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.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : PanAmerican BanCorp (PABN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ROSARIO who wrote (22158)	1/5/1999 7:34:00 PM
From: slotman	Respond to of 43774

As an owner or partner in an investment co, where are your disclaimers?

To: ROSARIO who wrote (22158)	1/5/1999 11:26:00 PM
From: LegalBeast	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 43774

Oh yeah great babling idiot, I have read it in depth. Your analysis is totally wrong. Several points for your education: 1. There were no "charges". This was a civil trial on a breach of contract claim. There are no "charges" pending. But if there were, your claim that anyone is a criminal is completely wrong because a criminal is not so branded until found guilty of whatever charged.. 2. The case which you and your buddy cited was an appellate decision from the 3rd circuit addressing not the original BOK claim, but the issue of Federal jurisdiction. The court ruled that the Federal court did not have jurisdiction. They made no decision on the merits of the BOK case. 3. The Original case was won by the contractor. 4. While Mr. Kruze may have been an owner of one of the companies in the suit, he was not personally a party to the suit. The suit does not name the owners of the company as parties. 5. Your claims that anyone associated with this case is a criminal are completely unfounded and incorrect. The facts that your buddy presented conclusively show that. 6. Feel free to check any court records you wish oh great guru of law. But, you should be advised that you are way over your head here. You have really trompled your foreskin on this one. Better that you stay away from libelous claims and incorrect legal analysis and stick to your worthless opinion on what we will close at tomorrow instead. 7. As to your "avoided" question ... Do you have any proof that anyone has violated SEC regulations? If you do, then the enforcement division of the SEC is the place to take that information. Since yo have not done that, then it is my well educated guess that you have nothing but would like to appear as if you do. This is the same as claiming that just because John will not play your game that he must also be doing something wrong. You are the one in the wrong on both points. Totally Irresponsible, THOUGHTS?