Replies to post #7968 on Cat House

[Makamai]

Excellent advice 9B - I hope folks are listening. Like you said, the Judge needs more time to get up to speed on the details. Once enlightened, he will see the reality of what's behind the Joe/Kwan/Dean side and make an appropriate ruling. I'm confident that Jeff's legal team is up to the task.

Makamai

[texkengold]

YO BRUCE GREAT POST AS USUAL...
My only affirmation of the suggested "Friend of the court idea" is in this revealing LIGHT.
We do not know if here will be any factual evidence presented to the court about the past two years of daily conversation of the passing around of FACTS and Misuse of Ihub by certain company officials.. SHOULD THE COURT be presented, by the plantiff, or the defendants, ANY Ihub notes, messages and other items deemed important to the case, then there could be a necessity for "friend of the court"
Ihub is a big part of commonshareholders and others daily life!
some are very experienced in this life......2+2 does usually = 4
AGAIN, El Bruce i really value your knowledge that is presented here on tha HUB and thank you...

[Anvil]

B, not going to rub it in, but give it a break.

[Jim01]

Spot-On IMO, brother Bruce!

Thanks,

Jim

.

[crazy horse 0]

" "Friend of the court" I would strongly suggest that those advocating this to drop it"

I respect you as a poster 9bruce. Your critique is spot on. I think many of us including myself who want to help end this mess have to understand that we are nearing the end soon and to let things play out. Thanks for kicking us a bit LOL, I will let the process play out I am sure the Atty's for Jeff know what they are doing.

9bruce Your Post


Important, after reading thru the posts on opinions

and critique of the results of the hearing on the 26th, there is a couple of things which need to be said
regardless of popular acceptance.
Jeff's deposition was not necessarily lacking, and remember has not been seen in it's amended form, so any criticism of it is as unfair as the premature publishing of it was in the first place.
One has to bear in mind the judge was only familiar with the overall picture and not familiar with the depth of the details. Next time around he will be far more involved with actual circumstance.

Jeff and his Atts., did exactly as they should have done. Jeff was low key and not unrealistically demanding.
Team Jeff knew knew the other side were over confident and also knew the judge was liable to be confused
as to why all the fuss over so little, AND Team Jeff also knew they couldn't possibly enlighten him in the time available. Pure logic! SO what's best? Status Quo for a decision which will be made after enlightenment June 7!

The preferred are the main crux of the whole exercise with regard to this hearing and this, it would seem is
something that will make or break the whole thing. Team Jeff are 90% ahead on that score, in the judges eyes I am sure.

I have heard the suggestion of bringing up of an amicus curiae, which it seems all know the meaning of by now.
I would strongly suggest that those advocating this to drop it. Besides any other reason, there is nobody on this or the other blogs that have enough verifiable information to issue a "Friend of the court" letter to the Judge.

First, Team Jeff are fully capable of the undertaking they are in the process with. Second, without first hand knowledge, it could backfire and be perceived in many different lights by the judge and be interference with what Team Jeff are planning. If they need the assistance they can easily ask for it and we all know there will be plenty
of "enlightened" takers.

The last thing I would like to say: There is a lot more to legal proceedings of this nature than meets the eye. bandying around criticism and solutions using legal vernacular, require very solid verified information to be of value. Reading the nuances of what is known and of what can be expected, requires first hand knowledge and a lot of experience.
B.

[crazy horse 0]

9bruce may interest you


Illuminati - Plans by State From FEMA Camps To Nukes 6/3/11

[packerfan9]

9Bruce good post. I think some who are not familiar with legal discovery process don't realize they call it discovery for a reason. It the process to see what each side would present if case ever goes to trial. That each time a depo is taken of someone can change how next one goes etc. They discover things by seeing what each side says. IMO the judge will eventually learn more about why they have this case. Why one side dilutes started by Dean and stole so much. That this is the reason why Jeff is fighting. He doesn't want to see Joe do more of what Dean did. The judge has ways to go and so does discovery to understand everything. Once the judge does IMO I do not see how judge will side with Joe as CEO. Maybe the right move is to call for shareholder vote for who we want as BOD and CEO. It won't be Joe and he knows it. He has to remove Jeff who was CEO before Joe. It's Joe trying to remove Jeff so burden is on him to prove is case.