strange you say that, given the response of Jasons attorney.
while the latest documents sound like a pissing match, i found it interersting that the jasons attorney wrote something to the effect that:
"Jason did not participate in trading the stock".
Why use the word "trade" and not the word "selling" or something that he did not receive economic benefit. Maybe its not a big thing but just really caught my attention.
The tone of Jasons attorney letter also imo sounded like he is trying to cover his butt.
furthermore, on gut feel, jasosns arguement sounds ok - i am an individual, didn't have an attorney, don't hang me on some technicality
but the Briner response was grasping for straws imo
