXS has secured the only interview with Colin Diamond. Reluctantly he agreed to provide some insight into the allegations. Shortly before going to press, and in spite of threats of injunctions and writs by some of the parties mentioned in this article, we also managed to secure an interview with Andrew Young.

AXS: How long had you known Michael, and how did you meet?

DIAMOND: I knew Michael for over 12 years. I met him in 1986 one day over lunch in Hong Kong. There was an instant rapport. We've been fishing, flying, paragliding, socialising and doing business ever since.

AXS: So how would you describe your role in Michael's financial affairs?

DIAMOND: I'm a barrister practicing in international law. I've just done what Michael asked me to do as a lawyer and as a friend and what he wanted to do most of all was ensure Tiger's future. YOUNG: I'm a barrister with a roving brief. I would advise Michael on any matter he requested.

AXS: You've copped a bit of a hiding in the press as some sort of financial Svengali to Michael, with suggestions that, with regards to his estate, all is not as it should be. You've refused point-blank to speak to the media before this, so let me ask you directly: Where's the money?

DIAMOND: None of your business. That's the point; it's private. Don't you guys get it? It's PRIVATE.
YOUNG: From my discussions with Michael, his finances were structured precisely according to his wishes. I understand the money is exactly where it is supposed to be.

AXS: There are insinuations that Michael's money is so well hidden, that no-one would know if the estate is being ripped off. Isn't that what his mother and half sister are screaming about?

YOUNG: Is that what they're screaming about? I believe they might be working to a different agenda.
DIAMOND: The Will is clear, and ultimately it will be a public document. Michael was insistent that Greenpeace and Amnesty International receive a fair chunk. He had separate independent advice in relation to his affairs from lawyers and accountants in countries around the world to make sure that he knew what was going on. For example I can't act as a legal entity in the USA, I'm not registered there, so Michael always had U.S. professionals undertaking the work there and providing him with the necessary advice. He was very clear who else was to receive what. The Will was written in accordance with his specific instructions. He knew what was in his estate and what was in trust. He knew what the Will meant. He was very clear in his instructions as to what should ensue should anything ever happen to him and that those instructions should be followed to the letter. As far as I am concerned, I owe it to Michael to retain a long-term interest in his affairs, and that means most importantly, to the best of my ability, ensuring that Tiger is properly looked after.

AXS: Is there any of Michael's money that is not represented in the Will/estate?

DIAMOND: No, none that I'm aware of. Once money is placed into a trust, it ceases to be owned by any individual, that is what a trust is all about. Look, this is the difficulty in dealing with people who don't have a clear understanding of the law as it stands and is written. Look at it this way; if you were to win Lotto, and
wanted to set up a scholarship for a local university, once you've paid over the money for a trust set up for that purpose, you no longer own it. That's how a trust works. Once the money is placed into a trust, the trust becomes the legal controller and can only distribute funds in accordance with the terms of the trust.

AXS: Can you tell me who are the beneficiaries of these trusts?

DIAMOND: No. It's none of your business. But I can tell you it isn't me.

AXS: But aren't you a trustee over some discretionary trusts? Isn't that the complaint from Michael's mother?

DIAMOND: I was one of the directors of the trustee companies because that was what Michael wanted. I am not any more. Obviously Michael didn't think it unreasonable for someone he trusted to retain an element of responsibility over financial decisions that impact on the future of his two year old girl and, indirectly, her mother. Whether those trusts could have benefitted members of his family, or anyone else for that matter, is not for me to say. You don't seem to be getting the point do you? I'm trying to ensure that Michael's instructions are carried out. In spite of this, I have renounced my role as an executor. I have also resigned as a director of any relevant trustee company.

AXS: Why have you done this?

DIAMOND: Because the lawyers in Australia felt that there was a potential conflict of interest, or at least there was the potential for such a perception, if I remained an executor of the Will or a director of a trustee company. With what's going on at the moment, the last thing that's needed is anything that detracts from the welfare of Tiger.

AXS: How come a bunch of properties, for example in France and surfers Paradise, are claimed by his mother to be Michael's, but don't appear as part of his estate?

YOUNG: They're not part of his estate and as far as I'm aware they never have been. Nothing has changed since his death. The property in France you mention is owned by a French company and you'll discover they've owned it for over a decade.

AXS: She further claims he owned an Aston Martin that doesn't appear in the estate. Did he?

YOUNG: I'm glad you actually asked. Too many people are caught up with making accusations when they don't know the facts. Michael didn't own an Aston Martin, he had use of one in France. The only car I know Michael owned was a Jeep Cherokee, and it's in London.

AXS: It strikes me that there are many unanswered questions about what he did and didn't own. Isn't this what's causing the damage, that what, according to some, appeared to be Michael's suddenly isn't? Can you understand why some members of his family might feel that they're being kept in the dark?

DIAMOND: Nothing's vanished. If it's not in his estate, it's in trust.
YOUNG: I get the impression that Michael's family were not privy to the particularity of his financial affairs and simply assumed that anything they associated Michael with was his and would be included in his estate and they don't seem to be aware that Michael's affairs were structured in a fashion that is quite common around the world and that only those things that were personally owned by Michael could be included in his estate. They have their grief to come to terms with. I can understand that. I understand that grief can manifest itself in many different ways. I just wish they would respect Michael's wishes without suggesting Mr Diamond is acting contrary to them.

AXS: Surely if there was some elaborate tax structure or asset protection scheme that Michael didn't want made public, the family could be taken to one side and have it explained to them?

YOUNG: Explaining is one thing, but getting someone to accept something they don't like is another.

AXS: International barristers don't come cheap, and you're obviously spending a lot of time on this. Who's paying your fees?

DIAMOND: I'm not getting paid and I won't be. There's not even a remuneration clause in the Will. I'm doing this as a service to Michael. I'm not only not being paid, in fact I'm out of pocket.

AXS: When will the estate be settled?

DIAMOND: I don't know. Hopefully in the near future a grant of probate will be issued in Hong Kong. After that, the executors can then begin to distribute the estate.

AXS: Some people have claimed they'll use every tactic available to them to get their hands on more money. Will this delay the distribution of the estate?

YOUNG: It must, the pending litigation could take years.

AXS: Why Hong Kong? Why not the UK or Australia? Is this one of the artificial devices that `these people' are complaining about?

DIAMOND: Michael was a long term Hong Kong resident. They know Michael better than any other jurisdiction in the world. His banks, taxes, finances, the whole lot. Michael lived in Hong Kong for nearly half his life remember? The Hong Kong courts are thorough; in this case I have no doubt they will be especially so.
Anything that is happening in regards to Michael's Will, his estate, has one of the world's best judicial bodies looking closely over the shoulders of the people concerned.

AXS: We understand that Michael's Will bequeaths decent amounts to Greenpeace and Amnesty International, that Tiger receives half of the remainder with the balance split equally between Paula Yates, his mother, his father, his brother and his half sister. Can you confirm this?

DIAMOND: No, I won't, and I'd like to know where you got that information from.

AXS: Has the actual amount in the estate been determined?

DIAMOND: Until the grant of probate is made, personal assets can't be valued or be touched. Once the probate is granted, the executors' solicitors independently value the whole box and dice.

AXS: And I suppose you are the executors' solicitor?

DIAMOND: You've been reading too much British press, mate. The firm appointed is [Hong Kong lawyers] Boase Cohen & Collins. It's their job to do all of that.

AXS: Who is the executor?

DIAMOND: A gentleman by the name of Andrew Paul in hong Kong.

AXS: So nobody knows yet what they'll be getting - in terms of actual amounts?

DIAMOND: No.

AXS: So why is Michael's mother making these accusations? She's seeking to have the money Michael placed in trusts be a part of the estate and has lodged a writ to that effect with the Queensland Supreme Court. Has she got a point?

DIAMOND: I'm not prepared to comment on anything that is or might be before the courts.

YOUNG: Well, you'd have to ask her as to her motives on that point. I can only assume that she is not a beneficiary of the trusts. That she is unhappy with the trusts Michael established and would prefer the money to be declared as part of the estate and so obtain a portion of that trust money. Why she chooses not to abide by Michael's wishes and decisions is beyond me.

AXS: Her solicitor, Joanne Kelly is on the record as saying "It's not about taking away anybody's inheritance, particularly Tiger Lily's. The proceedings are about trying to bring into the estate millions of dollars of assets for the benefit of everyone and obviously for Tiger Lily." Surely this is a fair position for her to take, not a selfish one?

YOUNG: Fair to whom? If those trusts were declared part of the estate, it would definitely not be to Tiger's benefit, it would in fact be to her considerable detriment. It seems to me that they must know that and that in spite of this, they are in fact seeking to have the court rescind Michael's legally expressed wishes. Wishes that are particularly evident by the legal structures he established to ensure they would be carried out.

AXS: Well obviously she feels something is not quite right. She must be receiving advice along those lines. Surely a writ in the Queensland Supreme Court can't get up on nothing?

YOUNG: You're right, a writ can't get up on nothing and it's certainly not up yet. As to the advice she's been given, you'd have to ask her lawyer, Ms Kelly, who acts for both Patricia (Patricia Glassop - Michael's mother) and Tina Shaw (Michael's half sister).

AXS: Ms Kelly is obviously confident enough to lodge the writ in the first place. She's no newcomer to these matters having had an association with firms acting for INXS matters dating back years. She once worked for another firm, Gray Perkins, who used to act for INXS. She obviously believes she has sufficient grounds to make a case. Perhaps grounds you are not aware of?

YOUNG: You must understand that lawyers act on their instructions. The fact that they have done so is not an indication that they are necessarily confident of success. I wasn't aware of Ms Kelly's past association with Gray Perkins. Presumably the lawyers for the estate and the trustee companies will be examining the association to see if there is any conflict of interest, that is to say, she is not relying upon information obtained whilst working for those solicitors.

(In a telephone call to Ms Kelly, she felt unable or unwilling to provide any comment to AXS other than that she worked for Gray Perkins 13 years ago and that, at that time, another solicitor, Mr John Gray acted for Chris Murphy, the INXS manager at the time a number of trusts were established. Mr Gray confirmed Ms Kelly was an employee at the time but was unable to remember whether she worked on any INXS trust documents at the time. Ms Kelly wouldn't comment on when the matter before the Queensland Court might be heard, why the action was in Queensland or even why they launched the action in the first place. When asked why she didn't put her case before the Hong Kong courts, Ms Kelly was unaware of any Hong Kong probate related activity saying, "you're ahead of us on that one". Ms Kelly would not disclose whether she or her firm were on a contingency (success) fee, or when she began acting for Ms Glassop and Ms Shaw.)

AXS: Surely his mother and half sister believe they are acting in Michael's best interests, that they are being sensitive to the other members of the family and are just reflecting the love they had for Michael?

YOUNG: Frankly I'd have thought the best way to reflect any love they had for Michael would be to abide by his wishes. I knew, as did most people genuinely close to Michael, what his views on his family were. I thing it's fair to say Michael's Will reflected those views accurately. One way or another they had their pound of flesh while he was alive. But it's time to accept that he's unfortunately no longer with us and that he made these financial
arrangements specifically with Tiger's wellbeing in mind. As I understand it, none of the family have been forgotten, but, not unnaturally, Tiger was his prime concern and that is clearly reflected in his affairs.

AXS: OK. So legally, monies held in trust are not part of a person's assets. Supposing in this case, the trusts are, in fact, as per Michael's wishes. Has the challenge got a leg to stand on?

YOUNG: Aside from any question as to whether the Queensland courts have jurisdiction, bearing in mind he wasn't even an Australian resident, what should also be considered is Paula's position. It seems to me that if anyone had grounds to fairly take issue with the terms of the Will it would be Paula. She has always respected
and understood Michael's wishes but I would wonder what her actions might be if it were to appear likely those wishes weren't to be followed.

AXS: Are the executors managing his music and photo `rights' now? Will the estate be seeking to sell or liquidate Michael's composer-writer rights?

YOUNG: From what Michael told me, he, like many of his peers, hasn't owned those rights since the middle eighties. I believe that they are now owned by a trustee company and so would have nothing to do with the estate.

AXS: Are there any whackos making claims? Children nobody was aware of, that sort of thing?

DIAMOND: No. In fact it is surprisingly quiet on that front. Very quiet.

AXS: Have the executors had any trouble locating any of Michael's personal assets?

YOUNG: I understand there have only been a few problems. I understand some of the beneficiaries approached the staff of a villa in France and arranged for some things to be sent to them before the executor could seal the assets. One beneficiary in particular has been phoning people claiming personal items Michael
left with them were now theirs and should be sent to them immediately. I believe the executors are expecting some items presently with friends and family members to be delivered to them.

AXS: Who gets Michael's private photo albums, etc?

YOUNG: Well, technically, that's up to the executors. That's a curly one though. Michael certainly had a large number of very personal photographs of both himself and some of his friends. Michael was very discreet. I'd hate to think the photos would end up with anyone who wasn't as discreet. Certainly many of the photos were never meant for publication. I think it would be nice for Tiger to get the photos of her dad, don't you?

AXS: Do you agree with the coroner's verdict?

DIAMOND: I dunno; who knows? There are so many things that aren't clear. There's Geldof doing the double-cross on Michael that day; there's the autopsy finding of bruises to the front of Michael's brain that we think could only have happened in Copenhagen; there's the medication he was on since Copenhagen. Who knows? I knew Michael for so long ... he wasn't the sort of bloke to do that. He was talking to me about his future, he was excited about his solo album, he was keen for his future. I just can't understand what happened.

AXS: What happened in Copenhagen?

DIAMOND: Ah, Michael was assaulted, he copped a bit of a hiding. After that he was certainly moody. Nobody made the connection. It seems he suffered some bruising to his brain. Maybe that affected him much more than we thought.

AXS: What do you mean by Bob Geldof double-crossing him?

DIAMOND: It's simple. We had a deal. He gave his word and he went back on his word. A complete turn-around. He double-crossed Michael, Paula and the kids. That's the kind of bloke he is. He can't be trusted.

AXS: What deal was this?

DIAMOND: It was about allowing the kids to travel with Michael and Paula as a family. Every conversation with him [Geldof] was about possessions. He had no regard for anyone's feelings except his own. He treated his kids as possessions in exactly the same way he viewed any other material possessions. He didn't think they have a right to any sort of life outside of him. Every court appearance to him was about power and money. Even a simple matter of custody and letting the kids travel was tied to talks about money. Look, Michael wasn't concerned about the money and neither was Paula. All they wanted was to be able to enjoy a family life with the
kids. They had a Christmas holiday planned up at Port Douglas, at Steve Vizard's place. You know, give the kids a chance to go snorkelling on the reef, that sort of thing. Bob wouldn't give permission for them to leave the country. I did a deal with Geldof while he was in France. It was agreed that Paula would forgo claims on `his' money if the kids could travel with the whole family. Geldof said yes. When we got to court, we did our bit and then he double-crossed them. Just like that. Everything was arranged for the kids to fly out with Paula. Michael was waiting for the call to say they're on their way. Instead he got the call saying Bob's double-crossed them, Christmas is ruined and for all he knew that was how life would be forever, Paula and the kids trapped in London by Bob so to speak. A few hours later Michael was dead. It tore his heart out. That's why Paula said to Bob that he'd killed Michael as surely as with his own hand.

AXS: If you're such a great mate of Michael's why didn't you go to the funeral?

DIAMOND: Tiger had a seizure the night before. I spent the whole night before the funeral in an emergency ward having Tiger looked at. We had no idea what was wrong. She had a zillion tests and those results don't all come in instantly. The next morning (the day of the funeral) I flew to Queensland to speak to a paediatrician and her doctor who had looked after Tiger previously in Australia to see what additional treatment, if any, they thought might be necessary. Paula and I wanted a second opinion. At that point in time I was more concerned with looking after the living.

AXS: What about the accusations that you stiffed the crematorium for the bill?

DIAMOND: Yeah, I read that. The firm (Walter Carter) initially quoted a fee of $30,000 for everything. Without even coming back to the executors or anyone in a position to authorise it, they took it upon themselves to book another $15,000 worth of limos for some of the family, more thousands for personal security guards for them, and then expected the estate to just cough up the money. I offered them the $30,000 out of my own pocket if they wanted to stand by their quote, otherwise they could sort out their bill against the estate and stand in line to get their money like every other creditor. That's perfectly normal and above board.

AXS: On a separate note, as a mate and a legal adviser to Michael, what happened with that so-called drug bust in London?

DIAMOND: Perhaps you should try and figure it out for yourself. Michael and Paula were out of the country and during that time only a few people had any real access to the place: Bob Geldof, Anita Debney the nanny who used to work for Bob for 12 or so years, and a woman called Gerry Agar who had developed a grudge against both Paula and Michael. The police were called days after the nanny claimed she'd found two Smarty packets with opium in them. Geldof immediately had a new custody application before the courts, "in light of recent events". The local police and prosecutors had the media on their case. There was enormous pressure on them, but even they had to admit something was a bit fishy. They dropped all charges remember and Michael was issued with a certificate of non- prosecution by the Crown.

AXS: You seem a bit dark on Geldof.

DIAMOND: Whatever gives you that idea?

AXS: So Michael got off fairly?

DIAMOND: Got off, GOT OFF? I think the question should be who tried to get him on. You figure it out.