Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Pastimes : Investment Chat Board Lawsuits -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jeffrey S. Mitchell who wrote (1492)	5/4/2001 8:09:56 PM
From: Tom C	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12465

Jeff, This thread is my favorite thread on SI. It’s useful, timely and there’s not a lot of bs chit chat. This article was too wild to resist commenting on. The Virginian-Pilot: Titanic salvage company sues over Internet postings The lawsuit also accuses the seven of violating the Federal Telecommunications Act by posting information to "annoy, threaten or harass" the company while hiding behind aliases. I’m not a lawyer but this seems like a stretch. Couldn’t the company just avoid RB or do they think they are obligated to read all the posts on a message board? If so why? Maybe I’m off base, but posting information to "annoy, threaten or harass" on a message board doesn’t seem to be the same as annoying, threatening or harassing a company or it’s officers and employees. "They made a lot of sick, negative comments, many of them untrue," LOL, so which sick negative comments were true? The people on Raging Bull are there because there is sour grapes. They really hope that the management of this company fails. They are negative rabble rousers.'' When did hoping someone will fail and expressing that opinion become a crime? "We will have a day in court with this. They will have to prove all their lies." LOL, why would the defendants WANT to prove they were lying? The guy deserves a Moron award for this single statement if he wasn't misquoted. Isn’t the burden of proof on the plaintiff? Regards Tom

To: Jeffrey S. Mitchell who wrote (1492)	7/22/2001 11:44:01 AM
From: Jeffrey S. Mitchell	Respond to of 12465

Re: 7/13/01 - [SOST] SEC obtains judgment against Paul J. Montle for stock manipulation SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Litigation Release No. 17066 / July 13, 2001 SEC OBTAINS FINAL JUDGMENT AGAINST PAUL J. MONTLE INCLUDING A FIVE-YEAR BAR ON MONTLE SERVING AS AN OFFICER OR DIRECTOR OF ANY PUBLIC COMPANY, OVER $360,000 IN DISGORGEMENT AND INTEREST, AND A $50,000 CIVIL PENALTY. Securities and Exchange Commission v. Paul J. Montle, et al., 98 Civ. 3446 (MP), U.S.D.C., S.D.N.Y. The Securities and Exchange Commission ("Commission") announced that on Thursday, July 12, 2001, the Honorable Milton Pollack of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York entered a final judgment against Paul J. Montle ("Montle"). Following a four-day bench trial in May of this year, the Court entered a judgment against Montle on all of the Commission's claims against him. The judgment Permanently enjoins Montle from future violations of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 ("Securities Act") and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ("Exchange Act"); Section 13(b)(5) of the Exchange Act; and Section 13(b)(2) of the Exchange Act; Bars Montle for five years from serving as an officer or director of any public company; Bars Montle for five years from participating in the sale of securities under Regulations S and D of the Securities Act; Orders Montle to disgorge his ill-gotten gains of $187,459.25 and prejudgment interest of $177,633; and Orders Montle to pay a $50,000 civil penalty. The Court found that Montle's "violations involving fraud and deceit were numerous and ongoing," and that his "actions were knowing departures from the securities laws." The Court further found that Montle's testimony in his own defense "was without even the semblance of credibility" and "was infected by the same variety of distortion and outright falsehood that accompanied his deceptions in the arena of publicly held companies," and concluded that "there is strong evidence that [Montle] is likely to violate the securities laws in the future." The Court further found that: Montle violated the federal securities laws regarding three public companies: Viral Testing Systems Corporation ("VTS"), which marketed an HIV diagnostic test called "Fluorognost"; Lone Star Casino Corporation ("Lone Star"), which sought to own and operate gambling casinos; and RMS Titanic, Inc. ("Titanic"), which attempted to salvage artifacts from the sunken Titanic ocean liner. As CEO and a director of VTS, Montle made material misrepresentations in two trade publications and a VTS press release regarding VTS's revenues and projected revenues and related matters. For example, in an article that appeared in Today's Investor, Montle overstated VTS Fluorognost revenues by more than double, projected grossly overstated future revenues, and falsely claimed that the American Red Cross had "endorsed" Fluorognost. As Chairman and CEO of Lone Star, Montle intentionally omitted from numerous public SEC filings that Lone Star had sold more than a million shares of its stock to foreign investors, thus concealing significant dilution. Montle also attempted to cover up this fraud by falsely altering Lone Star's Board of Director's minutes, omitting the stock sales from Lone Star's books and records, failing to disclose the sales to Lone Star's securities counsel, and creating sham stock purchase agreements. Montle also orchestrated a scheme to manipulate the stock of Titanic, causing it to open at an arbitrarily high price of $5 per share, climb to $11 within two months, and subsequently fall below $5. Through this scheme, Montle obtained ill-gotten gains totaling at least $187,459.25. Montle, age 53, resides in Massachusetts. sec.gov