InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 1
Posts 925
Boards Moderated 1
Alias Born 03/30/2010

Re: None

Wednesday, 08/15/2012 7:01:33 PM

Wednesday, August 15, 2012 7:01:33 PM

Post# of 30000
Let me break it down for the nay-sayers... sigh...

Jorge has pressed charges in Chile against Barrick, while the Chilean legal system would not even put forth this case unless their was substance to it..to whit the past PR's showing Barrick admitted in Chile court they DID NOT HAVE TITLE...

The court case it said in the PR was September 5th.. it also stated that Barrick may try to settle before hand.. read the PR again

"The audience of Sept. 5, 2012, will take place as follows: First of all every one of the named parties must appear. Without prejudice charged, they may be represented by their attorney. The judge, in the first place, will call the parties to reach an agreement. If no agreement exists, parties proceed to file their evidence, proof, documents, witnesses, experts amongst others."



Now, if you understand Chile law, and as an investor, you would check it out before posting something unintelligent....ahem...
the court system is demanding Barrick show proof on THAT DAY ALONE... (this is assuming Barrick doesn't try to save face and settle as stated in the PR) If they cannot provide proof, Chile court system will prosecute THAT DAY... look into it..DD really is worth your time... and shows good sense and intelligence.

The real question you should be asking.. is since the Chilean Barrick executives are in Chile and working on behalf of THE CANADIAN BARRICK...is why..oh why.. has the SEC not halted Barrick as they are trading shares in the open market based on an asset they admitted in Chile to not owning..

Jorge has posted the court docket in Chile before on here.. any investor can go back on Jorge's posts and look it up and check it out yourself.. If you are unable to read Spanish or have access to something as simple as Google Chrome then find another way as the answers are ALL RIGHT THERE.....

Nay-sayers ask for title proof, that Jorge showed publicly when he didn't even have to.. you ask Barrick for it..and they say they don't have to show it, just believe them, that's all...
That in itself is the definition of idiocy.. it's ok for some to demand title proof from MSX and mock when they don't see it in their hands instantly (and by the way, they don't legally have too. Jorge was very generous.) But it's ok to take Barricks side and back them when they don't respond or show title.. Nice try.
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.