as long as the dtc chill remains in effect,theoretically the only stock that can be traded is stock not under control of the dtc and its nominee cede and company.
Thus,only those w hard stock certificates can relinquish their stocks to brokers to sell. Then brokers manually try to match w a buyer.
last fall,under pressure from congress to follow some semblance of due process as required by the constitution-no one can be deprived of life liberty or property (as dtc has done without any visible due process) without due process of law-thats what separates a democracy from a dictatorship- dtc issued a policy whitepaper whereby they detail a due process procedure which would allow companies to show, e.g in CWRN's case CWRN was not complicit w the Oppenheimer brokers error at 1 office in Florida where the broker erroneously released ca $8400 of restricted stock before its time.
Such problems usually occur when a companies lawyer issues an opinion letter saying the stock can now be taken off restriction-the agencies often disagree w those opinion letters. To the best of our knowledge CWRN reportedly did not issue any opinion letters releasing restricted stock and reportedly never even sold restricted stock- the only possible such would be a small issue 12-28-08 which would not have been aged 1 year by june 2009 as required for a non- sec reporting co before it could be taken off,but that issue reportedly was not restricted either and nothing on the forms indicates it was ever restricted, so we dont know where any restricted stock could have come from unless it was a principal of the previous legal entity preceding CWRN -Casino Airlinks -which previous entity was located in the Boca Raton area where the offending Oppenheimer office was located- awful high coincidence. stockpromoters.com etc verify no restricted stock was paid for any promos.
if CWRN can show at a due process hearing it did not issue any opinion letter releasing restricted stock nor did it even issue restricted stock (except to family members who held such in hard cert form -which was not released to the Oppenheimer broker ) then dtc would have to remove the restriction without delay under the due process of the constitution. the 6 and12 month punishment provisions apply only to companies who violated the rules re restricted stock. Under normal principals of law dtc would be required to show CWRN violated the rules before issuing any restriction and dtc didnt do that-CWRN had no warning -judgement was handed down before the co was notified -dtc didnt even notify CWRN-another co did. Normally at the very beginning of an action the accused party has to be notified and given opportunity to defend and do discovery etc and have a trial-none of that was done.
They have already illegally taken our property without any visible due process for years- and we are innocent 3rd party purchasers who are never punished under the law, a basic principal of the law - so this lack of due process is part of a never before seen pattern of dictatorship in violation of the constitution since 2009. There isnt even any logical rationale to hold our collective stock hostage, as any restricted stock has already been part of the "money supply" (stock supply) for years,and is certainly a very small amount compared to the naked short shares issued by mm's and or brokers.
I've tried to think of an analogy but there really isnt one because the dtc action without due process was unprecedented 3.5 years after the fact against innocent 3rd party purchasers.
the only poor analogy is if we all bought a nonperishable product from a store which the store improperly acquired without our knowledge and then the authorities tracked down every such innocent purchaser 3.5 years later and confiscated an otherwise legal product without compensation-its crazy.
Thus,only those w hard stock certificates can relinquish their stocks to brokers to sell. Then brokers manually try to match w a buyer.
last fall,under pressure from congress to follow some semblance of due process as required by the constitution-no one can be deprived of life liberty or property (as dtc has done without any visible due process) without due process of law-thats what separates a democracy from a dictatorship- dtc issued a policy whitepaper whereby they detail a due process procedure which would allow companies to show, e.g in CWRN's case CWRN was not complicit w the Oppenheimer brokers error at 1 office in Florida where the broker erroneously released ca $8400 of restricted stock before its time.
Such problems usually occur when a companies lawyer issues an opinion letter saying the stock can now be taken off restriction-the agencies often disagree w those opinion letters. To the best of our knowledge CWRN reportedly did not issue any opinion letters releasing restricted stock and reportedly never even sold restricted stock- the only possible such would be a small issue 12-28-08 which would not have been aged 1 year by june 2009 as required for a non- sec reporting co before it could be taken off,but that issue reportedly was not restricted either and nothing on the forms indicates it was ever restricted, so we dont know where any restricted stock could have come from unless it was a principal of the previous legal entity preceding CWRN -Casino Airlinks -which previous entity was located in the Boca Raton area where the offending Oppenheimer office was located- awful high coincidence. stockpromoters.com etc verify no restricted stock was paid for any promos.
if CWRN can show at a due process hearing it did not issue any opinion letter releasing restricted stock nor did it even issue restricted stock (except to family members who held such in hard cert form -which was not released to the Oppenheimer broker ) then dtc would have to remove the restriction without delay under the due process of the constitution. the 6 and12 month punishment provisions apply only to companies who violated the rules re restricted stock. Under normal principals of law dtc would be required to show CWRN violated the rules before issuing any restriction and dtc didnt do that-CWRN had no warning -judgement was handed down before the co was notified -dtc didnt even notify CWRN-another co did. Normally at the very beginning of an action the accused party has to be notified and given opportunity to defend and do discovery etc and have a trial-none of that was done.
They have already illegally taken our property without any visible due process for years- and we are innocent 3rd party purchasers who are never punished under the law, a basic principal of the law - so this lack of due process is part of a never before seen pattern of dictatorship in violation of the constitution since 2009. There isnt even any logical rationale to hold our collective stock hostage, as any restricted stock has already been part of the "money supply" (stock supply) for years,and is certainly a very small amount compared to the naked short shares issued by mm's and or brokers.
I've tried to think of an analogy but there really isnt one because the dtc action without due process was unprecedented 3.5 years after the fact against innocent 3rd party purchasers.
the only poor analogy is if we all bought a nonperishable product from a store which the store improperly acquired without our knowledge and then the authorities tracked down every such innocent purchaser 3.5 years later and confiscated an otherwise legal product without compensation-its crazy.
