Mr. Jenkins' name should not be used to attack WSRC.
I am glad that it is now admitted that Mr. Jenkins does not hold 5% or more of the company's stock. Therefore, claims against Mr. Jenkins and the incident he is involved in have little or no relevance to WSRC but should not go unchallenged.
As lawyernotinvestor pointed out in post 14869, Mr. Jenkins was not convicted of securities fraud and his name should not be used in order to discredit WSRC. His offense is basically equivalent of driving without a license, which is a victimless "crime" if nobody is hurt in an accident.
The claim that Mr. Jenkins is a "convicted securities fraudster" is false for several reasons:
(1) He was not convicted of fraud in a court of law. He pled guilty to a charge that was brought against him, which was equivalent to being charged with driving without a license. There is a big difference between pleading guilty and being convicted in a court of law, as any lawyer will explain.
(2) In financial fraud the victims suffer loss by theft or deception. Who lost money and how much money did they lose in this incident? If there is a "victim" in this incident, it would be the Alabama Securities Commission, whose regulations requiring a broker license before marketing securities was not being followed. In short, no fraud was committed, he simply failed to get a license from the Commission before marketing securities. If no fraud was committed, then he cannot be called a "fraudster".
