Replies to post #268043 on Plastic2Oil Inc (PTOI)

[arvitar]

PART III – AGREED FACTS (John W. Bordynuik's admissions to being a crook)

A. OVERVIEW

5. During the years 2008 to 2011 (the “Distribution Period”) Bordynuik raised money for JBI and/or its predecessor entities.

6. In doing so he caused JBI to raise a total of approximately $11.2 million U.S. from 433 Ontario investors through activities which breached Section 53 of the Act and which were not in compliance with Ontario securities law.

7. During part of the Distribution Period, Bordynuik caused to be prepared and signed financial statements of JBI in which JBI’s financial position was misstated by approximately $10 million as a result of attributing an excessive value to one of the company’s assets, namely certain media credits. This misstatement was first made in JBI’s third quarter financial statements for the quarter ended September 30, 2009 and contained in its Form 10-Q. It was repeated in JBI’s 2009 year-end financial statements contained in its Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009. Both documents were filed with the Securities Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and are collectively referred to as “the Financial Statements”.

8. JBI reported in the Financial Statements that it owned media credits having a valuation of $9,997,134. This valuation was erroneous, and was not in compliance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles or “GAAP”.

9. Bordynuik certified that, based on his knowledge, the Financial Statements fairly presented in all material respects the financial condition of the registrant, JBI. In fact the Financial Statements did not do so.

10. Monies were raised from Ontario investors during the time that the Financial Statements contained the erroneously high valuation for the media credits.

11. The media credits were eventually written off in their entirety in JBI’s amended form 10-K filed on July 9, 2010. The proper valuation of the media credits under GAAP was nil.

12. While Bordynuik was raising funds on behalf of JBI, he established a trust for the benefit of his two minor children (the “Childrens’ Trust”), which was subject to a formal trust agreement.

13. Bordynuik caused shares of JBI or John Bordynuik Inc. to be irrevocably settled on his mother as trustee of the Childrens’ Trust. The Childrens’ Trust held those shares in a securities account at RBC Dominion Securities (“DS”).

14. Having irrevocably settled JBI shares in trust Bordynuik then directed his mother as trustee to transfer the shares out of the trust account at DS to a number of transferees whom he designated, contrary to the terms of the formal agreement governing the Childrens’ Trust.

15. Bordynuik adopted this practice, which violated the terms of the Childrens’ Trust, so as to put free trading and not restricted stock, in the hands of third parties.

16. Bordynuik used the Childrens’ Trust in part as a reservoir of JBI shares which could be distributed to others, including Bespoke Growth Partners, in aid of acquiring a listing on the AMEX or NASDAQ exchanges. Bordynuik’s misuse of the Childrens’ Trust for this purpose was conduct contrary to the public interest.

http://www.osc.gov.on.ca/documents/en/Proceedings-SOA/soa_20140401_bordynuikjw.pdf

[jimmenknee]

In an alternate reality where a preferred subset of data, or the venue, and/or the adversary is the focus-- that line of reasoning may make sense...

... however, in the real world where the whole body is looked at in proper context it does not.

Let's review reality:
1. John's use of the trust fund to distribute free trading shares while simultaneously declaring "The company has no free trading shares to sell" is technically accurate in the alternate reality; but any reasonable person would say it is sleazy in the real world. Equivalent to defining "is"

2. John's hiring of Bespoke and their revealed roles of aiding in uplisting and acting as Investor Relations may afford some plausible deniability of their role in the Stock Promotion in an alternate reality; but any journeyman OTC trader understands the difference between promotion at the surface and underground. Equivalent to "slight of hand"

3. Using a United States SEC settlement structure to define what the Canadian OSC structure should look like is ridiculous in any reality. Equivalent to comparing "apples to oranges" because they are both fruit

4. John's e-mails filed as exhibits in one lawsuit are just that-- John's written words. John's deposition filed in another lawsuit is just that-- John's spoken words. The facts agreed to in the settlement combined with the denial is just that-- legal-eeze affording the defendant enough legal comfort to accept the agreement.

Combined with John's facebook and other e-mails, as well as PRs released while he was the CEO, any reasonable person in the real world should read these pieces of "evidence" and come to the conclusion that John has lied and has been deceptive on multiple occasions to the detriment of unwitting retail investors :-(

[Artiztic1]

Caught RED handed again!

So many lies, so little time.

Neither JB or JBI ever held a patent relating to data recovery, but that didn't stop them from saying that they did, in fact they filed that bullshit with the SEC:

"We also hold a patent relating to our Data Business for the recovery of tape information."

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1381105/000121390012001206/f10k2011_jbi.htm


However, during his testimony (see below) JB finally admits to not having a Data Patent.


A. We were going through a sole source

process with NASA, which took a lot of time.

122 Q. Yes. Is it a patented technology?

A. Yes. We filed for patent protection.

It is not patented yet, but we filed for patent protection.

Nonsense. There has yet to be a single shred of evidence of a single lie.