Westergaard the fraud
Here's an email he sent in his newsletter
"Hey, everybody. Please keep this to yourself for the time being!
I'll be at the SEC tomorrow morning (Tuesday) at 10:30 a.m. to sign off on a
consent decree. Paul Curran got everything I could have wanted and more. It
is my decision to go in personally tomorrow morning for the signing and look
these people in the eye. Here's the essential language:
Defendant John Westergaard.......... "without admitting or denying the
allegations of paragraphs 1-33 of the Complaint as said allegations claim
violations of Section 17(b) (JW: that's the regulatory equivalent of
jaywalking) of the Securities Act of 1933 [15 U.A.C. 77q(b)] and denying said
allegations to the extent that they claim any violation of Section 10(b) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 19345 [15 U.S.C. 78i] and Rule 10b-5
thereunder [17 C.F.R. 240.10b-5] (that's the fraud stuff) except as to
jurisdiction which he admits to, consented to the entry without further
notice of this Final Judgment, this Court having jurisdiction over Defendant
and the subject matter of this action, and the Court being fully advised in
the premises, and there no just reason for delay."
The "more" Curran got was the language whereby I deny "said allegations to
the extent that they claim any violation of Section 10(b)". That's important
because whereas I am restrained from denying what I agreed to re the 17(b)
jaywalking violation (Why would I do that in any event?), I am not restricted
from bringing up all the dirt as to conduct of the SEC at my Internet website
The SEC v. John Westergaard and the First Amendment relating to the
malicious, false charges of fraud against me and their disregard of my appeal
for protection under the First Amendment. I intend to activate the site
shortly before or after Labor Day.
Congratulations to Federal Judge Deborah A. Batts, a Moynihan recommended
appointee by the way, who immediately saw through the absurdity of this case
when it was presented to her June 29th. She scheduled a hearing for tomorrow
afternoon, Tuesday, at 4:30 p.m. which is what brought the signing to a head
-- clearly the SEC had no appetite for going in and being effectively
ridiculed a second time. Absent a deadline, the SEC would have been content
to leave me twisting in the wind for months.
As for Paul Curran, he is a truly rare human being. He did not know me from
Adam when this case came across his desk. He and Joe Hansen (and a Kaye
Scholer litigator, Michael Lynn, and associate Brian Satz), have put
considerable time (somewhere $50,000 to to $100,000 worth is my guess) and
clever research into this case pro-bono.
The website The SEC v. John Westergaard and the First Amendment comprises 13
chapters as of this writing. In showing the SEC culture as crypto-fascist it
will draw on several works of Hannah Arendt (The Origins of Totalitarianism
and Eichmann In Jersusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil) and others.
Stay tuned, everybody: Now it's my turn to have some fun!!! As to where I'm
going with this, see attached.............John " |
