“Forensic accounting was already done through the Google cases.... Also in the filing....lol Seriously.... “ The Google legal team only looked at two years of bank statements in the deposition in which Blaisure was called to testify. In forensic accounting, the researchers are always looking for specific areas of accounting that relates to their assignment. When they find what they are looking for, they generally close shop and move on.
In the Google deposition case, they were looking for ways to go after Greg Halpern. He had posted videos naming specific Google executives in defamatory ways. They were looking to take him down for it, and they did. They found the evidence of Halpern using corporate cards for personal gain, which allowed them to pierce the corporate veil and get personal judgments against the MAXD officers and company. That was an example of partial forensic accounting.
It’s always good to check out the definition of a word, or phrase, to see if it’s being used correctly. The phrase “forensic accounting” is understood to mean, “a type of accounting that investigates financial information for potential evidence of crimes. Forensic accountants use accounting, auditing, and investigative skills to understand whether a person or company has committed financial misconduct, such as embezzlement or fraud.”
The phrase “financial misconduct” covers a lot of territory and certainly applies to the Halpern years, both at Z-Trim as well as during his tenure as CFO and CEO of MAXD. Far too much money went into the MAXD and related accounts with no real return. MAXD shareholders have a right to an honest accounting.
It’s irrelevant whether Google or the bankruptcy trustee performed any form of forensic accounting as that was about Halpern's personal bankruptcy issues and not specific to the MAXD case. From everything I have read, the Mintz Levin law firm, brought into the case by the trustee, didn’t appear to perform detailed forensic work during the bankruptcy. Was this due to Harvey Vechery stepping in and agreeing to pay all debts for Halpern? That he agreed to pay off the house and additional fees to the lender to prevent further legal action against Halpern for apparently falsifying financial documents? Whatever the reason, a full forensic accounting of MAXD was not performed. It was a personal bankruptcy case for Greg Halpern, not a full forensic accounting of the entirety of MAXD.
The courts are backed up and don’t generally waste time when both parties agree, and the debts are paid. The bottom line is that a complete forensic accounting needs to be done for the entirety of the MAXD years. If Halpern has nothing to worry about, why debate this point? Allow it to happen so we all know the truth.
AI
