Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Posted by: IH Admin [Matt] Date: Thursday, March 16, 2006 3:01:50 AM
In reply to: dropdeadfred who wrote msg# 22690 Post # of 27058 [Send a link via email]
LFWK, MYRG, GZFX and maybe SMMW for a lottery play
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=10186707
OTOH, if he hasn't really skipped town, but is a tout now hidden in the witness protection program (didn't they simply state he isn't in custody???)...
That's an interesting thought, but I suspect they wouldn't have indicted him if it were the case...
Posted by: IH Admin [Matt] Date: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 2:12:30 AM
In reply to: timhyma who wrote msg# 22683 Post # of 27058 [Send a link via email]
ERHE has been extremely active on iHub the last few days and up quite nicely in the last month.
Thoughts on it here?
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=10166612
829:
Once again you said: "Given the number of alias's used by admins and their cohorts, I cannot see how you can come to the conclusion that ihub was not used."
I said: "Please site the quote indicating that IHub admin(s) had multiple aliases."
Your response is that any reply to my question citing multiple aliases of admin will be deleted.
I'm here to tell you it will NOT be deleted - or if it is, it will be reinstated. That's a fact!
Now, what excuse will you use not to post their aliases when, in fact, there are no aliases to post about????
If you think you have names, post them and let us decide if there is any validity to them - which there won't be.
Len
Or it could have just been the time needed for SEC IT guys to get around to reading the disks and for their attorneys to build some document boxes and order replacement toner for the photocopier and puzzle out how the case management system is supposed to work etc etc etc etc etc.
I suppose this only came on relatively quickly because other enforcement agencies with working photocopiers etc were involved.
http://www.cjr.org/the_audit/wapo_circles_back_on_coxs_sec.php
Investigative attorneys with whom we spoke concurred that having little or no administrative or paralegal support causes them to spend considerable time on non-legal duties such as copying, filing, document-scanning, preparing exhibits, making travel arrangements, soliciting bids for court reporters, and logging and processing documents submitted by respondents. For example, one attorney told us such duties can take 2 to 3 hours daily. Another, who joined the agency from private practice, said that investigative attorneys can spend up to half their time on tasks handled by support staff in their previous position. One attorney told us of plans to spend a day assembling document storage boxes. Because there is insufficient in-house copying capability, confidential documents sometimes are sent to non-secure outside copy shops. Frequent equipment breakdowns mean attorneys must search for working copiers and scanners, a number of attorneys told us…
Once all those internal memos are completed, they have almost no value internally because the system is run on a proprietary case tracking system called CATS that is incompatible with all their other computer systems (which are all incompatible with one another) and which no one bothers to update or fix when it’s broken, both because their old information technology contractors no longer work there and because it is, in the staffers’ own words, “severely limited and virtually unusable.”
While downloading of information from computer hard drives has become a basic evidentiary technique, some investigative attorneys told us there can be lengthy delays for information technology support staff to retrieve the contents from hard drives obtained during an investigation. For example, one attorney told us about a case in active litigation in which Enforcement had to seek an extension of time for discovery because after 6 months, only two of a number of hard drives had been downloaded…
Several attorneys said that another significant shortcoming is that the investigative staff does not have access to real-time trading information… Currently, when attorneys need such information, they manually query hundreds of broker-dealers, a process that initially produces only incomplete records.
WOW.
You haven't bothered to read the indictments, have you?
Good grief.....
Ordinary
Maybe 'mastermind' of this little gang of cheats, but perhaps with tentacles reaching out to other gangs in which the Feds are more interested. If he has, in fact, skipped town, obviously he cannot be providing the info the Feds need to go after the others, but a cooperating coconspirator could! OTOH, if he hasn't really skipped town, but is a tout now hidden in the witness protection program (didn't they simply state he isn't in custody???), perhaps he has already provided everything they needed to build the other cases. Who knows, we're all just speculating. . .
Newly
But according to the SEC suit and the indictments, Dynkowski was the "mastermind".
They may just have needed the time to work on what they found on Dynkowski's computers, and to trace all the IM messages, bank accounts, brokerage accounts, and so on.
and if EVO is guilty of using IHub for illicit gains, then IMO it is a huge leap beyond what the SEC has already accused him (Matt) of.
Not really. Have you read the indictments?
Why didn't anyone realize the game was up, and offer to cooperate with the Feds?
Perhaps someone did! That would explain the time lapse between Dynkowski being arrested 2/07 and the coconspirators not until recently -- time spent building their case and widening the net to catch some bigger fish based on whatever info the tout regurgitated . . .
Newly
NICE TO SEE, the ''whole'' gang on one page. Hope they were not ''all'' on the same page, if youse gets my drift. Time will tell. Think we will lose a few more. Indian
Mike:
Well, then... we agree on all points.
And, YES... if Matt green-lighted EVO on IHub - and if EVO is guilty of using IHub for illicit gains, then IMO it is a huge leap beyond what the SEC has already accused him (Matt) of.
It's one thing to do bad things on your own. It's another to drag the company into it. To me, that is a major issue because if it can be proven that Matt used IHub or intentionally enabled IHub for illicit gains for himself or anyone else... then IHub stands to be at the mercy of major litigation. Without knowing their level of protection (insurance), it's always possible it could be fatal.
That would be catastrophic IMO.
Len
I think the point was about regular members. Your example is about a mod position which is true.
Regs and freebs see nothing of value about their deletion.
How can "Nathan M. Michaud" be alias "nateeeeee" ?? He's still posting and pumping like crazy. No Way!
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/profile.asp?user=45865
I hope Bill P writes a book about the whole thing and makes millions...
I somehow doubt that will happen.
Out of 10,000 + alleged paid members, I'm pretty sure you shouldn't expect any personal apologies any time soon.
well the paper is a bit damning.. would love to hear it straight from the horses mouth.. since matty was a very vocal anti pinky preacher... look how that turned out? btw your pretty anti pink too... and vocal.. lol
and if its all so innocent why is EVO on the lamb?
I hope Bill P writes a book about the whole thing and makes millions...
would love to hear the real story. wouldn't you?
real
Very slick...you must be retired.
You need to give it a rest. The indictment is pretty clear on that. They named an administrator here to 8 felony counts.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=38318367
Matt's problem was he thought every other ISP would resist a federal subpoena like he pretended that Ihub would.
AOL IM has been around for years. I asked someone at work about it and they said no one in their right mind would use that in the commission of a crime.
Yes it was. Sometime in 2007. It takes time to put these things together, have to lay low for a while after a raid. That was a close call. Got to make sure the heat is off.
EVO stopped posting 11/17/2007
Matt brings the IRP to public light on 8/24/2008
Olico stopped posting 10/27/2008
One more insulating layer in place.
Now the site has been busted, the layer fades away.
What "mob" are you referring to kind sir?
The mob that wants to lynch Matt before he is found guilty.
Phil
Don't you find it curious that folks aren't up in arms over the ceo's and transfer agents who issued all those shares and have yet to be charged?
A number of people have wondered why the companies weren't named as defendants. Like you, I hope the Feds eventually get to them.
As a business call I don't see it as a bad call as it was to raise money for the company in charging the extra fees to IRPs promoting companies on the IHUB site.
Perhaps. But I have the strong impression that at least some of the IRPs thought that in return for making disclosure and paying more, they deserved something in return.
That's easy enough to understand, but I think it created problems.
Once again, very nice job! Many thanks...
I'm sure it is...
Ordinary
Don't you find it curious that folks aren't up in arms over the ceo's and transfer agents who issued all those shares and have yet to be charged? I hope that is addressed in the continuing investigation.
Good to see you, Janice. Gotta run to the store on the way back from the office. Have a super week!
JJ
As a business call I don't see it as a bad call as it was to raise money for the company in charging the extra fees to IRPs promoting companies on the IHUB site.
I DO agree that they had no way to criminally or civilly enforce it, but you know from watching posters who is pumping this or that or not, and especially with full admin rights and ways they could tweak it to bring those posters to light. I agree they could never bring all the posters to light, and just touched the tip of the iceberg, but they had a pretty good idea, in my mind, for a business decision to raise more revenue, although it had limited success because there's lots of crooks on here that will never disclose that they are promoters. LOL
JJ
Posted by: janice shell Date: Tuesday, June 02, 2009 10:36:27 PM
In reply to: JJSeabrook who wrote msg# 7812 Post # of 7814 [Send a link via email]
I think in the end it turned out to be a bad idea, for the reason you cite. IHub isn't a regulatory agency. There isn't much point in starting up a program if you can't enforce compliance.
There are many, many more promoters active on IHub than ever disclosed.
AHHH I'll have to go back through a board but thank you for clarifying that. I've always seen a name for the ones deleted on OTCBB when I was actively monitoring it. Maybe that changed?
JJ
Posted by: janice shell Date: Tuesday, June 02, 2009 10:33:21 PM
In reply to: JJSeabrook who wrote msg# 7809 Post # of 7812 [Send a link via email]
Click on "Manage" and any post deleted is shown whom it was deleted by.
Yes, mods can see who deleted what. But if the post in question was deleted by a Mod Squadder or by an Admin, it says only "Mod Squad" or "Admin". You don't know precisely who deleted it.
Even if you're not a moderator, you can go to your "settings" and click on "my removed posts". If the post in question was deleted by a mod, you can click on "request review". If it was deleted by an Admin, it says "reviewed by Admin", in which case you can't click, but you can write directly to an Admin protesting the deletion.
I think in the end it turned out to be a bad idea, for the reason you cite. IHub isn't a regulatory agency. There isn't much point in starting up a program if you can't enforce compliance.
There are many, many more promoters active on IHub than ever disclosed.
I think the IRP program was a good program, at least insofar as the disclosure, which was madated all along by the SEC whether enforced by IHUB or not. IHUB actually took an active role in that to bring out IRPs by enforcing a mandatory SEC regulation, of which they made some extra fund off of in the process. Never saw anything wrong with that at all.
JJ
Posted by: janice shell Date: Tuesday, June 02, 2009 10:26:23 PM
In reply to: Qone0 who wrote msg# 7804 Post # of 7810 [Send a link via email]
The IRP "program" started in October 2008. I believe Matt's house was raided much earlier than that.
Click on "Manage" and any post deleted is shown whom it was deleted by.
Yes, mods can see who deleted what. But if the post in question was deleted by a Mod Squadder or by an Admin, it says only "Mod Squad" or "Admin". You don't know precisely who deleted it.
Even if you're not a moderator, you can go to your "settings" and click on "my removed posts". If the post in question was deleted by a mod, you can click on "request review". If it was deleted by an Admin, it says "reviewed by Admin", in which case you can't click, but you can write directly to an Admin protesting the deletion.
You know when an admin has deleted a post.
Okay, that's true. I'd forgotten about Admin review.
Janice, I think you can go in deleted posts and it tells you EXACTLY who deleted what post...or that's the way it always has been for me. Maybe I don't understand your post. Click on "Manage" and any post deleted is shown whom it was deleted by. I think that is how IHUB manages mods in conflicts on deleted posts on the individual boards, as well as the individual moderators being able to see what the IHUB mods did.
JJ
Posted by: janice shell Date: Tuesday, June 02, 2009 10:08:44 PM
In reply to: 829 who wrote msg# 7801 Post # of 7807 [Send a link via email]
Not at all. Normally, you don't know who deleted what. If you're moderating the board in question, you know whether a post has been deleted by an admin, but not which admin.
The IRP "program" started in October 2008. I believe Matt's house was raided much earlier than that.
This ought to be interesting. Been following it a little bit, although not regularly. There's lots of smoke in the SEC charges, but nobody knows for sure yet who the flames for the fire truly were, although the SEC has charged the participants they feel were responsible for the smoke ring, and the ashes left in the wake of the fire.
Personally, I never followed Matt's posts. I got bit on both GHTI and AAGH, of which I'm not proud of, but I can't attribute that directly to anyone. Wish I would have bailed out on them when my brain told me I should have, but I didn't. Such is life when you trade for a living. You ALWAYS know that there is a potential of manipulation and scamming in penny land. Sometimes that works to your benefit, and sometimes you ignore your instincts and get the shaft like many others. This is nothing new.
It would seem to me that ADVFN would put Matt on leave from posting, but that's their call. I would imagine that if the membership falls it would then become a management decision they would have to address at that point. If it doesn't fall, then there's probably nothing they have to address at this point, at least from a business standpoint, IMO of course. It's the appearance of impropriety that hurts IHUB/ADVFN at this point, as there has been no conviction(s).
I personally don't know all the facts, obviously, and certainly believe every individual is entitled to a fair trial upon merits.
I've always liked IHUB, and would hate to see the site disappear...and not saying that it would even if Matt is convicted of the charges IF that were to occur. IHUB has a LOT of newbies that are members. It would be a huge black eye for the site to have Matt convicted, and up to that date continuing to actively participate on the site, IMO. The appearance of impropriety is bad at this point, and would be compounded exponentially upon a conviction, should that occur.
Best of luck to Matt! Hope he's innocent upon receiving a judgment on the facts.
JJ
You know when an admin has deleted a post. Whether or not you know which one, does not change my argument.
IHUB never cheated anyone and guns don't kill people
people do!
There aren't any new IRPs that I'm aware of.
I would think not a one new one.
And a number of the "old" IRPs claim they're no longer "active"...
Yes, the site has been busted. The activity will slow to a stop.
It's the timing of the IRP's activity that's important to a civil case. Preponderance of the evidence.
When did the IRP program start?
When was Matts house raided?
Not at all. Normally, you don't know who deleted what. If you're moderating the board in question, you know whether a post has been deleted by an admin, but not which admin.
But they have made one VERY bad mistake. The IRP's that were started after they were aware of Matts role.
There aren't any new IRPs that I'm aware of. And a number of the "old" IRPs claim they're no longer "active"...
Admins cover themselves and delete posts that they do not like or that expose their alias. Clear enough?
Obviously, they have a responsibility to regulate EMPLOYEES (of which, Matt was one). Because of that, they have a very large legal exposure IMO if he is found guilty of using IHub for illicit gains - although he hasn't been charged with that at this time.
If you read Matt Browns indictment, manner and means, he probably has. An indictment does not contain all evidence. It's just a brief overview. When PD was bragging about having the entire world on AAGH that locked it for me. IHUB was used.
IHUB now stands directly in the path of Vicarious liability.
Suits will start to fly the moment a plea deal or guilty verdict is announced.
With regard to the actus reus principle, courts approving vicarious liability often contend that defendants voluntarily "assumed the responsibilities" the statutes imposed or had it within their power to prevent the crimes in question (see Morisette v. United States, 342 U.S. 246, 256 (1952)). On this basis, most (though not all) courts agree that vicarious liability is constitutional in the employer-employee context (see United States v. Park, 421 U.S. 658 (1975)) and in statutes imposing liability on vehicle owners for traffic offenses committed by those the owner permitted to use the car (see City of Chicage v. Hertz Commercial Leasing Corp., 395 N.E. 2d 1285, 1290–1291 (1978)).
You see IHUB is in a very bad position now. If they change anything they are admitting they could have prevented the scams. If they don't change, they are allowing on going scams to be carried out that they know very well how to prevent.
So they have chosen to stick their head in the sand and hope this all goes away. And plead ignorance.
But they have made one VERY bad mistake. The IRP's that were started after they were aware of Matts role. That shows they KNEW what the site was being used for.
I don't know what the argument is here, but
a) IMO disclaimers carry no weight in illegal actions. Just because Terrorists announce that they might kill people, doesn't make them immune from prosecution when they actually do kill people. Therefore IHUB's (as well as the companies and promoters involved) disclaimers are invalidated the moment (if) IHUB has been used for illegal pumping of those stocks by IHUB employees or by people blessed/asked to do so by IHUB employees.
b) IHUB has/had the chance to claim innocence by distancing itself from employees accused of wrongdoing. If they continue to let MATT act as he did in the past (keep him as an employee without leave), IMO they will make themselves liable if Matt gets convicted of those crimes.
lentinman:
In the interests of "customer service"..follow up on the matter is in order from who ever is running this web site. Someone needs to grow a pair, stand up and do the right thing rather than the silence. It would put some worries to rest. The lack of communication is irresponsible. We are either building relationships or we are not. Its like any other business.
mimurray:
"By saying employees do you mean the admins?? In my experience here they will remove posts that violate the TOU, but I've never seen them control the "flow" of anything."
Absolutely 100% right. I have never seen them deal with "flow" unless it is to put a stop to an ongoing violation of the TOU.
Also, your point about ruining their own posts with deletable material is right on. It has always amazed me how many people cannot grasp what is deletable and what isn't.
Len
Fireman:
"In any private corporation when one is charged with a crime that involves the bussiness they are placed on Administrative leave either paid or unpaid depending on the charges. This is like a cop "being on the take" being charged and then not being removed from Duty...."
I agree 100%. I think it was a mistake for Admin not to place Matt on some kind of leave. I was shocked to see him begin posting in a few days after the news hit. However, he has not posted since May 28th, so I'm thinking they got the word from one (or more) attorneys.
Len
"principles before personalities" here
What "mob" are you referring to kind sir?
tia
IMO most of the posts on this board belong on the Parking Lot board.
Especially all of the posts about Ihub's TOU and the way Ihub is being managed.
Phil
Followers
|
347
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
0
|
Posts (Total)
|
16741
|
Created
|
05/21/09
|
Type
|
Free
|
Moderators |
http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2009/lr21053.htm
U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Litigation Release No. 21053 / May 21, 2009
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Pawel P. Dynkowski, Matthew W. Brown, Jacob Canceli, Gerard J. D’Amaro, Joseph Mangiapane Jr., Nathan M. Michaud, Marc J. Riviello and Adam S. Rosengard, Civil Action No. 09-361 (D. Del.) (May 20, 2009)
SEC Charges Eight Participants in Penny Stock Manipulation Ring
The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) announced today that it filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware against Pawel P. Dynkowski, Matthew W. Brown, Jacob Canceli, Gerard J. D’Amaro, Joseph Mangiapane Jr., Nathan M. Michaud, Marc J. Riviello and Adam S. Rosengard. The complaint alleges that in 2006 and 2007, Dynkowski, a Polish citizen who resided in the U.S., engaged in market manipulation schemes with at least four separate stocks: GH3 International, Inc., Asia Global Holdings, Inc., Playstar Corp., and Xtreme Motorsports of California, Inc. As alleged in the complaint, Dynkowski’s co-defendants each participated in one or more of these schemes, which together generated more than $6.2 million in illicit profits.
The SEC’s complaint alleges that these fraudulent schemes generally followed the same pattern: Dynkowski and his accomplices agreed to sell large blocks of shares for penny stock companies in exchange for a portion of the proceeds. The companies put these shares in nominee accounts that Dynkowski and his accomplices controlled. The defendants pumped the market price of the stocks using wash sales, matched orders and other manipulative trading, often timed to coincide with false or touting press releases by the companies, to give the market the false impression that there was real demand for these stocks. After artificially inflating the market price of the stocks, Dynkowski and his accomplices then dumped the shares obtained from the issuers and divided the illicit proceeds.
The SEC’s complaint further alleges that:
The pump-and-dump scheme involving GH3 International, Inc. stock occurred between October and December 2006. Dynkowski orchestrated this fraud with Matthew W. Brown, who operates a penny stock website called InvestorsHub.com. Brown introduced Dynkowski to a representative of GH3 and to Jacob Canceli, a penny stock promoter who participated in the scheme. Brown acted as a liaison between Dynkowski, Canceli and the issuer. Dynkowski and his associates used wash sales, matched orders, and other manipulative trading, timed to coincide with false, misleading and touting press releases by the company, to inflate the price of GH3 stock. Canceli provided the accounts from which Dynkowski subsequently sold purportedly unrestricted shares received from the issuer. The scheme culminated in mid-December 2006, with Dynkowski dumping 312 million shares of GH3 stock for total illicit proceeds of $747,609.
Brown planned the Asia Global pump-and-dump scheme with Joseph Mangiapane Jr. and Marc J. Riviello, who were both registered representatives at a small broker-dealer in California. Dynkowski and Nathan M. Michaud, who met through InvestorsHub.com, pumped the price of Asia Global stock using wash sales, matched orders and other manipulative trading, coordinated with false, misleading, and touting press releases by the company. The scheme occurred in three cycles: August-September 2006, November-December 2006, and January-February 2007. After manipulating the price of stock, Dynkowski, Brown, Mangiapane and Riviello dumped more than 54 million shares that had been improperly registered on SEC Form S-8 and held in nominee accounts. The illicit proceeds from this scheme totaled at least $4,050,529.
Dynkowski and Gerard J. D’Amaro carried out the Playstar pump-and-dump scheme. The two of them met through InvestorsHub.com. D’Amaro acted as the liaison with the issuer as well as the nominee account holder for the purportedly unrestricted shares received from the company. In this scheme, which occurred during October and November 2006, Dynkowski pumped Playstar’s stock through wash sales, matched orders and other manipulative trading. Dynkowski and D’Amaro sold 11.5 million shares for total illicit proceeds of $1,180,294.
Dynkowski and an accomplice carried out the Xtreme Motorsports pump-and-dump scheme. The two of them, who met through InvestorsHub.com, pumped Xtreme Motorsports stock through wash sales, matched orders and other manipulative trading during January and February 2007. Dynkowski’s friend, Adam S. Rosengard, served as the nominee account holder who facilitated the dump of 13 million purportedly unrestricted shares of Xtreme Motorsports stock. After pumping the stock, Dynkowski sold the shares from Rosengard’s account generating illicit proceeds of $257,646.
The SEC’s complaint alleges that Dynkowski and Brown violated Sections 5(a), 5(c) and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”), Sections 10(b) and 13(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”), and Rules 10b-5, 13d-1 and 13d-2 thereunder; that Canceli, D’Amaro, Mangiapane, and Riviello violated Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 17(a) of the Securities Act, Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act, and Rule 10b-5; that Michaud violated Section 17(a) of the Securities Act, Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act, and Rule 10b-5; and that Rosengard violated Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act. The complaint seeks against each defendant a permanent injunction against future violations, disgorgement of ill-gotten gains with prejudgment interest, and civil monetary penalties, and, as to certain defendants, orders barring them from participating in penny stock offerings.
The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Delaware also announced today felony criminal charges against Dynkowski, Brown, Canceli, D’Amaro, Mangiapane, and Riviello.
The SEC thanks the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Delaware; the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement; the Internal Revenue Service – Criminal Investigations; and the Delaware State Police for their assistance in this matter.
The SEC’s investigation is continuing.
Documents & Articles
The Full SEC Complaint:
http://sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2009/comp21053.pdf
The US DOJ Press Release:
http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/de/press/2009/Pump%20&%20Dump%20Stock%20Schemes%20Indictments.pdf
Troopers aid in scam case:
http://www.gosanangelo.com/news/2007/feb/17/troopers-aid-scam-case/
UD student, Newark man named in
'pump and dump' civil suit:
7 charged in alleged stock scheme:
http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D98AQDQG0.htm
SEC Sues Eight in Three States in Penny Stock Ring:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=an0vTmWDEj_Y&refer=home
Pompano Beach man charged in stock manipulation:
http://www.bizjournals.com/southflorida/stories/2009/05/18/daily63.html
O.C. stock board founder, broker indicted for fraud:
http://ocbiz.freedomblogging.com/2009/05/21/oc-stock-board-founder-broker-indicted-for-fraud/12005/
Former Newark man among those indicted in stock fraud scheme:
http://www.ledgerdelaware.com/articles/2009/05/21/news/doc4a156b9de488d415326660.txt
http://dealbreaker.com/2009/05/the-sec-to-the-rescue.php
Las Vegas company's stock manipulated for profits:
http://m.lasvegassun.com/news/2009/may/21/sec-las-vegas-companys-stock-manipulated-profits/
Felony Criminal Charges For InvestorsHub.com Operator, Matthew Brown, In Penny Stock Scheme:
04/16/2009 3 REDACTED VERSION of 2 Indictment by USA as to Defendant Sealed. (rpg) (rpg). (Entered: 04/22/2009)
http://tinyurl.com/n9t6nz
- Note: This link will not post as a live link. Copy and paste it to any browser and the Pacer Document PDF file can be opened.
Companies Involved
GH3 International, Inc. (stock ticker: GHTI)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/board.aspx?board_id=5091
Asia Global Holdings Corp. (stock ticker: AAGH)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/board.aspx?board_id=5623
Playstar Corporation (stock ticker: PLYCF)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/board.aspx?board_id=3011
INCA Designs, Inc. (stock ticker:IDGI)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/board.aspx?board_id=8819
Participants Charged by the SEC
The SEC's complaint, filed in federal district court in Delaware, charges:
Matthew W. Brown, age 26, of Aliso Viejo, California:
Pawel Dynkowski of Newark, Del.
Jacob Canceli of Mission Viejo, Calif., who is a stock promoter.
Gerard J. D'Amaro of Pompano Beach, Fla., who is a stock promoter.
Joseph Mangiapane Jr. of Laguna Niguel, Calif, who was a registered representative at AIS Financial, Inc and is currently CEO of Rubicon Financial, Inc., which owned AIS Financial, Inc. during the relevant time period.
Nathan M. Michaud of Boston, Mass., who is a web site designer.
Marc J. Riviello of Redwood City, Calif., who was a registered representative at AIS Financial, Inc.
Adam S. Rosengard of Voorhees, N.J., who was a student at the University of Delaware during the relevant time period.
Persons Indicted by DOJ
The seven defendants named in the DOJ indictments are:
• Pawel Dynkowski, age 24, formerly of Newark, Delaware;
• Joseph Mangiapane, Jr., age 43, of Laguna Niguel, California;
• Marc Riviello, age 50, of Atherton, California;
• Matthew W. Brown, age 26, of Aliso Viejo, California;
• Jacob Canceli, age 50, of Mission Viejo, California;
• Gerard D’Amaro, age 38, of Lighthouse Point, Florida; and
• Angelo R. “Bill” Panetta, age 48, of Montebello, California.
FYI From MATT >>>>>
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=38023743
Posted by: IH Admin [Matt] Date: Thursday, May 21, 2009 1:03:12 PM
In reply to: None Post # of 127421
Re: SEC complaint/etc
Hi guys,
I'm aware of the SEC complaint/Delaware situation that was released today. You guys know the deal - I can't say much without my legal counsel ripping my head off (certainly the way I tend to write).
If/when I'm cleared to update everyone, I will.
ADVFN is aware of the situation and they consider it a personal matter.
Just so rumors aren't circulating -- iHub isn't going anywhere. The community and the incredible Admin team are what make this place. The site has been absolutely rocking lately and there's no reason that will change. We're doing some upgrades next week to the hardware infrastructure and the Nerds are working on some very groovy cutting edge stuff that we've dreamed up the last few weeks that I'm pretty excited to release.
I appreciate all the concern/messages you guys have sent.
FOR THOSE WHO SUPPORT MATT, HERE IS A LINK: investorshub.advfn.com/boards/board.aspx
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |