David Bolden denied wrongdoing when grilled by a prosecutor over allegations that he stole from Emerald Capital International [ECI] and gave false information to the Bermuda Monetary Authority [BMA].Mr Bolden and his wife Antoinette are on trial accused of stealing more than $250,000 from ECI, an exempt company, and laundering $65,000 of it. The couple set up the company with two Canadian businessmen, Jason Bagg and John Wright, who gave evidence that the Boldens made unauthorised and unapproved cash withdrawals.The husband and wife are also accused of misleading the BMA when the regulatory authority expressed concern over the finances of their Emerald Financial Group of companies, which were licensed by the BMA. Prosecutor Susan Mulligan alleged during her opening speech on May 9 that the couple plundered the accounts to pay debts and live beyond their means.Under cross-examination from prosecutor Ms Mulligan yesterday, Mr Bolden said he did not agree with concerns expressed by the BMA over the liquidity and capitalisation of the Emerald Financial Group.He agreed the company borrowings had gone up which was a concern for the BMA, along with the issues of liquidity and net assets. He also admitted the global financial market made things “difficult” . However, he told the court there was equity in the family home and funds could have been found from “a variety of sources”. He denied misleading the BMA in discussions about a liquidity shortfall of $500,000.The Boldens told the BMA they had the ability to provide a cash injection, writing a letter saying they had “raised for the group in excess of $500,000”. Ms Mulligan put it to him: “The truth was you were owed money; any receivables of $500,000, that’s not the same as having raised it.”Mr Bolden replied: “I did not mean to mislead. I would agree it’s not as clear as it should be.”Mr Bolden denied the prosecutor’s allegations that money from ECI should not have been used to prop up the separate Emerald Financial Group, in particular the Direct Trade company under that umbrella. She alleged that Direct Trade had “no right to that money”.The transfer of ECI money to the Emerald Financial Group accounts forms part of the criminal charges against the Boldens.Mr Bolden said: “As directors we could have allocated that money anywhere we wished so yes, it could have gone to Direct Trade.”