MHHC Enterprises Inc (MHHC)

[jrf30]

Blue,

"The one thing that isn't exactly correct is that your post is not mentioning it is a trial about ALLEGED fraud. Not a fraud trial"

It is ALWAYS an "alleged" crime, not a crime. Even when that lunatic shot the congresswoman here in Arizona, the trial was for the alleged shooter to go to trial. People saw him do it, video was all over showing him do it, they caught him at the scene within seconds, they tackled him right there as he did it, and yet he was the alleged shooter until he was convicted. THEN he became the shooter.

I think it is stupid, as the rights of criminals is protected so well nowadays that we can't even in the paper call him the shooter, but must use the word "alleged", but it is the way it is. So it will ALWAYS be an alleged criminal count, and they will always be alleged fraudsters, until a conviction (IF one is obtained). by the way, it is only in the last 10 - 20 years that papers and others had to start using the words alleged before a trial. there was a shooter of Ronald Reagan, a shooter of John Lennon, a shooter of MLK, and an alleged shooter of congresswoman Giffords. It's a new change in the legal system to now take what is in the court (innocent until proven guilty) and expound it in the papers and elsewhere when talking about the shooter.

Just the way the legal system goes. So I don't think you can make much of the difference between a fraud trial and an an alleged fraud trial. they are the same thing. It is a fraud trial where they are going to review and rule on the allegations of fraud. That makes it an alleged trial AND a trial both one and the same. Make sense?