InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 0
Posts 200
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 05/04/2010

Re: azgirl post# 9582

Tuesday, 11/30/2010 10:10:24 PM

Tuesday, November 30, 2010 10:10:24 PM

Post# of 13200

So, as I said before, if Petro the company has the assets, it would not change the charges against Owen. Or perhaps it would change Count 1 and 2.



Owen problems only meet the definition of a crime because the feds couldn't find any company to substantiate the activity.

Withdrawing several thousand dollars a day in short time frames, in and of itself is not a crime. But if you're claiming to do it for a business with funds from investors whom you've told there is a multi-billion dollar company that needs you to do this, then you should be able to produce proof that this company exists in the form you've claimed. Since Owen didn't/couldn't do this, it looks like he was trying to take money out of the bank without the feds knowing about it. This is a major crime as many illegal operations do this.

Actually if Owen had produced assets, he wouldn't have been charged at all. They only arrested him at first, and when in interviews he couldn't back up his claims about Petro, then he was charged.
Join InvestorsHub

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.