Replies to post #7625 on SEC Charges Eleven in Stock Manipulation Ring

[QaB2i]

Well Put!

[lentinman]

Mike: Re: Evo

1) I have no predetermined opinion on whether he is guilty or not - just as I have no predetermined opinion on Matt.

2) However, assuming the SEC isn't just playing games, then let's say both are guilty.

3) If EVO is guilty, then you bring up a good point - that being... Is Matt guilty of using IHub for illicit gains? Of course, that can't be answered because A) We don't know if either are guilty, B) He hasn't been specifically accused of it, C) We don't know if he knew EVO was using IHub for illicit gains (assuming he was) and D) We don't know if he got anything in return for EVO using IHub for illicit gains.

So, although your point is closer than anyone else's to making the case that Matt used IHub for illicit gains, it is a long ways from being probable without more information.

No matter what, my main emphasis is that I'm going to err on the side of IHub until proven otherwise. By that I mean the forum itself is not corrupt and the other admin are innocent.

If evidence comes out that undermines that assumption, then fine... Let the chips fall where they may. Until then, innocent until proven guilty.

Len