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: Janice Shell who wrote (90307)	1/28/2005 12:01:31 AM
From: olivier asser	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 122087

That's not what the jury found, which was that Tony corrupted a federal agent for information and then used it to extort corporate executives. Tony didn't "pilfer" anything: it was offered to him.

To: Janice Shell who wrote (90307)	1/28/2005 12:08:37 AM
From: rrufff	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 122087

Tony was certainly an expert in trading and often quoted SEC acts and regs. To say he didn't know about trading on insider information really defies logic. The bottom line was that Tony and crew was LOOKING FOR THAT EXTRA EDGE SO THAT THE RECORD OF 100% SUCCESSFUL CALLS AND TRADES WOULD BE PRESERVED. As for who sought whom is a question that probably wasn't that important. If you are part of an enterprise, it doesn't matter if you seek it or the other conspirators seek you. Why should one group of traders have unfair advantage in the market? Is that what you want to be on record for advocating? I don't think they should. But Tony didn't "pilfer" anything: it was offered to him. As I've said before, unless the journalists left an awful lot out, Tony didn't "induce corruption". Cleveland and Royer tried to make money using Royer's information. They didn't succeed in doing so, and then decided to bring in Tony.