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 : AP's Crime -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: peter michaelson who wrote (3)	1/26/2005 4:59:15 PM
From: Dale Baker	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 78

Peter, don't underestimate the vindictive passion of a bureaucracy that feels it has been messed with due to the corruption of one of its own. Every organization, especially one with a law enforcement/national security mission and classified information, has a certain barrier to outsiders. Government bureaucracies can become especially insular since they don't "sell" things to "customers", they just perform some kind of service. When an outsider crosses those barriers and either corrupts an insider or cooperates with a corrupt insider, tempers flare. The Dept of Justice is nothing if it can't police itself and nail anyone trying to mess with it. Tony messed with the DOJ in what became a very public manner. I first heard about it the day I arrived in Amsterdam, on CNN International and CNBC all day. What happens when you kick a snake? You better be quick or have very thick boots or you're gonna get snakebit. A smart federal prosecutor can draw up 30-40 counts against anyone who plays on the wrong side of law, without breaking a sweat. And he only has to win a few to put the guy behind bars. Nail the guy who worked with a corrupt agent and it's a major win-win for the prosecutor, not to mention a helpful reminder to every agent who thinks they can make up their own rules for classified information as they go along.

To: peter michaelson who wrote (3)	1/27/2005 7:08:01 AM
From: Pluvia	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78

peter i put up three posts that consider issues surrounding publishing non-public info on the net and potential legal implications... they're meant for people on ap's site and elsewhere worried about doing dd, taking a position in a stock and publishing their dd. fyi 1. Trading on Public & Non-Public info Message 20988832 2. Market Manipulation re: publishing non-public info Message 20988838 3. Insider Trading - Misappropriation Theory Message 20988842

To: peter michaelson who wrote (3)	1/27/2005 7:11:11 AM
From: Pluvia	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78

peter, i also printed out and read the pre-final version charging order... 50ish pgs... phew... Message 20975476 after reading it, considering what was printed in the media re: evidence, i'm now suprised both ap and royer were not found guilty on more charges. that said i also saw the prosecution's aggressive tactics over the top. but hey, that's life. look at some of the hi profile murder cases, i guess it's nothing new. my lesson learned here, don't expect things to be fair.