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: jhild who wrote (22321)	1/7/1999 12:46:00 AM
From: barbara sperino	Respond to of 43774

Can you please post the outcome of the case. I don't think being charged with something is very important but if you could show us were someone was convicted of something that might mean a bit more. It is still American isn't it. I thought someone was suppose to be innocent till they were convicted of something. Now I understand this isn't a criminal case but if he was guilty surely he had to make some kind of restitution. Are you going to be doing a court search on all the shareholders of PRWT? You are really looking pretty desperate here lately. Not very becoming I might add.

To: jhild who wrote (22321)	1/7/1999 5:02:00 PM
From: LegalBeast	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 43774

It is interesting that a FRAUD talks of FRAUD: 1. jhild states that Carl was charged with Fraud. 2. jhild gives us the case (in italics no less) with the case title and a valid legal cite. 3. The title does not match the legal cite because the names of the parties have been changed (he probably did not think anyone would really look up the case) 4. jhild tries to make his deception go away by saying that he knows he has seen the real case somewhere (yeah, right). 5. jhild tries again to make his FRAUD go away by telling me that I should not refer to that case any more because it is not the case he wanted it to be and says that he obviously got the wrong title and cite together (No kidding). It does not take a rocket scientist to see that jhild is a total fraud and will do anything to try to support his wrong position. Obviously a person without any ethics whatsoever. But, will he ever admit that he trompled his foreskin on this one? I doubt it. Folks like him never own up to their own FRAUD! Totally Irresponsible ... THOUGHTS?

To: jhild who wrote (22321)	1/7/1999 5:13:00 PM
From: LegalBeast	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 43774

This is really interesting ... your own admission ... <<<<<The citation that I offered you was from a footnote that I found in a report on qui tam offered by the New York State Bar (http://www.nysba.org/legis/civilprosecut.html ) >>>> Yet if you go there, you find the real case cite that does NOT mention Carl Kruze or any other individual. since you admit copying the cite, then you also stand convicted of changing the parties to attempt to vindicate yourself. This is really fascinating since you are so despirately trying to get out of being labled a fraud, yet you convict yourself! All you have done is to prove to all of us that you are indeed a fraud and will go to any length to try to shift the responsibility for your deceipt. BUSTED! Totally Irresponsible ... THOUGHTS?