posted
Hey My question was legit. I just wanted to know if your company was public.
-------------------- "I will smack you in the mouth, I'm Neil Diamond"- Will Ferrell Posts: 4190 | From: Rhode Island | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yesterday I used the term "Evidentiary Hearing" that's record here in a post. In the "minutes" report that is exactly what they called it TODAY...
"Therefore proving that I knew what I talking about." Right?!!!
This thesource person I'm telling you now, is talking out of their (_!_)
Here are the FACTS!!!
Rufus WANTED a FORMAL investigation, remember? Why? -So he can show ownership and have it on record! Again, this is just what Rufus WANTS!!!
This HEARING (not trial) gathered evidence, that is ALL it does!!!!
It is NOT the judges job to know about BONDS or anything else! He will listen to both sides, then render a decision... LATER
-THAT is the judges job, and he does that at a TRAIL, not at a Evidentiary Hearing! [unless NO claims or proof are presented, then case is dismissed]
You will feel better when you hear Rufus tonight, IMO!!!
posted
Awwwwweeee, gonna take his ball and go home? I was waiting for his proof of fraud and all that. Ameriturd is definitely going to dock his check for that. Mad? Tell you supervisor to give you his shift, you are more polite.
-------------------- Stay strong! Stay long! Posts: 69 | From: Portland, OR | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I always feel better when I hear Rufus, but this is getting beyond the point of good presentation from a CEO. We need hard facts to know that Rufus is telling the truth. It sounds to me like the court has shifted the burden of proof on to CSHD. Which means that Rufus has to prove his innocence, they don't need to prove his guilt. Thats a tough deal.
-------------------- "I will smack you in the mouth, I'm Neil Diamond"- Will Ferrell Posts: 4190 | From: Rhode Island | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Chartwalker: thesource.... no-no....
You don't have a clue...
This was just a "Evidentiary TRO Hearing-" or FACT gathering HEARING... not a trial.
What they do is gather evidence... If the SEC thought a Comic book was evidence then it would be marked as such.
Now if the SEC showed up with nothing at all then the case would be dismissed, they didn't.
They brought their evidence, Rufus brought his.
THAT IS ALL THAT HAPPENS AT A EVIDENTIARY HEARING!
Chartwalker - no disrespect to you but you are wrong .
An evidentiary hearing is only a step in the process but a very important step . This is the step where the Judge examines the evidence and decides whether there is enough there to proceed with it . If the Judge finds there is a lack of evidence , the process stops . If the Judge find there is enough evidence to support the claims the SEC has made , the process goes foward .
I'm not going to sit here and agrue with you guys . I've been involved in lots of legal cases , most of them smaller civil suits but the same basic rules apply .
We have been played ....... Its that simple . Rufus has been lying to us this whole time and painting us a picture of what we want to see . We are screwed but hopefully he's screwed even more !!!
That's right source... the judge will look.... doesn't know anything about BONDS so the NEXT STEP is trail!!! Where he will listen to BOTH SIDES EXPLAIN THEMSELVES!!
-------------------- "I will smack you in the mouth, I'm Neil Diamond"- Will Ferrell Posts: 4190 | From: Rhode Island | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wow Thesource I also own my own businesses for five years although not eight like yours I have not been brought to court once. Guess i should be proud of myself so far!!!
Posts: 42 | From: Louisiana | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Madmoney ~ I know who Mashburn is... heck been looking into him most of today. But his questions regarding the bonds and their ownership are wrong. I also take it that he is the guy who asked the questions of the VP at MRF, which were also wrong.
Now you go reread it and waste you own time.
-------------------- Una Mas! Posts: 2717 | From: Eville,IN,USA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm sorry to say, but this thread is very disappointing. thesource actually brings up alot of good points. Anytime anyone brings up anything that isn't a cheer, you're a basher. Unbelievable. Man, has this place changed.
Posts: 83 | From: NJ | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
You know, the people who listened to Jim Jones felt good afterwards as well. Here, drink the kool-aid.
The judge has already heard and reviewed the SEC's material. The order says that CSHD must respond within three days of being notified with each request or guess what -- contempt of court.
Posts: 106 | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Morty: You know, the people who listened to Jim Jones felt good afterwards as well. Here, drink the kool-aid.
The judge has already heard and reviewed the SEC's material. The order says that CSHD must respond within three days of being notified with each request or guess what -- contempt of court.
-------------------- #1 Rule: Protect your capital! #2 Rule: Never fall for the BS on the boards! Posts: 8890 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by thesource: damn you guys are really brain washed ........ I'm not going to bother with ya'll anymore . I thought I was on allstocks not HSM .
posted
Dude... you registered Oct. 23rd. You have only been here a few days!
quote:Originally posted by Jellz: I'm sorry to say, but this thread is very disappointing. thesource actually brings up alot of good points. Anytime anyone brings up anything that isn't a cheer, you're a basher. Unbelievable. Man, has this place changed.
posted
From what I have just gathered it looks like this is all about that mysterious "document" the SEC wanted Rufas to sign. The one that would state that Rufus would promise not to violate any of the SEC rules and regulations.
That document has a name and it is a "Preliminary Injunction". It is all over the official order and the next step if Rufus doesn't answer their questions to satisfaction.
Rufus did say that he could sign that document anytime and avoid court... Hmmm wonder if everyone is playing nice all of a sudden. Unlike the people on this board.
-------------------- Una Mas! Posts: 2717 | From: Eville,IN,USA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Morty: You know, the people who listened to Jim Jones felt good afterwards as well. Here, drink the kool-aid.
The judge has already heard and reviewed the SEC's material. The order says that CSHD must respond within three days of being notified with each request or guess what -- contempt of court.
morty? you are sortof suggesting that people should commit suicide...
i think you need to revise your communication aproach...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ClayN: Dude... you registered Oct. 23rd. You have only been here a few days!
quote:Originally posted by Jellz: I'm sorry to say, but this thread is very disappointing. thesource actually brings up alot of good points. Anytime anyone brings up anything that isn't a cheer, you're a basher. Unbelievable. Man, has this place changed.
Actually, I've been "here" over 2 years. Took a 6 month break (so to speak) and have a new screenname. So I know how it used to be.
There seems to be less "discussion". Anyone brings up something and are attacked, or labeled a basher. It's just sad.
Posts: 83 | From: NJ | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doniboy: I always feel better when I hear Rufus, but this is getting beyond the point of good presentation from a CEO. We need hard facts to know that Rufus is telling the truth. It sounds to me like the court has shifted the burden of proof on to CSHD. Which means that Rufus has to prove his innocence, they don't need to prove his guilt. Thats a tough deal.
That's the BEST part Doniboy, he ALREADY DID! 1-10, court record!
Now, the next step is to explain them in public.
-golden.
Perfect play by "Formal" play by Rufus "Checkmate"
Hey if I saw it differently I'd be the first to tell ALL of you!
Hey, both sides dropped their evidence off, so no dismissle, next step, each side gets to explain your side, all Rufus has to do is show Ownership.
I believe he has them ~
That's what it's going to come down to. So I think we are good ~
posted
In the Mashburh declaration here are the only questions:
I asked Harris to tell be of CSHD business and press releases;
I asked Harris if he planned to send any documents describing the merger and bonds;
I asked Harris if he made a guarantee the the stock would trade at $15;
On 09/07, I called and asked about a press release.
I don't see one question about bonds. It is just Mashburn's sworn declaration of what Mr. Harris said.
Posts: 106 | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Chart, I always feel a little better after reading your posts. We will just keep on hoping that all will turn out in our favor.....
Posts: 741 | From: North Carolina | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Gang, I think we are all stressed out, and I think you guys know I attempt to be honest and fair above anything else. We all need to chill, and while I don't subscribe to the beliefs of oursource and a couple of others, they have as much right to be here as we do. If we could trade and people buy and sell based on the bashing, then I believe I would take a somewhat different stance.
I don't like some of the things they have pointed out either, and I would rather not hear it, but in fact, Rufus may very well have been lying to us all along. Do I believe that he has? No, however, I will feel much better when a third party has vindicated both him and the company, and my shares being my shares becomes a choice again.
-------------------- Study before you buy, Sell before you think about it.... Posts: 3903 | From: Gulf Coast | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by SherriT: Gang, I think we are all stressed out, and I think you guys know I attempt to be honest and fair above anything else. We all need to chill, and while I don't subscribe to the beliefs of oursource and a couple of others, they have as much right to be here as we do. If we could trade and people buy and sell based on the bashing, then I believe I would take a somewhat different stance.
I don't like some of the things they have pointed out either, and I would rather not hear it, but in fact, Rufus may very well have been lying to us all along. Do I believe that he has? No, however, I will feel much better when a third party has vindicated both him and the company, and my shares being my shares becomes a choice again.
quote:Originally posted by Morty: In the Mashburh declaration here are the only questions:
I asked Harris to tell be of CSHD business and press releases;
I asked Harris if he planned to send any documents describing the merger and bonds;
I asked Harris if he made a guarantee the the stock would trade at $15;
On 09/07, I called and asked about a press release.
I don't see one question about bonds. It is just Mashburn's sworn declaration of what Mr. Harris said.
Exactly Morty... that is my point he did not ask the right questions regarding the bonds. He requested two meetings and asked Rufas to disclose confidential information on the bonds. All the information that was not deemed confidential was already available on a public GA Court website.
-------------------- Una Mas! Posts: 2717 | From: Eville,IN,USA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
Topic Closed
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
