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: The Philosopher who wrote (3465)	7/25/2002 9:09:45 PM
From: mmmary	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 12465

The prosecution wanted to claim 911 involvement to make sure he is denied bail and to have certain extra powers so they have a better chance at winning the case. Notice a guy in jail with 911 involvement is not even allowed to speak to his attorney. Why wouldn't they want to include one tiny bit of true evidence which might show 911 involvement? If they had it, they would have shown it, just one trade even. As they obviously had access to his account information, they could have gotten it if it existed. Speculation, yes but I think the chances of it being correct are probably high.