Who says that "they" didn't own it? And who says what was, or was not done in this particular case, illegal? And if shareholders think it is illegal, why have they not brought suit? Evidently, none of Walther's attorneys, paid for by those generous shareholder loans, felt that there was any provable case in the matter.
We are now years out from the "alleged" matter. It is almost a certainty that any applicable Statute of Limitations, would have run its course. But, why not hire an attorney and find out?
I know why; because this whole matter is another desperate attempt to generate a market and no attorney has been or will be consulted.
Finally, it is nobody's responsibility to prove themselves innocent, It is the accuser's responsibility to prove them guilty because they are innocent until proven guilty.
The reality is that nothing was done illegally. No court of law has passed judgment on those silly allegations ... nor will it EVER be adjudicated.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
