RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:PYR Synopsisdevelopbc wrote: PRESUMPTION OF INNONENCE is RIGHT under the Canada Charter
As stated...they were absolutely evil fraudsters from the beginning to the end so they lied throughout. Your parallels of totally offside for any new reader to make assumptions that are these cases similiar!? NO THEY ARE NOT...NOT EVEN CLOSE!
Those you quoted were absolute evil fraudsters that stole massive money. What Peter did was for the whole world to see ..AMF claims it was breach of fiduciary duty and conflict of interest. NOT stealing or defrauding innocent people.
Meanwhile....
“The Company will welcome its day in court where we are confident the truth will prevail and the motives behind those who supported this outcome will be exposed.”
Each of Mr. Pascali, Mr. Curleigh and the Company denies the allegations against him/it, believes they are without merit, and will vigorously defend himself/itself. The operations of the Company continue as usual.
On the outside chance the ruling stands(which I HIGHLY DOUBT) - the max exposure $550k to PYR etc... - I have no issues. The company will continue it's objectives and operate accordingly. I FULLY believe truth will PREVAIL!
Meanwhile team FUD bashers want everyone to take their eyes off of PYR's incredible tech and engineering of DROSRITE, TORCHES, WASTE DESTRUCTION, PUREVAP QRR/NSiR partnership w #HPQ , FUMED SILICA , NEXGEN 3D POWDERS, PYR GREEN GAS ETC ETC are poised to be huge verticals for PYR as many huge industries need to be GHG compliant asap which many will imho will not only want PYR's offerings but absolutely need them.
LONG and STRONG PYR and HPQ!!!!!!!!!!!
I am not certain if you are purposely trying to be obtuse, , or you really don't get it.
I will give it one last try. If you read the sequence of posts, several people posted that because the directors expressed innocence that are currently being charged by the AMF regulatory authorities for potential violations It was stated that therefore, they must have a significant case.
What I showed was it in other cases of fraud, and not just massive cases of fraud as you say, but in over 30 cases prosecuted from the SEC, which you have conveniently ignored, there were similar expressions of innocence.
How often do people being charged for any crime? Admit to guilt if you're going to court?
I don't care if it's a speeding ticket or murder. Expressions of innocence, in my opinion, are not highly predictive of success in an allegation buy a regulatory authority. That's what I referenced, and my examples were metaphors.
You are purposely, I believe trying to miss represent what I am saying, which, once again is a classic technique of pumpers. It is the logical fallacy of the strawman hypothesis for anyone who took logic in University.
In any event, like I said, if you don't get it, I can't learn it for you if you don't try. If you were purposely trying to misrepresent what I am saying, and trying to use this as a way to promote the company, I will clearly have no impact since you have a vested interest.
Any reasonable reader that is unbiassed will understand what I am saying, and I am done. Caveat emptor.