It does take time to absorb things and we've only heard 1 side of the story
This has no direct bearing on CWRN 's actual operations-the mining/production/selling of ore/business relationships.
The SEC complaint asks the court for the following injunctive relief (something that generally requires a high likelihood of immediate and serious and irreparable harm if the injunctive relief is not granted-i.e. SEC etc wants to skip the due process/trial etc part of the legal process and go directly to judgment):
1) Bob/defendants are forbidden from issuing any more penny stock related to THIS alleged promotion of March 8, 2010 ---no problem since that is ancient history re CWRN stock and has nothing to do w the present stock situation or pps- -plus CWRN has said many times they wont be diluting-and they are self supporting w self generated net income now so they dont need to dilute. Instead its SOP for such co's to begin buyback - delayed to need to acquire more equipment to take advantage of the veins discovered thru acquisition of the 1st 68 drill hole reports in May 2011
2)-assuming any of this is true-what monetary gains did Bob receive from the agent purchasing 500,000 shares of stock at .0029 and .003 on the OPEN MARKET (not directly from Bob) on March 8, 2010-which only had a very short lived effect on pps--
if Bob expected the pps to rise as claimed in the complaint to the teens (11 to 19 cents pps) he would not have yet moved to take any action to release shares into the market-which I'm guessing any "monetary gain" would come from.
Thats the only "relief" I can see that the SEC is asking for!!!!!!!!!!! Does anybody see any other demands by the SEC? (not the separate DOJ complaint of bribery-if thats what it is-and the penalties for that cannot constitutionally affect innocent 3rd parties like the stockholders or the business either imo)
I and others spent a total of 1000's of hours of dd re mining/stocks/independent articles-the cost of shipping etc that was independent of trust in Bob- iron prices and junior miner costs etc have nothing to do w trust in Bob
The complaint does not ask for Bob or the officers/BOD shares nor does it ask anything re the operation of the business (apart from compliance w specified securities laws which I would think CWRN is complying with-as it has not issued any shares since 2010- as per Nov 17 etc PR-and if they were it would be pretty stupid to keep noting that in PR's)
It doesnt ask that assets or the business be dissolved or sold or that Bob and the officers step down from their positions in the company.-
and to ask such things could be construed as interference w interstate commerce-which constitutionally is congressional jurisdiction-not DOJ (executive) and SEC (to the extent the SEC follows executive political leading -which it seems to be-which is the reason the perfect storm of otc/dtc/broker restrictions came about-SEC/DOJ took on a new anti-business attitude-I'm not writing this now because of this -I've been saying the same thing ever since dtc restrictions-and so those organizations were free to do what they had wanted to do for a long time-restrict penny stocks.
Apart from any monetary civil penalties set out out in the specified SEC Acts,the main cost will be Bobs/defendants attorney fees.
Has anybody researched the monetary penalties specified by the sections of SEC law/regulation Bob allegedly violated- these are allegations- they are not yet proven in a court of law-so its proper to say "alleged".
This addresses the SEC complaint-not the DOJ complaint-which I will have to look at also.
normally the civil relatively relaxed preponderance of the evidence standard would apply OR the specific stronger standard applicable to the civil complaint-which in this case is apparently intent to defraud,which is a very difficult standard to prove-
