3 ms·

The SEC cannot bring criminal charges. Honestly it's a fucking joke, seems like it was worth it for them. They can just reshuffle their cash in some trusts or

The SEC cannot bring criminal charges. Honestly it's a fucking joke, seems like it was worth it for them. They can just reshuffle their cash in some trusts or crypto or whatever and good luck getting it, they won't be behind bars.

loeg 4y ago
> The SEC claims that the illegal trading by L. Palmer's former client and J. Palmer's friend netted approximately $35,000 and $73,000 in profits, respectively, portions of which were shared with L. Palmer and J. Palmer according to their arrangements. > Additionally, the final judgment against L. Palmer would order him to disgorge $9,000 plus prejudgment interest of $2,026, and pay a civil penalty of $88,698. The final judgment against J. Palmer would order him to disgorge $28,000 plus prejudgment interest of $6,303, and pay a civil penalty of $73,399. The litigation as to Dishinger remains pending. In no sense was it "worth it for them."
- Forgeties79 4y ago
  He’s clearly just grinding his axe about government. Probably not worth engaging him tbh.
  - notch656a 4y ago
    - eyelidlessness 4y ago
      I reached the same conclusion from your comment and afaik I’ve never encountered you before (and if I have it wasn’t very memorable, sorry bud)
      - eyelidlessness 4y ago
        Can’t edit the comment now. To the person above, I’m easy to find and contact, feel free to avail yourself if you have something you want to say. That’s not an invitation for abuse, but I’m considerably more open minded to expressing and hearing strong emotions than I feel comfortable doing or expect to be kosher here. Have at it. As long as you’re not threatening me, I’ll read what you have to say.
        notch656a 4y ago
        You said you came to the same "conclusion" ("not worth engaging tbh" said OP). So now you admit that your comment was a lie, and that you do want to engage. Not really interested now though, someone who one moment believes I'm not worthy of engaging but the next moment pretends they are an open and interested communicator ready and receptive to communication is quite the mood swing on your end. This is the last I desire to ever interact with you, and I'll give you the benefit of the result there would be had your comment actually been truth: have a nice life and I promise never to intentionally contact you again.
- notch656a 4y ago
  >Palmer's friend netted approximately $35,000 and $73,000 in profits Yeah I'd like to see proof that's actually all there is, rather than all they were able to charge them with. It's not as if those involved in financial related crimes are always honest about finances, and it could be they only gave up the portions where they figured out the feds were going to find.
  - halfmatthalfcat 4y ago
    One could assume that the SEC (or any legal entity with investigative powers) will do their own due diligence and in this case, will do their own forensic accounting investigation into these two to corroborate their story.
  - gruez 4y ago
    >Yeah I'd like to see proof that's actually all there is, rather than all they were able to charge them with. doesn't this require proving a negative? If they got charged, presumably the feds combed through their bank records and found any unexplained deposits. You could argue that they had the real loot in some numbered offshore account and/or crypto that's totally unlinked to them, but I'm not sure how you'd prove that those accounts don't exist.
yellow_lead 4y ago
It can, and often does, work with the Department of Justice and the United States Attorney’s Office to bring criminal charges.
yieldcrv 4y ago
A lot of times the SEC and the DOJ bring parallel actions, with the DOJ bringing criminal charges. You need to go specifically look for the DOJ's press release or scour court dockets.

loeg 4y ago

> The SEC claims that the illegal trading by L. Palmer's former client and J. Palmer's friend netted approximately $35,000 and $73,000 in profits, respectively, portions of which were shared with L. Palmer and J. Palmer according to their arrangements. > Additionally, the final judgment against L. Palmer would order him to disgorge $9,000 plus prejudgment interest of $2,026, and pay a civil penalty of $88,698. The final judgment against J. Palmer would order him to disgorge $28,000 plus prejudgment interest of $6,303, and pay a civil penalty of $73,399. The litigation as to Dishinger remains pending. In no sense was it "worth it for them."

Forgeties79 4y ago
He’s clearly just grinding his axe about government. Probably not worth engaging him tbh.
- notch656a 4y ago
  - eyelidlessness 4y ago
    I reached the same conclusion from your comment and afaik I’ve never encountered you before (and if I have it wasn’t very memorable, sorry bud)
    - eyelidlessness 4y ago
      Can’t edit the comment now. To the person above, I’m easy to find and contact, feel free to avail yourself if you have something you want to say. That’s not an invitation for abuse, but I’m considerably more open minded to expressing and hearing strong emotions than I feel comfortable doing or expect to be kosher here. Have at it. As long as you’re not threatening me, I’ll read what you have to say.
      - notch656a 4y ago
        You said you came to the same "conclusion" ("not worth engaging tbh" said OP). So now you admit that your comment was a lie, and that you do want to engage. Not really interested now though, someone who one moment believes I'm not worthy of engaging but the next moment pretends they are an open and interested communicator ready and receptive to communication is quite the mood swing on your end. This is the last I desire to ever interact with you, and I'll give you the benefit of the result there would be had your comment actually been truth: have a nice life and I promise never to intentionally contact you again.
notch656a 4y ago
>Palmer's friend netted approximately $35,000 and $73,000 in profits Yeah I'd like to see proof that's actually all there is, rather than all they were able to charge them with. It's not as if those involved in financial related crimes are always honest about finances, and it could be they only gave up the portions where they figured out the feds were going to find.
- halfmatthalfcat 4y ago
  One could assume that the SEC (or any legal entity with investigative powers) will do their own due diligence and in this case, will do their own forensic accounting investigation into these two to corroborate their story.
- gruez 4y ago
  >Yeah I'd like to see proof that's actually all there is, rather than all they were able to charge them with. doesn't this require proving a negative? If they got charged, presumably the feds combed through their bank records and found any unexplained deposits. You could argue that they had the real loot in some numbered offshore account and/or crypto that's totally unlinked to them, but I'm not sure how you'd prove that those accounts don't exist.

yellow_lead 4y ago

It can, and often does, work with the Department of Justice and the United States Attorney’s Office to bring criminal charges.

yieldcrv 4y ago

A lot of times the SEC and the DOJ bring parallel actions, with the DOJ bringing criminal charges. You need to go specifically look for the DOJ's press release or scour court dockets.