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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Anthony @ Equity Investigations, Dear Anthony, -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: campe who wrote (76833)	5/26/2002 11:47:14 PM
From: PartyTime	Respond to of 122087

>>>"San Diego stock adviser who is accused of bribing an F.B.I. agent to give him confidential government information may have had prior knowledge of the Sept. 11 attacks, a federal prosecutor said yesterday."<<< I'll be the first to agree that a prosecutor is apt to load the deck in order to prevent a release on bail. What else is new!?! I'd pretty much call this common behavior among prosecutors. >>>"But a judge disregarded that contention and the adviser's lawyer called the allegation ludicrous."<<< It was easy for the judge to do this since such an accusation is indeed sensitive, potentially explosive from a media point of view and is a contention that ultimately can be dealt with at a later date. However, it doesn't mean that the judge put the matter to bed for good. Relative to the adviser's lawyer's comment I can think of little else an attorney would say in response to such a charge. Bottom line is it appears the feds want Elgindy securely behind bars while it continues its investigation and prepares its case. And this much is certainly true right now in the wider matter: "There's a whole lotta shakin' goin' on ...!"

To: campe who wrote (76833)	5/27/2002 12:03:42 AM
From: CountofMoneyCristo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 122087

This may have been posted already, however, I did read in the NY Times yesterday a story saying that Tony had put in $300k of sells with his broker just before 9/11. It said there was not enough time to get them all in so the orders were executed after the markets re-opened. This was as A@P was telling everyone on this thread not to sell short. It may not be solid proof, but the records are there. Hi GJC, My point is this: The prosecutor has made a charge so grave that proof is absolutely required. I agree the circumstantial evidence does not look good, but what does that prove? As a member of the community here, and the American public at large, I demand that the prosecutor prove this allegation without further delay. What strikes me more than anything, from my vantage point of one with most limited access to all the facts, is that though the original charges are most serious, this one is by far the most potentially damning and inflammatory, and therefore the prosecutor bears a unique responsibility to all of us to prove it, immediately. And he has not. And the media have already reported it to the public in a manner that is certain to harm the standing of A. in not only the public eye but in his legal defense, not to mention his personal security while incarcerated. And a federal judge has already stated that he would disregard this allegation. If that prosecutor cannot prove it, he should be not only immediately disbarred, but legal proceedings against him should be instituted. One who is not only a member of the bar, but also of the government, must absolutely confine oneself to the facts, and not reckless innuendo. Again, barring considerable proof of this terrible allegation, he should face serious consequences for such unprofessional and unethical behavior unbecoming a member of the bar.

To: campe who wrote (76833)	5/27/2002 12:07:39 AM
From: PartyTime	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 122087

From your link, I think the below excerpt best describes why the judge didn't have to go down the pre-9/11 knowledge path: >>>"Mr. Elgindy also transferred more than $700,000 to Lebanon in the months after the attacks, Mr. Breen said. When F.B.I. agents raided Mr. Elgindy's home outside San Diego on Wednesday, Mr. Breen said, they found $43,000 in cash, as well as a loose diamond and faxes indicating that Mr. Elgindy had been tipped about the raid and had given his wife a power of attorney to liquidate his assets."<<< The above is more than sufficient reason to deny bail, with or without the 9/11 aspect considered. Both Elgindy's supporters and his detractors will have to wait as more facts get presented in the case. This and thats heaved this way and that way, for the most part, are heated and emotional exchanges which will succomb one way or another to what's discovered in the investigatory and trial process.