Mirror (non)Trading International 2 - The Fallout

Status
Not open for further replies.

JSbot

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2020
Messages
239
I don't think it is going to be as easy for them this time now as with BTCG. They, especially Cheri, have put themselves up front and centre too often and using too many terms showing that they are major players. [Directors have all sorts of fiduciary duties and the upper echelons on MTI have just ignored these.]

This thread hasn't brought down the ponzi (yet), but it has very materially increased the exposure to the leading lights. the wiki has provided much firmer evidence than anyone did against BTCG. Comments on the thread have also given considerable information about some of the lesser members of MTI.
Johan designed the scheme controlled the site employed the programmers described the bot and convinced them to come onboard he held exclusives access to all the proprietary trade information and access to the brokers. Gave all the answer to questions asked was a trustworthy completely upstanding guy and they bought it all - they never thought he would lie and never had reason to question his explanations. (At least that's how it will be sold)

So it depends what incriminating she has done - has she been verbal, emotional blindly loyal, naive gullible or can other than that be proved - that's the issue and the mission. Without substantive evidence that She and Clynton are the actual owners of the scheme the servers the software and where complicit with Johan - what do you have and what has been achieved?
 

Def-e-nition

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 2, 2020
Messages
413
I don't think it is going to be as easy for them this time now as with BTCG. They, especially Cheri, have put themselves up front and centre too often and using too many terms showing that they are major players. [Directors have all sorts of fiduciary duties and the upper echelons on MTI have just ignored these.]

This thread hasn't brought down the ponzi (yet), but it has very materially increased the exposure to the leading lights. the wiki has provided much firmer evidence than anyone did against BTCG. Comments on the thread have also given considerable information about some of the lesser members of MTI.

In CLosing: a Note to Finalmente Investors .

YOu Might Escape My BB , for the first 500 pages :
But :

When we hit 370 pages or more , on the Second Thread : Kiss your Square scam with a narrow topsection :KOebaai Meraai .
:)
 
Last edited:

Spxdxrbxtxs

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2020
Messages
403
Johan designed the scheme controlled the site employed the programmers described the bot and convinced them to come onboard he held exclusives access to all the proprietary trade information and access to the brokers. Gave all the answer to questions asked was a trustworthy completely upstanding guy and they bought it all - they never thought he would lie and never had reason to question his explanations. (At least that's how it will be sold)

So it depends what incriminating she has done - has she been verbal, emotional blindly loyal, naive gullible or can other than that be proved - that's the issue and the mission. Without substantive evidence that She and Clynton are the actual owners of the scheme the servers the software and where complicit with Johan - what do you have and what has been achieved?
As directors they're culpable regardless of intent or belief.
 

Def-e-nition

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 2, 2020
Messages
413
As directors they're culpable regardless of intent or belief.
Spider: could shillers Be prosecuted Simply due to their benefitting Out of Mti Financially?THey will obviously have profitted into the Millions.
CLyntons' video confessions of withdrawals, on MMM on you Tube , Still Give Me Nightmares .
6th grader Stuff. He sounds like he Was reading from a prompt machine .
I Sound jaded : it's because the Stuff worked , and people bought in regardless of How Stupid He Sounded.
F Me blind.............
 

quovadis

Executive Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2004
Messages
6,079
Johan designed the scheme controlled the site employed the programmers described the bot and convinced them to come onboard he held exclusives access to all the proprietary trade information and access to the brokers. Gave all the answer to questions asked was a trustworthy completely upstanding guy and they bought it all - they never thought he would lie and never had reason to question his explanations. (At least that's how it will be sold)

So it depends what incriminating she has done - has she been verbal, emotional blindly loyal, naive gullible or can other than that be proved - that's the issue and the mission. Without substantive evidence that She and Clynton are the actual owners of the scheme the servers the software and where complicit with Johan - what do you have and what has been achieved?
Flawed logic. The companies act already defines prescribed officers. Cheri & co are on the hook as such regardless of the claims of being naïve as they actively participated and are complicit in the operation of an illegal scheme. They can also NOT rely on legal opinion as a mechanism to avoid criminal or civil prosecution but are welcome to argue the same in a court of law.
 

JSbot

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2020
Messages
239
Many countries will provide protection from liability for business directors provider it is not shown that they acted in bad faith and contrary to their obligations to the business, It will be a long and complex operation to obtain witnesses to specific acts which might be deemed inappropriate,

Granted that they like most of the members may be in trouble for actively participating in an illegal operation. They can however claim that they did so under the legal advice of a pre-imminent legal expert as mitigiating factors
 

r00igev@@r

Executive Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
7,443
Johan designed the scheme controlled the site employed the programmers described the bot and convinced them to come onboard he held exclusives access to all the proprietary trade information and access to the brokers. Gave all the answer to questions asked was a trustworthy completely upstanding guy and they bought it all - they never thought he would lie and never had reason to question his explanations. (At least that's how it will be sold)

So it depends what incriminating she has done - has she been verbal, emotional blindly loyal, naive gullible or can other than that be proved - that's the issue and the mission. Without substantive evidence that She and Clynton are the actual owners of the scheme the servers the software and where complicit with Johan - what do you have and what has been achieved?
If you are Ulrich then you know squat about the law. Cheri isn't going to squeak out of this one. JS is on the record as stating he has full trust in her as a company representative.

Finish and klaar

GxdBlxssXndMxchSxccxss
 

Spxdxrbxtxs

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2020
Messages
403
Many countries will provide protection from liability for business directors provider it is not shown that they acted in bad faith and contrary to their obligations to the business, It will be a long and complex operation to obtain witnesses to specific acts which might be deemed inappropriate,

Granted that they like most of the members may be in trouble for actively participating in an illegal operation. They can however claim that they did so under the legal advice of a pre-imminent legal expert as mitigiating factors
But they're a South African company being prosecuted according to South African law. Are they going to beg refugee status for running a Ponzi?
 

JSbot

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2020
Messages
239
But they're a South African company being prosecuted according to South African law. Are they going to beg refugee status for running a Ponzi?
Even under South African law inappropriate acts must be proven. Consulting a duly registered member of the legal fraternity, held in high regard is also reasonable due diligence, and then acting on that advice . What are we supposed to do if we seek opinion from a legal expert and it turns out his advice was wrong.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top