InvestorsHub Logo

MorningLightMountain

03/30/15 8:28 PM

#280482 RE: Steady_T #280481

I guess in the bigger scheme of things, all the blatant bullshitting about $10 oil from any old crappy plastic using a secret catalyst was a bit more important to shareholders than all the legal subtleties of the wordings in "judgements".....

why people keep arguing about all this is a mystery to me, when the writing has been on the wall for some time now......the major point is the entire thing was one big steaming pile, designed to funnel money upwards to a select few, and nothing will change that simple fact.....

kaymeyer

03/30/15 8:30 PM

#280483 RE: Steady_T #280481

Not even remotely. This was not a civil dispute along the lines of one entity or individual seeking relief against another. The SEC is a Federal regulatory agency with enforcement authority. Bordyniuk and JBI were charged with fraud, consented to the judgement, and received fines, permanent injunctions, and financial industry bars. Bordyniuk is extremely lucky that this was not handed over to the Feds for criminal prosecution. It certainly qualified.

Rev Kilgore Mullet

03/31/15 7:42 AM

#280491 RE: Steady_T #280481

It also says there was no finding of fact.



That is not at all what it means to waive findings of fact. One very effective method of waiving findings of fact is simply not to show up for trial. The defendants, Bordy & JBI, agreed not to contest any findings of fact and agreed to waive any right of appeal based on contesting the findings of facts.

Essentially, Bordy and JBI pleaded "no contest" to the SEC's fraud allegations and consented to the sanctions contained in the judgement.