The VERY FACT that he (assuming Wilma's story accurately reflects the phone call discussion topics) conveyed MATERIAL information in such a manner is blatant disregard for SEC/FINRA regulations.
You simply CANNOT tell one investor something while leading the masses down the primrose path. It flies in the face of all rules surrounding dissemination of material data. I don't know about you, but I'd say with certainty that the timeliness of the China deals are supremely material.
What Wilma needs to do is contact the SEC, get deposed, write a statement of fact(s), and offer up any evidence of the phone conversations that she has which could help her/others recover losses or portions of losses going forward.
I've no reason to not believe Wilma was told what she claims to have been told. I have every reason to suspect she was taken advantage of by a con man who's simply running his con and told her all sorts of enticing fractions of a whole in an effort to take her money. I believe he knowingly, purposefully, and maliciously targeted her as soon as he accepted the call upon identifying her as a "mark" to take money from.