There's only a small blurb on insider trading, and I think other statutes like reg FD are more appropriate, but it states that
The SEC has long advocated an "equal access theory" with regard to 10b-5, arguing that anyone who has material, non-public information must either disclose that information or abstain from trading.
Of course it is not so clear whether "disclosing" it here is adequate or not. Or where do you disclose it?
It also says, however,
In order for Rule 10b-5 to be invoked, there must be intentional fraud or deceit by the party charged with the violation.
In the case of retep, where he was induced to buy or sell securities based on another poster telling him that that other poster went to Africa when he did not, is clearly fraudulent, imo.
retep might want to read this:
The defendant need not be the seller of the stock - any person who fraudulently induces a person to purchase any stock may be held liable.
But none of what DK has e-mailed is fraudulent, EXCEPT, potentially the omission of T-gas if t-gas was found:
The rule prohibits any act or omission resulting in fraud or deceit in connection with the purchase or sale of any security.
EHP/tryoty might be interested to know that as well, if PN lied to him about ERHC's ability to execute due to the investigations.
What is good for me is this:
If the defendant had prefaced remarks about the health of the company with a disclaimer that he might be wrong, then his subsequent statements can not be held against him.
And that's why I like to say that the above could be completely wrong, and that I am not a lawyer.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
