InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 211
Posts 32176
Boards Moderated 1
Alias Born 06/30/2009

Re: fourkids_9pets post# 221265

Friday, 04/05/2013 8:25:29 PM

Friday, April 05, 2013 8:25:29 PM

Post# of 312016
So that there's no misunderstanding on the final issue, the deletion of the payment instruction language isn't as a result of any mistake on the part of the SEC. It's merely being deleted because the original 10 day payment requirement expired over a week ago. Thank goodness JB made his payment by then or he'd have found himself with a new problem. It would have been totally inappropriate to leave that language in the "new" Final Judgment.

"Finally, the Commission notes that the proposed Amended Final Judgment amends the language of paragraph X by deleting instructions that the Defendanat make the payment of his civil penalty within ten days of the entry of the judgment. That language has been taken out of the proposed Amended Final Judgment because Mr. Bordynuik has already paid the $110, 000 civil penalty."


Also, please note that Mr. Healy was obviously falling on his sword in front of the court in his use of this language:
"It is totally the fault of the Commission, not Mr. Bordynuik, that the five year limitation was not contained in the proposed Final Judgment submitted to the Court and, as a result, in the Final Judgment entered by the Court."

While that may be true, it was the judge's hand that applied his signature to the flawed judgment, not Healey's.

It's morally wrong to allow a sucker to keep his money.......Cuthbert J. Twillie