RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Allegations by AMFBaswel61 wrote: If one want to compare with precedents, why not look at previous fraud cases sued by AMF like Mount Real and Norbourg where frauds amounting to over 70 millions gave fines lesser than 5 millions to individuals responsable of such frauds The actual disproportionate sanction seeked by AMF with Pyrogenesis (if there is any real case here, wich remains to be proven) gives reasons to beleive Mr Pascali's statement about the merit of the case. doesn't it?
Why not look at all the cases rather than just cherry pick. Do you need to look at the percentage success rate, but you also need to look at the type of allegation, and the type of case but it's been prosecuted under since some have higher rates of success, in my opinion.
For example, for the report that I quoted, which was the annual report; they had 98 successful cases, including three THAT were put in jail, and about 7 million in fines, and they had 207 cases opened, 178 concluded and 70 that are still ongoing. Hard to do the math based on what they’re reporting but it looks like they have a pretty decent success rate. It also sounds like if you read the report that they have improved their approach after some of the cases that you quoted, but I think we have to avoid cherry picking and look at the data.
do you want the link to the annual report again?
At the end of the day, you're going to have to wait and see how this case comes out and nobody knows how that will happen. Still, I don't think that it's responsible to simply dismiss it and Sheri pick cases that weren't successful as if to suggest that this case won't be successful. Similarly, statements of innocence, by those being persecuted is hardly evidence of a successful case as they already showed based on the previous post. Would you like to have the SEC ruling and study on this regard?
Bottom line, we're going to have to wait, but I think that investors should take the fact that there is an allegation into the consideration when they're making investment decisions. Trusting what's posted on a billboard as reassurance, or those who point out the facts, should all be taken in context. Do your own due diligence, and do not trust what you read on these boards.
I think it would be more helpful instead of giving opinions if people used references in links. Then people can do the research themselves and make up their own mind.