Plastic2Oil Inc (PTOI)

[loanranger]

When you say "At a minimum, Reckless John will need at least two CPA's willing to throw themselves under the bus in order to win this case" are you referring to Gately and his colleague?

Because I don't think that there's wording in the complaint or the answers specifically describing his colleague as a CPA (but note the coincidence in the post quoted later here) and Gately himself has been under the bus since October 22, 2010 when the final stamp was put on his prohibition from any association with a public accounting firm.

There are accountant witnesses described in the complaint as the "business consultant", who is clearly Geoffrey Weber, a CPA, and the "consultant", who I believe to be CASEY Walker (Cathryn L. Walker), not a CPA.

Since they appear to be material to the SEC's case and cited in the Defendant's answers with the strong suggestion that they provided different information to the Defendants, in one case "under oath", it seems like it might a good idea to provide a little background detail. All of the following is based on my research, including information provided on message boards, so I welcome correction. I'm skipping all the "it is my understanding" and "I believe" wording accordingly.

Mr. Weber was one of the founding members of Pak-It. From July 1983 to November 1992 Mr. Weber was a partner in a CPA firm, Baldwin & Weber, CPA's, that provided management advisory services to small and medium sized business clients. His partner in that firm was Ron Baldwin....it should be noted that the JBI 2009 10-K says "From 1991 to 2005, Mr. Baldwin was a staff accountant at Baldwin & Weber, CPA’s". The following comes from a press release issued by what was then 310 Holdings on 10/1/09.......the last sentence being especially noteworthy.:
"To advance the Company's objectives in corporate restructuring and grow the Company through mergers and acquisitions, the Company will utilize Geoffrey C. Weber, CPA who has organized many ventures for himself and his clients for over 25 years. He has also been Chief Financial Officer for several multi-million dollar companies, including franchised operations, where he developed systems and operating procedures for financial reporting for owners, operators, and banks. Mr. Weber has an emphasis on real estate development and operations and he has been involved in over $200 million in loan and private placements. Mr. Weber began his career as an auditor with Deloitte and has been a CPA since 1982. Mr. Weber has a Bachelors of Business Administration from James Madison University and became a Florida Certified Public Accountant in 1982. He is a Member of American Institute of CPA's and is an Associate Member of the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners."
http://www.stocktrendnews.com/index.php?fuseaction=public.showView&symbol=TRTN&loc=knobias&story_id=43854568

The defendant's answer to the complaint says "Defendants admit that the business consultant was an independent contractor who held the title of Assistant Secretary for JBI". While I expect that is true, I could not confirm it in the SEC filings, so I assume it wasn't an Officers position.


Regarding Ms. Walker:
I'm not sure if this is where they first reported it, but this is from the Domark 10-K for the year ended 5/31/09:
"On December 16, 2008, we executed an agreement for the exchange of common stock
between ECFO Corporation, a Florida Corporation ("ECFO") and Cathryn L. Walker,
the sole shareholder of Company, (the "Shareholder") and Domark (the
"Agreement"), whereby pursuant to the terms and conditions of that Agreement,
Domark acquired all the shares in ECFO in return for an issuance of One Hundred
Thousand (100,000) shares of Domark common stock in return for all outstanding
capital securities of ECFO. Accordingly, ECFO became a wholly owned subsidiary
of Domark. ECFO is an accounting firm who provides accounting and tax services
to public and private entities."
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365160/000116552709000772/g3413a.txt

Following is a post of a post that Ms. Walker apparently made on a message board that I believe has since gone out of existence:

By: ecfocorp in FAKE | Recommend this post (0)
Wed, 07 Jul 10 2:36 PM
Boardmark this board | Franklin, Andrews, Kramer & Edelstein Msg. 23907 of 23913
(This msg. is a reply to 23022 by scion)

Hi, my name is CASEY WALKER. My company is ECFO Corporation. I do not own or have any portion of ownership in Armada Capital. ECFO is no longer a subsidiary of Domark as of October 2009.

ECFO has had many mutual clients with Gately & Associates over a span of 8 years. Mr Gately's license and business address were that of ECFO's because he was relocating and needed an address where he could reliably get his mail, etc Mr Crowder was hired as an employee of Gately & Associates to assist Mr Gately in his transition and work load. Mr Crowder is a reputable CPA and is PCAOB registered (edit added by lr: https://www.myfloridalicense.com/LicenseDetail.asp?SID=&id=2620BDE3EB641F241EE56FA8E2C029AB ). I have never been a part of Gately & Associates as that would violate independance rules and I am not licensed to perform audits. I essentially specialize in providing auditable financial statements.

ECFO has also been entrusted to receive mail on behalf of other clients, providing use of our address as a business mailing address. This is not uncommon as many of our clients have principles who travel extensively worldwide and wish to have their financial information processes centralized.

ECFO is not currently retained by JBI. My involvement with JBI was with the Canadian entity and I assisted in the early P2O projections. JBI's issues would seem to be symptematic of growth (possibly too fast), but I am certain that JB will take whatever steps are necessary to make JBI the HUGE success it should be and JB will protect the shareholders in every way possible.

http://www.atomicbobs.com/index.php?mode=read&id=534674

(post no longer publicly available)
===============================================

I'm sure that there's more where all that came from, but I suspect that's plenty for an Easter Sunday morning. If there's a point to it, it's that some of these relationships have existed for a long, long time and could have strengthened or dissolved in the intervening periods. And their current status might reasonably be expected to have an effect on the testimony offered in the case. It's a tangled web and it's had a long time to tangle.