NanoTech Entertainment Inc (NTEK)

[Zorax]

I've heard the arguments used in these cases that the victims aren't victims as no one was twisting their arms to buy his scams. This to me will be absolutely used by the principal.

And there is logic to that claim. Is the principal criminal because no one did their homework? I'm just putting this out there because this is most likely some of the threads of logic from both sides.

But the circle argument is that the principal lied and used false promotional information so that the 'rubes' had no way of knowing he was lying. The principal was fairly careful most the times to use weasel wording with open ended escape routes.

So it goes back and forth.

The principal will probably go down from the corporate shenanigans and tax evasion before what he did to the shareholders rubes. The shareholders are so far from the principals mind that they don't exist.

The SEC will end with the principal going with the classic SEC sentence of neither admit nor deny wrongdoing, but agree to fines and disgorgements which the principal will laugh at and promptly ignore, maybe pay a token amount at first. I don't believe the principal had a ban from officer job the first go around. If he did, that was ignored as well.