Ask Jeeves,Inc-(Nasdaq-ASKJ) Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Ask Jeeves,Inc-(Nasdaq-ASKJ)

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: StockDung who wrote (488)	6/13/2002 5:24:29 PM
From: rrufff	Read Replies (2) of 838

This guy seems to have a handle on what the Enterprise associates may be up against. Any comments? To:Matthew Tyson who wrote (404) From: jag2002 Wednesday, Jun 12, 2002 3:50 PM View Replies (2) \| Respond to of 447 I don't find that it is not necessary to have participated during the entire time period of the scheme to be culpable under the Racketeering Act. I may be wrong. I don't find that it is necessary to have known that Elgindy was bribing FBI agents. I may be wrong To:rrufff who wrote (422) From: jag2002 Thursday, Jun 13, 2002 10:10 AM View Replies (1) \| Respond to of 447 It seems that many think that they will be safe from prosecution if they can claim that they didn't know about the alleged bribes. The "Findings of Fact and Order of Detention" has an interesting quote about the tactics of the enterprise. IMO, it isn't necessary to know about a bribe in order to act in concert to manipulate a stock. How many fund managers had access to Elgindy's site? If there were fund managers, how will that fact enter into the concept of the enterprise?

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next