Karen Chester raised allegations about her boss James Shipton in a private meeting, then asked him to lobby business figures to help her get his job.

At one point, Mr Shipton and Ms Chester agreed it would be best not to be in a room together without other people present. Former commissioners Sean Hughes and Danielle Press sometimes acted as mediators.

Clarification

This give you an idea of the state that ASIC was in at the time it targeted Mayfair 101.

For you to phone up those people and say something nice about me. That I ‘did a damn good job’ and I ‘was incredibly professional in my parliamentary hearings’.

Accurate

Ms Chester's statements speak for themself.

The conversation, which was recorded on April 9, 2021, began with a discussion about the selection of Mr Shipton’s successor. Ms Chester said she was one of two final candidates.

Ms Chester was one of two candidates and she lost. That must be quite humiliating for her considering what she tried to do to obtain the role.

She asked him to fix the problem by contacting influential figures and praising her performance while Treasurer Josh Frydenberg was choosing his successor.

Ms Chester led ASIC's campaign against Mayfair 101. It appears from this statement in the article that she was concerned about obtaining the top role at ASIC. This might explain why ASIC's legal against Mayfair have been so misguided.

she asked him to lobby senior business leaders to help repair her reputation

Ms Chester's statements about Mayfair 101 and Mr Mawhinney echo her behaviour toward Mr Shipton. It is apparent she would do anything, including making false public statements about Mayfair 101, in her quest to get James Shipton's role.

ASIC deputy told chairman she could have ‘destroyed’ him

Just 10 days later when Justice Anderson handed down a 20-year fundraising ban to Mr Mawhinney (which was overturned on appeal) Ms Chester made a serious of defamatory comments in an ASIC media release, including telling the public ASIC had done its job because Mr Mawhinney had lost investors $211 million when this statement was false (no losses had been incurred).