|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Jun 9, 2016 6:42:32 GMT -5
Oh Geezzzzzz UncleMelvie's back ??
14 hours ago Maya said: about an hour ago
From Paltalk:"Welcome all Bona Fide CMKM Shareholders..Des came by ...1000% confidant..Acca can't talk....MEL is extremely excited and happy for us."
29 minutes ago Updated:"Welcome all Bona Fide CMKM Shareholders...Des came by...1000% confident..Acca can't talk..."
24 minutes ago ANOTHER CHANGE! LOL :"Welcome all Bona Fide CMKM Shareholders....Des came by 6-7-16...1000% confident in our success.....Acca can't speak to us right now...."
unclemelvie_2: the days of foolin are over
tapped out: mel give us a clue when we hear something official?
unclemelvie_2: tapped out. imo we will hear somthing official before trial
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Jun 9, 2016 17:53:15 GMT -5
2 hours ago edgeof2015 said:
I just talked to MELVIN in Paltalk.
He plainly stated "HE HAS BEEN TOLD BY A RELIABLE SOURCE (A LADY) WE WILL HEAR OFFICIAL NEWS ON OLD CMKX BEFORE AUG 9 TRIAL DATE".
He did not want to characterize if it would be good or bad news, but since DES is out today saying he is 1000% confident on CMKX and ACCA can't talk , meaning imo we are close to SOMETHIGN BIG, then connect the dots...
2 hours ago edgeof2015 said:
MELVIN said in PALTALK he has not spoke to DES for 12 years so sounds clear to me MELVIN and DES have different SOURCES.
about an hour ago edgeof2015 said:
MELVIN characterized the coming OFFICIAL NEWS on OLD CMKX by stating "IT WILL MAKE A WORLD OF DIFFERENCE IN UNDERSTANDING WHAT HAS BEEN HAPPENING WITH OLD CMKX AFTER THESE PAST 12 YEARS".
That's what I heard him say in Paltalk.
|
|
|
Post by Display Name on Jun 9, 2016 19:04:21 GMT -5
There's no way any trial is going to happen in Aug. Everyone knows the date will continue to be pushed out. If there is anything to be said might as well spill it.
|
|
|
Post by cmkx4ever on Jun 9, 2016 20:43:38 GMT -5
This is so funny, he misses the April 15 date so we let him pick another one with open arms. But I guess they know we have no choice!
|
|
|
Post by ivegotanace on Jun 9, 2016 22:25:00 GMT -5
This is so funny, he misses the April 15 date so we let him pick another one with open arms. But I guess they know we have no choice! Well an alternate selected date is better than no date to look forward to IMO. :-)
|
|
|
Post by cmkx4ever on Jun 9, 2016 22:40:16 GMT -5
Oh I definitely agree Ivegot, so how many years have we been going on with alternative dates ? Question Ivegot is it possible that these alternative dates actually might of hurt us, maybe passified us not to do something when we might of had some leverage to do something just to sit back and wait for the rumor ?
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Jun 23, 2016 8:50:47 GMT -5
misterhandsome DIAMOND MINER Post by misterhandsome on 23 hours ago
I think there are two ways to look at this case.
Approach 1: its part of a plan. Many have advanced this theory. That this case is for mere public consumption but that it is paralleling negotiations which are much bigger in scope and scale. Some go so far as to even state - in their opinion - that there will not be a trial at all. There will be plea deal or I believe I even read a small minority view that it could even get dismissed but it really doesn't matter because it is just the visible proxy war if you will.
Approach 2: the trial is legitimate.
If you subscribe to approach 1, then the delays - or I should the bases for the delays - are largely irrelevant. They are germane in that they demonstrate that the negotiations are not quite final. But the point is, if this is your belief then the competency hearings and "I need glasses" and "give me more library time" are all just part of the show.
Now if you subscribe to approach 2, then you have to understand that while the overall time that this case has taken is above the norm, many of the things we have seen are not necessarily that unique to what you'd see. Lets start with Edwards extradition. How long did that take? I think if you look around the web you can find countless examples of struggles in which it took years, sometimes decades, to get someone back to a particular place to try them. I wont go into every delay in this case but I can tell you that the last thing any of us should want is a trial for it only to be appealed. And it is not all that uncommon that when the defendant is getting old that they can be deemed competent today and seemingly lost next month. Has anyone on this board dealt with a loved one with dementia? It is not a static condition - meaning they people who have it can have good days and bad days. Heck that happens even with aging parents.
Also remember that the right to a speedy trial is a right the US constitution guarantees to the accused not victims. So in a ironic twist of fate, the best people who can advance that argument are the other defendants. "Hey judge, I get you are in a quandary with old man river Edwards, but we got rights too so lets get the show on the road." But we will shall see. Again as a shareholder I want to see this thing play out and have a family to care for and some pretty insurmountable bills staring us down as a family, but as with most things in life, I try to worry about the things within my actual control and let the good Lord take care of the rest. I suppose what I am trying to say is assume (ie, mentally prepare) that it will get delayed but pray that it comes to an end.
Hope everyone is well MH
22 hours ago portrush said: Exactly the point the others are making--especially Turino.
pr
misterhandsome DIAMOND MINER Yes and they are the ones, as criminal defendants, with "standing" to make the argument - unfortunately we are not. The fear for the DOJ is that if they proceed against the others and leave Edwards out it creates what is commonly referred to as the empty chair defense. "Hey it wasn't us, it was this other guy who should be sitting at the table, he was the main culprit and we were duped just as much as the victims" It is why generally prosecutors want to try defendants together, while the defense generally wants to try and have separate trials. Plus it is much harder for you as a defendant to assert your 5th amendment right or to not take the stand if there is another defendant in the same trial who just pointed to you as the one committing a crime. Without having any knowledge of the evidence, I have no way of knowing how significant this is or is not.
Remember another huge practical problem is hearsay - a statement in court about something that was said outside of court that is being asserted for the truth of the matter. One exception is a statement by a party. So if Edwards is not there is could make proving the case more difficult. Again, I have no idea if such is the case. But my point is everyone assumes there has to be ample evidence of the crime - my guess there probably is. But having evidence and entering evidence in court are two very different things.
In any event, at this point, lets hope Turino pushes the issue and the show is made to go on!!!
MH
15 hours ago sokr61 said: So if Edwards is separated and the others point the finger at him they can all go free...and the plot thickens on whether he even exists...
misterhandsome DIAMOND MINER maybe it will be up to the fact finder (jury or if a bench trial the judge). The point is that it is more difficult to prosecute is all. As it relates to Edwards he will remain in custody which really is ostensibly jail but not as bad I suppose as some of the max security facilities. But I would suspect all of these people to be sent to a "club fed" type jail like Madoff went to. But if he's not competent then they can't try him that I am aware of. You can try people in abstentia but that's usually in circumstances when the defendant has fled for example so not sure that would be available.
|
|
|
Post by vulcanized crawler on Jun 23, 2016 8:56:33 GMT -5
i got it. they will pay us billions each, then the fiat dollar will collapse to zero and we will have bundles of fiat dollars worth nothing and the world is in chaos to boot. oh yea and melvin and acca will sing ''bad to the bone'' and whats her name will play ''here comes the sun''
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Jun 28, 2016 14:53:01 GMT -5
STR8 says ..... This is what is going on........
#2260110 STR8 3 hours ago
Little Tman,
WHY would anyone want to call a person who is known for speaking out 3 sides of his head? little tman why do you defend this type of known behavior ?
WHY little tman is it so obvious to so many that to this day you continue to cover the backside of this triple talking CEO ? What exactly are YOUR motives, as if we couldnt see ?
You call Gus Jarvis a liar ? That in my opinion tells me and so many others who know, Gus has been pro CMKX and finding out the TRUTH since day 1. And yet you sit in your arm chair quarterback position constantly deflecting / defending a oh so busy CEO that triple talks ALL the time to keep this cover up going ....
Dont worry , as you can tell the lights of TRUTH are starting to shine brighter and brighter on all the thingyroaches that are one by one starting to scurry for the cover of darkness as they know the brightest light of all is about to come on.
Shareholders " the real shareholders " are starting to see the light !! And very soon the triple talker may find a very bright light on him, what do you think he will do then ? What will all his minions do when the raid comes out and sprays the big roach? Yup you got it they will have one less leader roach to follow. WHY doesnt the triple talker just release the names and stop making up more lies to cover up all the others he has told ?
"One important note to clear up any confusion - I know the names of the two brokers who cleared through Jeffries ex-clearing, and supplied those names to FINRA. However, the information is so sensitive that Kevin West does not know who they are - so he answered truthfully to you. I will give you the names as soon as the Wells Fargo case is settled. Thanks again!" SK
"The names of the two brokers have been revealed during discovery with regard to the Wells Fargo lawsuit we are engaged in. Kevin had no way of knowing, and still does not know. I have been asked by our attorneys to keep the names concealed as confidential information. However, I did reveal the names to the FINRA Ombudsman, but have very little hope that FINRA will act on the information." I presume someone is trying to find fault with Kevin West because he does not know, but he certainly cannot be faulted for not knowing this information. Frankly – he is better off not knowing at this point." SK
"Of course Bill knows who the brokers are now, he claims it is from discovery in the Wells Fargo case." SK
So seagull beyond any doubt SK and BF know the names of the brokers, if they said they didn't they would be liars right?
"The note pad that I wrote the names on is in storage, and it would take days to locate it, and I do not remember one of the names, as it was a broker that I had never heard of." SK
"I asked Bill Frizzell if he knew the broker’s names, and he did not know, but did some research, and came up with two possible but different names than the ones I was given by the other law firm. I called the other lawyer, and he did not remember telling me any names. So, at this point I am not really sure that anyone outside of JEFF knows the true identity of the brokers." SK
|
|
|
Post by cmkx4ever on Jun 28, 2016 16:18:18 GMT -5
are you talking about Nevwest ?
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Jul 4, 2016 14:57:48 GMT -5
cmkxtoo DIAMOND JEDI yesterday at 12:27pm nada999999, seagull, and 1 more like this Post by cmkxtoo on yesterday at 12:27I am wandering Who is paying Transferonline to hold our certs? DOJ ? SEC ? FBI ? Homeland Security ? Acca ? Is it coming from our trust ? Any thoughts ? Fasttrackermo DIAMOND MINER yesterday at 1:05pm goforbroke, seagull, and 3 more like this Post by Fasttrackermo on yesterday at 1:05pmThat's the million dollar question that SK doesn't want people to dig into. I asked it during a Paltalk session, and he got all upset that I kept pushing. The excuse is they make money off people transferring shares into other certs to split for other family members. Yeah that should equal the multiples of thousands of dollars per month, that they should be charging. Now, everyone go put their heads back in the sand. Fast. 19 hours ago sptrader said: Transferonline no longer charges CMKX a monthly fee to be our Transfer agent...(SK arranged it, as I understand), any transfers or divisions of your certs will require YOU to pay a fee. You should be holding your certs in Your possession.. SK has replied to this question, dozens of times, on his webnars... More realistic answer & outlook by Fasttrackermo..... wouldn't be the first or last time we shareholders have been handed unbelievable, unrealistic answers. I truly doubt there are many people, if any, twisting & a turnin' anything in this stock. Nah..... sptrader's repeat of SK's answer is extremely hard to believe. How about trying again??
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Jul 4, 2016 19:58:29 GMT -5
cmkxtoo DIAMOND JEDI yesterday at 12:27pm nada999999, seagull, and 1 more like this Post by cmkxtoo on yesterday at 12:27I am wandering Who is paying Transferonline to hold our certs? DOJ ? SEC ? FBI ? Homeland Security ? Acca ? Is it coming from our trust ? Any thoughts ? Fasttrackermo DIAMOND MINER yesterday at 1:05pm goforbroke, seagull, and 3 more like this Post by Fasttrackermo on yesterday at 1:05pmThat's the million dollar question that SK doesn't want people to dig into. I asked it during a Paltalk session, and he got all upset that I kept pushing. The excuse is they make money off people transferring shares into other certs to split for other family members. Yeah that should equal the multiples of thousands of dollars per month, that they should be charging. Now, everyone go put their heads back in the sand. Fast. 19 hours ago sptrader said: Transferonline no longer charges CMKX a monthly fee to be our Transfer agent...(SK arranged it, as I understand), any transfers or divisions of your certs will require YOU to pay a fee. You should be holding your certs in Your possession.. SK has replied to this question, dozens of times, on his webnars... More realistic answer & outlook by Fasttrackermo..... wouldn't be the first or last time we shareholders have been handed unbelievable, unrealistic answers. I truly doubt there are many people, if any, twisting & a turnin' anything in this stock. Nah..... sptrader's repeat of SK's answer is extremely hard to believe. How about trying again?? AND then we have this........?? Interesting enough to repeatfisty DIAMOND DIGGER fisty AvatarPost by fisty on 7 hours agoHere is an item of interest, if you go to Transfer Online's website and search their clients CMKM Diamonds is not on their list of clients.
Please address this Steve Kirkpatrick.
Thank you in advance.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ . Post by silverbulletgirl on 11 minutes agofisty you are right.....Our Clients Capital Brewery Company, Inc. Wisconsin, United States Capital Financial Global, Inc. Utah, United States CardioGenics Holdings, Inc. ON, Canada CATALYST RESOURCE GROUP, INC. Florida, United States Ceelox, Inc. KS , United States Cell-nique Corp CT, United States CenterPointe Community Bank OR , United States Certified Inc Florida, United States Certuity, Inc Delaware, United States Chain Bridge Bancorp, Inc. Virginia, United States Ciralight Global, Inc. California, United States City Central Acquisition Corporation New York, United States Clatsop Community Bank Oregon, United States Coastal American Corporation Virginia, United States Coastal Financial Corporation Washington, United States Commencement Bank Washington, United States Community First Bancorporation South Carolina, United States Conihasset Capital Partners, Inc. MA, United States Converde Energy USA Inc Ontario, Canada Crednology Holding Corp GA , United States Critic Clothing, Inc. NY, United States CU Bancorp California, United States Cyclone Power Technologies, Inc Florida, United States www.transferonline.com/AboutUs/ClientList/CPost by silverbulletgirl on 7 minutes ago
HOUSTON we have a problem
|
|
cano1
Dr. Of Diamonds
Posts: 211
|
Post by cano1 on Jul 4, 2016 21:07:32 GMT -5
Don't worry SK is going to find another logic explanation!! they must be working on that right now! woop!
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Jul 6, 2016 11:14:55 GMT -5
14 hours ago blackknight60 said: I have physical certs. Some say "for this distribution only" and some dont but I dont give a shyt about what is going on with transfer online. They dont control my certs. When its payday they or some other accredited brokerage will handle the transactions. Period. Relax IMO
transfer online does not control the destiny of your cert.
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Jul 9, 2016 7:37:40 GMT -5
7 hours ago guymccool said: Monday July 11, 2016 ..... Status hearing for Edwards and others:
Questions:
1) Is this still set to "go" on Monday? 2) How many days will it take for us to find out the judge's decision on "GO" or "DELAY". 3) Anyone have any ideas about what Edwards could request yet ANOTHER delay for? 4) How many of you think there will be another delay? (I remember there was a poll posted, but it was quite awhile ago). Since we are very close....it would be interesting to repeat the poll again??? 5) Will Edwards get another delay but the rest of the miscreants go to trial in early August? 6) If there is another delay....will it just be 1 or 2 months or delay into early 2017 or even later?
I sure do hope that the judge is REALLY on our side and decides to get this over... forthwith! Like they say....."Justice delayed is justice denied".....and I think this situation, with all of the ridiculous delays...is beginning to really warrant the "justice delayed is justice denied" statement.
Just thought I would throw all of these questions out there for incipient debate....because we are so close to Monday July 11, 2016.
Thank you all for your participation by sharing your thoughts, opinions and DD. Guy
flyingj DIAMOND JEDI MASTER There will never be a Trial. All the real evidence is sealed. Unfortunately it will likely get delayed AGAIN.
Flyingj
|
|