As I said he may not have the 500K bucks for forensic accounting
but the shareholders of IPM who are not mouth breathing idiots and
want the questions answered that were so plausibly raised may have it
as a group. I will bet that some intelligent lawyers in Arizona will smell money there.
The objections you raise about Arizona being an interested party
in the fraud and ineligible to sue because they are in interested party in the fraud are circular as illustrated. They can countersue. It's done all the time. They can pay the suit, they do it all the time for pubic issues..
What are you too dense to understand?
I never said, you professional word twister, that AZ was unable to file their own lawsuit or join in this one as a plaintiff. Nice attempt to change the topic. What I said was that the state of Arizona is a defendant in a different lawsuit by IPM and is therefore not an uninterested third party in Bernie's suit due to its adversarial relationship to the company and they would have to be considered a hostile party if it intervened in this suit.
World-recognized, by everyone but you, arms-length third parties are doing the very chain-of-custody work that you say must be done. Why do shareholders or anyone else have to pay an addition $500,000 to do the same work? Are you making an accusation that BD and Bateman are participating in a fraud and will return fraudulant results?
BTW, you said in an earlier message that the suit against IPM was by its shareholders. It is instead solely by Bernie Lumbert who has been harassing people for months with his scam warnings and is unlikely to own any stock except that which he may have bought to have standing as a shareholder. Do you admit that your previous statement was incorrect?
They are now making money by NOT blowing the whistle. The share holders should name THEM in the suit. The shareholders should sue to get the information Bateman and BD possess.
Put up or shut up. You imply above, in a statement that would appear to a reasonable person as a statement of fact, that BD and Bateman are intentionally withholding information that would show IPM to be a fraud. Are you, as a matter of fact not of opinion, accusing IPM, BD and Bateman, jointly or separately, of fraud and/or stock manipulation? |
