Problems with state Rep. Randy Terrill’s reopened 2005 bankruptcy case are nothing more than errors on his Ethic Commission reports, Terrill and his attorney told a federal judge Wednesday.

Speaking at a hearing before federal bankruptcy judge T.M. Weaver, Terrill and his attorney, Oklahoma City lawyer Jeffrey West, said concerns raised by bankruptcy trustee John D. Mashburn were simply errors on Terrill’s 2004 and 2005 Ethics Commission filings.

“There are, probably, a half-dozen or more errors on those reports,” Terrill said. “And under state law I am allowed to correct them.”

Testifying for more than an hour, Terrill spared with Mashburn about those filings, including several line-items listed as “loans.” Terrill said the listings were not “loans” but were, instead, reimbursements for campaign related expenses.

“What you are referring to as loans are not loans,” he said.

Asked by Mashburn about his understanding of the state’s Ethics Commission rules, Terrill said he “wasn’t familiar” with the rules. “I’m not a campaign finance expert,” he said. Instead, he said he followed the advice of an staff member of the Ethics Commission to fill out the forms.

“Those listings were put on that particular document based on a conversation we had with the Ethics Commission staff,” he said.

Asked after the hearing to identify the commission staff member who offered the advice, Terrill refused. “I’m not going to say who,” he said.

Citing filings from Terrill’s first campaign for office in 2004 and his subsequent 2005 campaign filings, Mashburn repeatedly questioned Terrill about several different listings — totaling more than $11,301 — which were noted as loans on the filings but not listed as assets on Terrill’s 2005 bankruptcy petition.

Mashburn also questioned the Moore Republican about a $4,000 transfer made from Terrill’s campaign account to his personal bank account in October of 2004.

“I’m not sure what this reflects,” Terrill said. “I’m not familiar with those accounts.”

A few minutes later, after being shown his own bank statement, Terrill acknowledged the transfer.

“I would agree it appears that way,” he said.

“So it’s a loan, right?” Mashburn asked.

“No,” Terrill countered. “I’m suggesting that there is still no intent that it would be repaid.”