Bancorp International Group Inc (fka BCIT)

[mretgnol]

I believe the length of time of over five years could easily be defined as a violation and addressed by the SEC as such

They did address the violations by revoking the stock.

All alledged shares as you suggest would have been sold into the open market while this stock was trading requiring such notification

Do you ever pay attention to other stocks? Have you not seen where insiders were caught dumping more shares than actually reported? John Edwards dumped 111 Billion shares using a fudged ex-clearing contract. Vince LoCastro and Edwards were caught dumping an extra 22 Billion shares while actually being investigated by the SEC (Vince used a bogus $7 Million promissory note as debt).

There has been more then enough filings completed to date to imply if not disclosed it is with the intention to mislead and the SEC can act on it

.

That's really a sorry excuse people keep using. You have to be fully compliant when you are asking the SEC to help. Not sort of compliant, not good enough compliant, not the lame excuse of you'll be compliant when you feel like it. Full compliance would rule out additional shares, would expose any insider foolishness, and would actually be beneficial to Tom by cutting off people claiming the fraud could be from insiders.

Hold on while I laugh on that thought

It was John O' Quinn Esq who made that accusation. In fact, O'Quinn has alluded to the DTCC being a paper tiger controlled by the brokerages. Still laughing now?

the DTCC who is our brokers

Now I'm lauging.

may not have records of all the sharesholders that exist since the "notebook" may have run out of ledgers to fill in to record the actual quantity of shares they actual sold us

Um no, I'm saying brokerages do not always report their positions back to the DTCC. What is reported, is never actually verified by the DTCC. Reported positions are an honor system by some not so honest brokerages.

and the SEC enforced the 203 by in rule

Hold on...LLOLLLOLL...ok, now I'm back.

but that is the only possible legal reason to halt this stock from trading as stated by the DTCC to the Senate Finance Committe

You mean "Committee"? See, by law, you never have an official failure to deliver until the Transfer Agent states so. Hence, why even the SFC stated Tom needed a Transfer Agent. If you noticed, the Transfer Agent has never been able to indentify one failure to deliver.