The only proof I have is that I know several people who received copies of the 'contract'. Realistically, how much more are the people who received the contract copies supposed to do? Should they assume every contract is a fraud and check every fact, every name, every account? Obviously not.
I may think BA is a greedy bunch of SOB's out more for themselves far more than their clients, but that doesn't make them crooks. I believed they were stroking Plant's ego and talking him into spending large sums of money on projects that would never return a nickel. But that's what consultants do. If the client is easily persuaded, a clever consultant can pick their pocket and make the client happy to watch it happen. It still doesn't make them crooks. It just makes them good at what they do.
BA is run by people who have great incentive not to cross any lines that cause them legal concerns. Now that's not to say there aren't gray areas. And I would be very curious to know whether or not BA knew about CKYS's outstanding share position as Plant was selling hundreds of millions of shares to replace the earnings he was lying about. That info may come out at one of the civil trials. We'll see. Maybe a case can be made that they knew or should have known. But as far as the proposition that they engineered or knowingly participated in the fraud, I reject that assertion without reservation.
Far too much risk, too little return. Even a moron would think three times before trying this. BA isn't populated by morons.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
