Very Interesting Posts By "oldepro"/Steve Walker

Consider this...

Any day now, "Crazy" Al Hodges will file a response to the Motion to Dismiss. Is he crazy. YES!!! Crazy like a fox. When this is all said and done and someone goggles Al Hodges, up comes World Reports, Two minutes and the average person says ' wow, what a nutcase", and loses interest. Will Al Care? I doubt it. He will be a hero to Thousands and have a boatload of cash. World Reports is the ultimate smoke and mirrors.
Why do I say these things? Here's why.

Al needs to convince Judge Selna this should proceed to trial. If he can't do that, he really is crazy. So let's assume he does convince the Judge, we go to trial right? Not so fast there folks, a few things will happen first.

www.courtinfo.ca.gov/rules/index.cfm?title=three&linkid=rule3_1380

www.ilr.cornell.edu/alliance/resources/basics/court_programs.html

Did you catch this?
Usually, attorneys trained by the court serve as evaluators; in some courts, including the Southern District of California, magistrate
judges conduct ENE sessions.

So a Magistrate Judge will conduct the talks.
www.lectlaw.com/def2/m057.htm

But Al is representing only the 7 plaintiffs you say. Not so buckaroo. From Al's 4-27-10 interim update:

• The Bivens action which I have filed not only sets forth the facts as I know them, it seeks to become a class-action on behalf of all shareholders.

• At this instant in time however, I literally represent only the seven named plaintiffs; as a result, I am constrained in the types and extent of information which I can provide to putative members of the class.

• In the unlikely event that this litigation continues forward, a motion will be filed with the Court requesting that a class be certified. If granted, at that point I will, presumably, be appointed by the Court to continue acting as counsel for the class; thereafter, the Court will be required to approve any and all settlements, and others matters.

Below is what Al asked for in his original filing:

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs seek judgment as follows:

1. For a declaratory judgment, pursuant to Title 28 U.S.C., Sections 2201 and 2202, which determines and declares the validity of the contentions of the parties set forth in Paragraphs 52 to 54, above;

2. For a judgment for compensatory, general and special damages in the amounts prayed for in the Second Cause of action set forth above;

3. For a judgment for punitive damages in an amount sufficient to punish and to make examples of these Defendants, and to deter these Defendants and others from engaging in similar conduct;

4. For an award of reasonable attorney’s fees, expenses and costs of suit incurred herein; and:

5. For such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.

Dated: January 10, 2010.

viewer.zoho.com/docs/paKdda

So, if there is a trust, this is how it will be released, IMO. And I'm sure the terms of the "settlement" will be confidential.

If the case goes to trial, we are entitled to a jury trial.
biotech.law.lsu.edu/map/ConstitutionalTorts-BivensActions.html

Now, in case you missed it, in the CMKM/Edwards and Angel case they agreed to full disclosure for both sides this week. My, my now that could get interesting.

The TRUTH will out.

BTW, does Al have proof of naked short selling in CMKX? Absolutely. I handed it to him personally. But guess what? I think he already had it. My evidence was sent to Assistant United States Attorney Timothy S. Vasquez, Inspector General Kotz, Robert Khurzami, Mary Shapiro and President Obama.



Subject:
Naked short selling

To:
President Barack Obama
October 7, 2009
Dear Mr. President,

Once again, I reach out to you in regards to naked short selling. The following is almost too bizarre to be true, but I assure you it is. It involves CMKM Diamonds. You may be familiar with this mess. www.cmkmdiamondsinc.com/. After the DOJ indictment, I contacted a Canadian shareholder, who had tracked the volume with me, when CMKX was still trading. We have concrete evidence that shows the SEC and the DOJ volume numbers are false. In May 2005, Christopher Wall of the SEC Los Angeles office testified the average daily volume was between 1 and 2 billion shares. In their recent indictment, the DOJ used the same numbers. Mr. Wall stated, under oath, his numbers came from Bloomberg News. Our evidence shows an average of 3.5 billion shares traded every day. One day, in Dec. 2004, the stock traded 39 BILLION shares. Why are there conflicting numbers? It's a computer glitch. If a company is using a 32 bit system, when the counter hits 2,147,483,647 it resets and counts backward to zero, then starts again. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2147483647.... We believe Bloomberg was using a 32 bit system.

When we discovered this flaw, I contacted SEC Inspector General Kotz. I offered to send the evidence to them. That was two weeks ago, I have had no reply. At the same time, I contacted Timothy Vasquez, the DOJ Nevada attorney prosecuting the CMKM defendants. He said he was "intrigued" by the evidence. He told me the FBI and the IRS officers investigating the case would contact me. He also, asked I have my Canadian counterpart contact him personally. This morning my Canadian friend told me he has called Mr. Vasquez 8 times, with no return call. I have yet to hear from the FBI or the IRS.

Mr. President, we have evidence that confirms naked short selling in CMKX. We alert the proper authorities and they do nothing. As an American, I am completely ashamed. I told my friend in Canada we would get results. He said Steve "your system is so corrupt, I doubt they will do anything.' Looks like I was wrong.