janice i am sure the nasd director the everen legal dept spoke to wasn't discussing an "ir" pack . your knowledge of this stuff is so weak or you are the epitome of 'shill' dear. what this broker who has been participating in the manipulation of a stock in concert with your group is facing is sanctions as well as everen & himself being served with wellrich & others in a defamation & libel suit. my understanding is you will be served in publication & through the consulate. everen was contacted about where the subpeona should go. everen & kuglar are being served.
it appears dear to even the casual observer you are on a mission. you continue to bury yourself deeper & deeper & one can only wonder why. how deep can you get? you defended those who could not & did not defend themselfs. there was no defense to there crimes. a default was entered 13 jan & here you are, defending those still who were unable, in a court of law, to defend there actions. because they have chosen not to defend, not to plead or dispute any material issues, a summary judgement will be signed by the judge on or before 1/29. andy mann has no lawyer, no legal representation & even bruce judd has been unable to contact him as we here it. still you continue to promote & defend andy mann! you suggest sylver "gave" him this stock. you say it was "sylver's opinion letter" alders & mann used to get the legends lifted off the stock before the restriction expired. how do you promote & defend this when andy mann himself could not , would not & did not?
you tell us the dtc has not changed there position since the outset. yet you fail to say that issac montal & the dtc came to aznt on three seperate occassions to negotiate a stipulation that they be dropped from the case in return for the freeze being lifted & the return of the 4.48 million shares. each time they failed to live up to the agreement. the last time was 14 jan where after negotiating the stipulation to be dropped from the case they again failed to live up to there agreement citing the hardship wholesalers would endure with the pending short squeeze. why does the dtc care about any "hardships" wholesalers who have deficits in there accounts would endure? why is thev dtc "dealing" with aznt AT ALL OVER STOCK? they are a DEPOSITORY?? why did jboxford have physical possession of the stock from may-oct '98 AND A DTC CREDIT???? finally why did jboxford claim they sent the cert to dtc when the restraining order ordered its return to the court? jboxford is an estimated 1.2 million shares short on the 4 million andy mann stold. now comes barrister maclean forstrom jackson who contacts aznt that montal wants to "compromise" before the 1/29 hearing (a hearing that would never be if dtc lived up to the stipulation the negotiated with aznt 14 jan). montal's "compromise" is that dtc will lift the freeze & return the stock as long as aznt states 1.2 million shares of it are free trading stock! 1.2 million is the short position on the 4 million andy mann stold. this is a "compromise". needless to say aznt laughed at this "compromise". again, why is dtc dealing at all over stock?? they are a depository.
you also are ill informed & judd can set you straight. the restraining order evolved into an injunction. aznt was granted injunctive relief. the 4.48 million shares were ordered to be returned to the court. this is the ONLY REASON DTC WAS BEING ADDED TO THE CASE, to extend the injunction & restraining order to dtc because jboxford used them keep the stock in the system & from the 1.2 million short having to be covered. i suggest you figure this out.
so now we have defaults against defendants who chose not to defend themselfs, yet you defend tooth & nail. we already have injunctive relief demanding the stock returned to the court & since dtc did not honor the stipulation agreement montal negotiated 3 times already, dtc will not be dropped from the case & with the summary judgement to be signed by the judge on or before the 1/29 hearing, the stock appears to be a non factor for 2 reasons. 1)court has already granted aznt injunctive relief & 2) andy mann is in default, has disputed no material issues, has no legal representation, & from what we hear is on the run. therefore with the signing of the summary judgement federal marshalls will seize the stock.
so dtc will be forced to defend why they do not lift the freeze. they do so to protect themselfs as well as the wholesalers of aznt with defecits in there accounts. i believe they , like the defendants can not defend themselfs in court & have tried unsuccessfully to negotiate with aznt a 'deal'. they have been unsuccessful up to as late as wedns. this week.
so everyday we watch you dear playing the shill for those in default & who chose not to defend themselfs in a court of law. we see you promote & defend andy mann, wellrich & what dtc is currently attempting to do ALL AT THE DETRIMENT OF THE SMALL INVESTORS YOU CLAIM YOU ARE BASHING THIS STOCK TO PROTECT.
so you & kuglar, everen, wellrich, tonto, s martin, forthright, ulrich, mitchell & the rest of your group who appears to bash this stock, defame its principals & target its shareholders with the support of silicon investor will have your day in court. you will be able to tell the world why you defend & promote those who chose not to defend themselfs & why your group, apparently in violation of rico statutes , has assisted those who chose not to defend themsels in court.
spider |
