Posted On: 03/08/2016 2:47:36 PM
Post# of 11039
Well, they did accuse the TA of being a part of the fraud.
This is the TA's part: to allow the issuance of ineligible shares during the interim between the Record Date and Ex-Dividend because they knew the DTC would be unable to track those shares itself.
Of course, they haven't shown:
A) Those shares weren't eligible
Even if (A) is true, that the TA knew the shares were ineligible
C) Even if ( is true, that the TA knowingly denied information to the DTC
D) Even if (C) is true, that the TA knowingly denied information to the DTC because he knew an explicit weakness in the system would cause a windfall to come to CRGP
Also, at what point is the TA supposed to be enriched by this scam? A backroom-deal of which no one has evidence? Why would the TA potentially lose his business, and even face jail time, for the benefit of CRGP?
This is the TA's part: to allow the issuance of ineligible shares during the interim between the Record Date and Ex-Dividend because they knew the DTC would be unable to track those shares itself.
Of course, they haven't shown:
A) Those shares weren't eligible
Even if (A) is true, that the TA knew the shares were ineligible C) Even if (
is true, that the TA knowingly denied information to the DTC D) Even if (C) is true, that the TA knowingly denied information to the DTC because he knew an explicit weakness in the system would cause a windfall to come to CRGP
Also, at what point is the TA supposed to be enriched by this scam? A backroom-deal of which no one has evidence? Why would the TA potentially lose his business, and even face jail time, for the benefit of CRGP?
(3)
(0)
