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: Pluvia who wrote (90051)	1/26/2005 9:20:32 AM
From: rrufff	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 122087

Not true - you can't get into someone's mind and know for sure. Anyone can tell you they "believe" something and may in fact be BS'ing you. That's why we have juries to find the facts. Again you are paraphrasing the jury instructions and you weren't there for the trial. IMO, it came down to the defendants and others having access to information that was NOT publicly available and/or not as easily available, something that gave them an advantage. If it involved pending investigations, that is not available elsewhere to my knowledge. I've already given my opinion that the key here was extortion and the motivation was the sanctity of the government information. You probably don't realize that law in a case applies to a set of facts. That's why lawyers argue that one case is precedent for another. You are trying to make a broad statement that I doubt was made in this case. BTW apples and oranges taste awful together, but it's even worse if you throw in a grapefruit.