Replies to post #96822 on Decision Diagnostics Corp (DECN)

[IPwatcher]

On consideration, there is a 3rd and 4th possibility:

(iii) Is that is that Herzog has finally got fed up with Berman ignoring his counsel and thereby instructing him in a way makes him look like a clown who is incapable of mounting a credible defence (on the basis that he is trying to defend the indefensible in an impossible bind).

(iv) Is that Herzog has come into possession of information or an admission that has convinced him of Berman's certain LEGAL guilt, and he is therefore unable to full-fill the requisites of a defence counsel where a not-guilty plea has been entered.

In most legal jurisdictions a defence lawyer must believe in the possibility (however slim, or on whatever tenuous legal grounds) of the technical innocence of their client in order to credibly argue in front of a court that they should be acquitted, rather than entering a guilty plea. Could it be that Berman now fails this test with Herzog? (Note there is a difference between 'factual' guilt and 'legal' guilt.). For example, if Berman is asking Herzog to lie under oath on his behalf, that would be enough to sever the ties!

[I ll be back]

IP, good eye.

I haven't taken the time or interest to dig into the weeds at this point, since I have no financial losses here. My only interest was to let others know (based on past exposure) who KB and Barb were in the real world.

Regarding your two options. There is a third possibility.

Given KB ego don't be surprised if Herzog and him parted ways due to Berman an unwillingness to listen to reason. After watching how Berman went after the SEC, it is very possible that Herzog became no longer interested in representing a mad man.

That being said, I believe your first option of NO MONEY "may" have played a key role. However, once a firm is engaged, it is not uncommon to carry the client over the finish line without getting paid. It is difficult for a firm to legally walk away when their client runs out of money.