To: Dee Jay who wrote (2629 ) 10/25/1999 1:44:00 PM From: WhiteKnight Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 2696
DEE JAY, As I am sure you are aware, I haven't been on Silicon Investor for the past year. Probably because I got tired of being bashed by you. I certainly respect your right to publish all the due diligence you want and to point out any flaws in my business plans, any adverse information that you can find. I do the best I can to point out my positive accomplishments, so I certainly can't criticize anyone who wants to provide a balanced alternative viewpoint. I refuse to jump in the sewer with you and sling shit every time you come up with totally false and misleading information. I do believe that you have made a number of points that deserve answers, so here goes. 1. The SEC Initial Decision with regards to the Hudson Fund is currently under appeal. The Judge concluded that I did not have any influence over the reporting of the Hudson Fund and that I did not do any of the 26 violations that they alleged. The only count that remains under appeal is whether I aided and abetted the Hudson Fund in their failure to report my relationship with them. My relationship was not a violation of any SEC rules, and the same Judge concluded I did not violate the company act, the investment advisors act or any other alleged violation except the Hudson Funds failure to report my options and agreements. The Judge's conclusions were inconsistent and that was the basis of the appeal. The Judge ruled that I intended to commit fraud in the future, but that there was no evidence I committed fraud in the past. No one lost any money in the Hudson Fund associated with any alleged activities of Larry Stockett, Hightec, or Sinclare. I believe I will be vindicated and win my appeal. I did not do anything wrong by purchasing options to acquire the Hudson fund management and advisory companies. I did not have any influence over their reporting and should not be fined for their failure to report. If they had reported as my agreement with them required, there would never have been an SEC complaint. See Next post for additional comments. Larry Stockett