To: jhild who wrote (2095 ) 5/12/1998 1:32:00 AM From: marcos Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 7491
Yes, she really did dance around that one, didn't she. Clearly he was the IR guy a short while ago, and clearly seems to have a history of involvement with Ms Rhonda Windsor/Maxwell. It would seem logical to expect that he has some involvement in Cashco or its 'affiliates' at this time. I have mixed feelings about making a federal case out of his involvement, though. If the guy did his time and is now flying straight - and we cannot rule out the possibility of that - then it would be unfair to handicap him for something that has no relevance to the stock - if in fact it does not have that relevance. Of course, how would we determine relevance without hearing the full story. Hearing it just might alleviate the mafioso image of the company to date. 'Uttering threats' is a serious offense in Canada, it comes under the Assault section of the Criminal Code. In the early 90s, it was prosecuted with a vengeance, a bit overdone. I was a witness for the defense in one such prosecution - my friend won, but only by a fluke, we were able to find one little pickey piece of evidence that he couldn't have been where he was supposed to be threatening the turkey who accused him (same turkey once charged me with something else, but that's another story). Anyway, imho, it's no big deal, necessarily, unless it's part of a pattern. Which maybe it is, who knows? But more significant is the way Ms Del M‚dico (she should have been a doctor, btw, that's what 'm‚dico' means, 'lawyer' is 'abogado') evaded the question. An answer that is not an answer ... well, I guess that is what lawyers are for ... and the style is quite consistent with the level of other information for Cashco, it seems. Such a basic thing as "How many shares out?" .... there's no answer ... pink flag, TED? ...... looks red to me ....... cheers ...... marcos