quote:Originally posted by SherriT: The TRO is actually kind of a catch 22, if you think about it....The SEC says that Rufus is engaging in fraudulent behavior, he says he isn't because he does own the bonds....going on SPR isn't a violation of those rules if he isn't engaging in fraudulent behavior...the TRO is rather a waste of time really, depending on your perspective. I do think Rufus should tread very lightly or he will wind up in contempt of court.
Thoughts?
yes I agree, so why take the chance of saying something that the SEC is accusing him of being untrue? I"m not a lawyer so honestly I don't know for sure how that would work.
IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah...this "reads" horrible...but it isn't...the TRO just states...no fradulent activity...(no kiddin') AND? this is what Ben and them relayed last night...they are going to wait for the SEC to finish the investigation...It's nothing..rufus and all can still go about business...and the SEC continues to investigate...nothing we didn't already know... this is how I am reading all of this...
quote:Originally posted by Chartwalker: WHOA people!!
Perhaps what Rufus wants is this part:
"The order also permits expedited discovery."
-that is what Rufus wants, this to be done and over with!
It also just says they can't break the law by destroying documents.... Well of course ~
Remember Rufus WANTS all this out in the open and public record! So let's chill and listen to what he has to say... IMO
-------------------- #1 Rule: Protect your capital! #2 Rule: Never fall for the BS on the boards!
IP: Logged |
posted
i fin dit so stupid that 50% of the people talking about cshd assume that just because the sec issues a complaint they are automatically frauds...give me a break! people can be so dumb sometimes...
IP: Logged |
posted
I have zero experience with legalities but here's what seems like common sense to me.
This hearing was something like an intro to this case for the judge. Rufus submitted something like 10 exhibits into evidence, probably the "proof" of the bonds I would think, which didn't require his attorney's presence(?) and now the court will mull it all over and it will be addressed on Nov. 7, until which time Rufus is under this TRO, needs to answer all the questions the SEC feels like asking, and at which time he better have retained some council
Seems ligical to me so the only question is why in hell is he spouting off at mouth today and apparently tonight? Someone should tell him the games are over...
-------------------- One shot - One kill.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by SherriT: The TRO is actually kind of a catch 22, if you think about it....The SEC says that Rufus is engaging in fraudulent behavior, he says he isn't because he does own the bonds....going on SPR isn't a violation of those rules if he isn't engaging in fraudulent behavior...the TRO is rather a waste of time really, depending on your perspective. I do think Rufus should tread very lightly or he will wind up in contempt of court.
Thoughts?
"Contempt of court" i thought that only happens IN court...lol of course correct me if im wrong.. im no legal guru
plus i see nowhere anything of a GAG order
To be honest, I am not sure if that is the correct term, but the result will surely be having a judge that doesn't like the way he is playing the game which would not be smart either.
A gag order would keep him from speaking at all, but the TRO is intended to keep him from doing what he has been doing, which, according to the SEC is fraudulent behavior. All of the exhibits in the case online are PRs and filings from the company. If Rufus puts out a PR and it effectively supports that the SEC is wrong and the bonds are his, yadda, yadda, yadda, that is considered engaging in the same behavior that the SEC is complaining about.
-------------------- Study before you buy, Sell before you think about it....
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by thesource: This thing is FAR FROM OVER ......
you are exaggerating imo.
And you are duely entitled to it .
IMO , this thing has just began . If Rufus had the proof as he proclaims , the Judge would not have granted the SEC the TRO . He would have thrown it out and told them come back when you have more proof of wrong doing or not at all . The very fact he didn't find for the def. means there is doubt of ownership and he's giving them until the 7th to prove it or else the TRO becomes a PRO pending appeal which can take forever . This will also open the door to a criminal investigation on the charges listed in the original complaint . This is why the Judge order all documents to be preserved . They will be used in the future to build a criminal case if needed .
-------------------- ----- Game Over -----
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by new2stocks: MonsterEnergy HSM Newbie
Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Homestead, Fl Posts: 19 From the website.....Harvard Defenders: Subject "show cause hearings":
"The hearing has three possible outcomes. The Clerk will decide whether to dismiss, continue or issue the complaint. If the complaining party fails to show probable cause, the complaint is dismissed. If the Clerk Magistrate continues the complaint, the complaint will issue if the defendant engages in further criminal wrongdoing during the period of the continuance. If the Clerk issues the complaint, this is not a determination of guilt or innocence. Nonetheless, the complaint will appear on the defendant's permanent criminal record. The defendant will then be arraigned and may be assigned a public defender."
But this is a civil case, not a criminal case, right?
posted
I think most of us are coming up with our own conclusions on these minutes and order. Do we have anyone here, or anyone with easy access to an educated law-person (be it a paralegal or a lawyer)?
-------------------- Study before you buy, Sell before you think about it....
IP: Logged |
posted
funny always thought u weere innocent till proven guilty...not guilty until you prove you are innocent... basically im getting this feeling that the SEC has nothing to prove guilt...so they just flip it and say prove your NOT guilty. and um slapa TRO cuz you know what we have nothing..lol
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by trade04: i fin dit so stupid that 50% of the people talking about cshd assume that just because the sec issues a complaint they are automatically frauds...give me a break! people can be so dumb sometimes...
you think than RUFUS case is like a DUI case to you?
And, "expedited discovery" means they want it done QUICK!
=Still Golden IMO
quote:Originally posted by 10of13: Yeah...this "reads" horrible...but it isn't...the TRO just states...no fradulent activity...(no kiddin') AND? this is what Ben and them relayed last night...they are going to wait for the SEC to finish the investigation...It's nothing..rufus and all can still go about business...and the SEC continues to investigate...nothing we didn't already know... this is how I am reading all of this...
quote:Originally posted by Chartwalker: WHOA people!!
Perhaps what Rufus wants is this part:
"The order also permits expedited discovery."
-that is what Rufus wants, this to be done and over with!
It also just says they can't break the law by destroying documents.... Well of course ~
Remember Rufus WANTS all this out in the open and public record! So let's chill and listen to what he has to say... IMO
quote:Originally posted by new2stocks: MonsterEnergy HSM Newbie
Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Homestead, Fl Posts: 19 From the website.....Harvard Defenders: Subject "show cause hearings":
"The hearing has three possible outcomes. The Clerk will decide whether to dismiss, continue or issue the complaint. If the complaining party fails to show probable cause, the complaint is dismissed. If the Clerk Magistrate continues the complaint, the complaint will issue if the defendant engages in further criminal wrongdoing during the period of the continuance. If the Clerk issues the complaint, this is not a determination of guilt or innocence. Nonetheless, the complaint will appear on the defendant's permanent criminal record. The defendant will then be arraigned and may be assigned a public defender."
But this is a civil case, not a criminal case, right?
You are correct and the post quoted is incorrect . This is a civil case as of right now . This is the SEC vs. CSHD . Now once the smoke clears and the judgement has been made , the feds can open a criminal case against anyone involved in wrong doing . This will more than likely include Rufus , Ben , Sabra and the other officers . They will offer the low guys a reduced charge or give them immunity all together in exchange for their testimony toward the bigger guys , namely Rufus and probably Ben .
-------------------- ----- Game Over -----
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by trade04: i fin dit so stupid that 50% of the people talking about cshd assume that just because the sec issues a complaint they are automatically frauds...give me a break! people can be so dumb sometimes...
you think than RUFUS case is like a DUI case to you?
LOL
no way a DUI is given after a breathalizer (the proof) the sec (i hope) is just blowing smoke
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by new2stocks: MonsterEnergy HSM Newbie
Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Homestead, Fl Posts: 19 From the website.....Harvard Defenders: Subject "show cause hearings":
"The hearing has three possible outcomes. The Clerk will decide whether to dismiss, continue or issue the complaint. If the complaining party fails to show probable cause, the complaint is dismissed. If the Clerk Magistrate continues the complaint, the complaint will issue if the defendant engages in further criminal wrongdoing during the period of the continuance. If the Clerk issues the complaint, this is not a determination of guilt or innocence. Nonetheless, the complaint will appear on the defendant's permanent criminal record. The defendant will then be arraigned and may be assigned a public defender."
But this is a civil case, not a criminal case, right?
well I would think that "show cause" would mean the same in any case...IMO...and like I said, I am not a lawyer so I could be wrong..
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by trade04: funny always thought u weere innocent till proven guilty...not guilty until you prove you are innocent... basically im getting this feeling that the SEC has nothing to prove guilt...so they just flip it and say prove your NOT guilty. and um slapa TRO cuz you know what we have nothing..lol
You thought wrong . They say the burden of proof is on the plantiff but thats wrong . The burden of disproof is on the daf. . I guarantee you the Judge took one look at Rufus and made up his mind before he even said a word . Is this fair , no . Is this the way it is in court rooms all over the country every single day , you bet it is .
-------------------- ----- Game Over -----
IP: Logged |
posted
theres so many people that trade/invest short cshd that theres gotta be a few con men out there (like whoever made the c&d order a while back) im sure they were flooded with emails, calls, letters by that sociopath ourstreet, and his friends. they (sec) HAD to do SOMETHING..even if it means they have no case...its their job u know
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doniboy: Rufus did submit 10 documents as Exhibits. That means that the court now has the paperwork that he believed would clear him.
Thats a positive note I would think. If he had nothing there would be nothing....He has SOMETHING...
what 10 documents did rufus submit? the link to the case seems to consist of document submitted by the SEC lawyer. they claim the bond issues ARE NOT wholely owned by CVSU that mutual funds appear to own some of each issue and that the bonds are trading NOW?, and that they can find no evidence of ANY SINGLE entity having sole ownership or that CVSU even owns a piece of these bonds? that cant be right! you realy should read through the charges! I for one am not happy with what I see there!http://www.digitalislandsinc.com/misc/index.html
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by trade04: theres so many people that trade/invest short cshd that theres gotta be a few con men out there (like whoever made the c&d order a while back) im sure they were flooded with emails, calls, letters by that sociopath ourstreet, and his friends. they (sec) HAD to do SOMETHING..even if it means they have no case...its their job u know
Well, apparently ourcreeps emailed the SEC complaining about Rufus.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by trade04: funny always thought u weere innocent till proven guilty...not guilty until you prove you are innocent... basically im getting this feeling that the SEC has nothing to prove guilt...so they just flip it and say prove your NOT guilty. and um slapa TRO cuz you know what we have nothing..lol
They already asked rufus kindly for the supporting documents, as they have the right to, and he told them to screw off and take him to court. IMO, rufus screwed us all real bad on this one. Arrogant pig could have avoided this whole thing
IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think that the judge would have thrown it out of court today no matter what. The TRO seems like normal procedure. There is more investigating to be done.
-------------------- "I will smack you in the mouth, I'm Neil Diamond"- Will Ferrell
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by trade04: theres so many people that trade/invest short cshd that theres gotta be a few con men out there (like whoever made the c&d order a while back) im sure they were flooded with emails, calls, letters by that sociopath ourstreet, and his friends. they (sec) HAD to do SOMETHING..even if it means they have no case...its their job u know
Well, apparently ourcreeps emailed the SEC complaining about Rufus.
yeah, dont get me wrong, but Rufus did a lot of trolling around giving ourskeet even more material to send their way...he kinda brought it on himself in a way...
IP: Logged |
posted
Mr. Harris would be a fool to issue anything or speak on radio at this point. Please refer to Section III of the show cause order. Number 3 restrains him from "making any untrue statement of material fact or omitting to state a material fact in order to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading in violation of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. 78j(b), and rule 10b-5, 17 C.F.R. 240.10b-5, thereunder."
The only exhibits I find are those made by the SEC, and several of them are press releases, etc. These statements, among others, got him in trouble. That's why he needs an attorney.
The Mashburn declaration should also give people concern. Mr. Harris had been contacted on 08/23/06 about these concerns, but all was well?? He didn't appear at a hearing??? He didn't tell us or anyone else?? He thought this was just a friendly phonecall?/ Let's have lunch?? This is serious crap. He told the SEC that a gag order from a UN ambassador carried more weight than the SEC request. I don't think so. I'm sure that didn't fly too well, either.
I'm sorry, but you don't pick a fight in a playground where 1000s of stockholders could get hurt.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doniboy: I don't think that the judge would have thrown it out of court today no matter what. The TRO seems like normal procedure. There is more investigating to be done.
Well let me tell you why I think thats incorrect . If the Judge thought Rufus was running a clean business , he would not want this to tarnish it any further . He would have ordered the SEC to refile its paper work when it had more evidence . The Judge felt that the SEC has enough credible evidence to proceed with this but has given Rufus the benefit of a doubt and allowed him until the 7th to provide the proof he claims he has .
As for not showing up with an attorney , my gut says they didn't show up with one because they are cash broke and couldn't afford one.
-------------------- ----- Game Over -----
IP: Logged |
"Number 3 restrains him from "making any untrue statement of material fact or omitting to state a material fact in order to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading in violation of Section 10(b)"
rufus is convinced he(we) will prevail...why would he be a fool to go on radio and speak truth...it forbids him from making UNTRUE statements....im sure hes being briefed by his lawyers of what NOT to say....this guy isnt a CEO for nothing u know...
IP: Logged |
posted
Just wondering if all this that is going with CSHD is uncommon to happen within a stock. I guess I am asking if any of you have had anything like this happen to you with any of your other stocks??
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ruthie: Just wondering if all this that is going with CSHD is uncommon to happen within a stock. I guess I am asking if any of you have had anything like this happen to you with any of your other stocks??
quote:Originally posted by ruthie: Just wondering if all this that is going with CSHD is uncommon to happen within a stock. I guess I am asking if any of you have had anything like this happen to you with any of your other stocks??
STTK..but it never went this far...what a pos THAT was still made a killing on it though 8-)
IP: Logged |
Topic Closed
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
