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 (4906)	7/14/2003 11:14:36 PM
From: Janice Shell	Respond to of 12465

I think the Alien Cat People really don't have any money. Most of them were just released from prison, where they'd been cooling their heels for trying to contract a couple of murders.

To: Jeffrey S. Mitchell who wrote (4906)	7/16/2003 11:12:02 AM
From: CountofMoneyCristo	Respond to of 12465

Congrats on your thread. You're doing the SI community a great service. SEC. Injunctions actually have a purpose. SEC actions are sometimes limited but even injunctive relief sought can pack a wallop. Here's why: discovery takes a similar route to other civil charges, so evidence is developed. Anyone files civil claims they can seek via subpoena to have this evidence released. So there is a benefit. One thing I've learned is that the best tool investors have is going to trial against wrongdoers. Of course as you've seen in my case that is an involved process, takes a commitment, but in the end you do get somewhere. For example, in my case, Chris Rea, the investment adviser, has already in his first two sworn declarations deliberately falsified material facts critical to motions before the Court. The Court of Appeal is receiving my brief today, along with exhibits proving perjury. So, though rare, it is possible that Rea could wind up charged with multiple felonies. Each perjured statement carries 2-4 years in state prison - and Rea made a number of them. Not just some small, inaccurate mistake of a statement but deliberately falsifying the factual record trying to avoid the jurisdiction of the California courts. Making matters worse, the Defendants, including Schwab, have introduced these perjured statements before the Court of Appeal, also trying to avoid jurisdiction of the California courts. You might imagine a defendant like Schwab relying on Rea's perjury - well, it makes them look very bad, that their arguments are so weak they have to rely on perjured testimony from a co-defendant. I hope the court takes strong action. We'll have to wait and see, but the evidence before them now is damning indeed. Some of the photographs I introduced show the actual keys TP analysts used to make securities recommendations, the actual investment advisory infrastructure from the TP, not the client, perspective. And he swore he never gave any advice, no rec's. Also a 129-page transcript of rec's. In the first hour, there are 67 separate recs - or an average of one every 54 seconds. You have to hand it to Rea, when he commits perjury, he does not go halfway, he goes down in flames... In my case SEC did make some major headway, nailing Robert Bentley, a former TP analyst, for a $300 million Ponzi scheme. SEC successfully shut him down. All his assets and those of his company have been frozen, now in receivership. It can be frustrating at times, but after the Bentley developments, I have gained great respect for SEC staff attorneys, three of whom I have spoken with many times. They're a very talented group working for a fraction what they might receive in the private sector. They're dedicated and doing their best under extreme pressure. If you look at all the fraud around us the past few years, then you know they've got their hands full! What really needs to happen is that SEC funding is dramatically increased, so that their staff can be expanded, and more attorneys taken on board. That would make an enormous difference.