Why are so many ignoring the importance of that statement from judge. --'No intent to harm the company' is what I am reading into this. Yes, the shenanigans will be punished and those that received unregistered shares and rewarded from those shenanigans will be 'disgorged'. What exactly will be that disgorgement was not specified and I am sure we will be hearing that soon. Monies from sale of those shares or return of shares can only be a positive to shareholders. Does this hurt the guilty party? Yes of course and if that is Whelan and his obvious connection to IBEX, SO BE IT! Punish THE GUILTY, not the innocent. The innocent (stockholders) have been punished enough by their shenanigans (stock price). How in the world can any worse come of punishing Whelan and his family. They have destroyed many investors (as we hear crying and hate everyday on this board}. I would think that their removal will be cheered by investors, but that is NOT their punishment as stated. Banned from further penny stock dealings. I am sure that they (Whelan family) are relieved of that punishment. Nowhere was it stated that Whelan must relinquish control of Bioelectronics. His shenanigans with IBEX?--yes that is done and IBEX is the one hurt most by all this, as their receiving of discounted shares and selling at market value is over. So the ones hurt most are whoever is IBEX. And we all know that is the Whelan family which includes our CEO. No more reaping rewards on these 'discounted' shares for loans. Understand there is NOTHING wrong with the loaning of money to a company you are an executive of as long as all is legal and documented. But using THAT executive power to reap personal rewards from a 'shady' deal that inturn hurts your stockholders is and should be personally punishable. The SEC was formed for just one of these purposes: to regulate and oversee actions and abuse by executives harming its common stockholders. There should be faith by all investors that all decisions made by the executives of a publicly traded company are made in best interests of its stockholders. I think it is obvious that this was NOT the case with the CEO's loan dealings with IBEX.
