HERE IS CHAIRMAN X NIGHTMARE SCENARIO #2
HERE IS THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL REASON WHY THE SEC MUST LAY ITS CARDS ON THE TABLE ON THE 11th DAY AFTER A SUSPENSION ORDER IS ISSUED!!!!!
The Law MUST provide an avenue of recourse here.
Justice is blind. Even if, for the sake of illustration, we assume the worst, e.g., that SLUP did something wrong, the law must still provide an avenue to require the SEC to show the public what evidence it had on April 30, 1998, of egregious fraud committed by SLUP, conclude the investigation, tell us what the investigation uncovered, and disclose to the public the evidence of the wrongful activity. ---- OTHERWISE, HOW ELSE CAN THE FOLLOWING NIGHTMARE BE PREVENTED?????
An evil, mean-spirited, political lacky is appointed as Chairman of the SEC(Chairman X). Chairman X is contacted by a large political donor of his party (FATCAT). FATCAT tells Chairman X that a new competitor is challenging FATCAT's business, which will result in his having less money to donate to Chairman X's party next election. FATCAT says to Chairman X "You know, I have heard that this company Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah!!! Maybe you should look into it! I KNOW THAT IF YOU LOOK LONG ENOUGH YOU WILL FIND SOMETHING!!!!! Chairman X orders his henchman, The Director of the Division of Enforcement, to issue a "temporary" suspension order to the company. A company that has done absolutely nothing wrong except presenting a competitive threat to FATCAT'S business and future donations to Chairman X's party. The notice of suspension says that "questions have arisen about the company's Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah." Ten days later, the price of the company's stock plummets and the SEC commences an investigation. The investigation drags on for two years and longer, without the SEC telling the public what the company did wrong. Chairman X dispatches armed agents of the FBI to harass his critics on the grounds that they have made statements that Chairman X considers to be threatening. --- WHAT RECOURSE WILL THAT COMPANY HAVE IF LEGAL RECOURSE IS NOW DENIED TO SOLUCORP AND ITS SHAREHOLDERS????????? IN THE EYES OF THE LAW, THERE IS NO DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE TWO POSSIBLE SCENARIO'S!!!
THE SEC MUST DISCLOSE IT'S EVIDENCE SUPPORTING A SUSPENSION AT THE END OF THE 10-DAY SUSPENSION PERIOD.
THE SEC MUST NOW DISCLOSE TO US WHAT FACTUAL EVIDENCE IT HAD ON APRIL 30, 1998, THAT CAUSED IT TO SUSPEND TRADING IN SOLUCORP. THE SEC MUST DISCLOSE TO THE PUBLIC WHAT SLUP DID WRONG AND THE EVIDENCE THAT SUPPORTS ITS FINDINGS -- OTHERWISE THE LIBERTY OF ALL MAY AT SOME FUTURE TIME BE DENIED........JUSTICE DELAYED IS JUSTICE DENIED!!!!!!!!!!
hawkeye(not Hawkeye), ITANCA!!!!!! SI SLUPPIE NATION!!!!!
|
