Quote Originally Posted by Enumerate View Post
Where are the facts?

Clearly, the SFO has a position on all of this. However, why is this basic "fact collecting" occurring under an order of Statutory Management? The Statutory Manager has presented little more than hearsay - heavily qualified with "mays" or " appears".

It is also interesting to note that no formal charges have been laid.

I don't have a copy of Allan Hubbard's journals. How can I respond to statements you make when you yourself have no evidence.

You are, at best, amusing yourself with idle speculation.

The matters that we can comment on - such as questions as to "why this process is being conducted under statutory management?" and "surely these matters could be dealt with under the Securities Act or the Companies Act?" - your contributions are, frankly, less than insightful.
Don't try the old trick and stunt of deflecting attention of what AH has done (as now verified - clear evidence is the operative word - by the SM) - borrowing money from the public and then, lending the money to himself via related entities. He DENIES it. Then, tries to defend it as kosher.

Look at the huge increase in related party transactions in 2008/2009 in SCF - AH would have you believe it never happened as well.

SM may be right, it may be wrong - that's a separate argument.