Post by citybear59 on Mar 20, 2016 15:50:54 GMT -4
This is brand new. Other than being named as a RICO defendant, Niki is never publicly discussed by agencies. Only he's still at large.
Scheduled Court Hearings
Status Hearing - May 16, 2016 @ 11:00am and August 1, 2016 @ 1:30pm
Trial Date - August 9, 2016 @ 9:00 am
(Nickolaj Vissokovsky will not get a court date until he makes his initial appearance in Nevada)
Are they expecting an appearance in this century?
If that onion with his thousand layers to peel, showed up in Vegas, no telling what would happen. Mayhem comes to mind LOL
It's been added below this
A false rumor has circulated that confuses the criminal prosecution in the District of Nevada (United States v. John Edwards, et al., 2:09-CR-00132-RLH-RJJ) with a civil suit out of the Central District of California that has now been dismissed (David Anderson, et al., v. Christopher Cox, et al., 8:10 –CV-00031-JVS-MLG). There are many variations of this rumor. However, in short, the Anderson civil case is not related to the Edwards criminal case. In Anderson, the plaintiffs allege that the SEC and other agencies of the U.S. Government conducted a sting operation against “illegitimate brokers, dealers, market makers, hedge funds, and other persons and entities that had engaged in naked short selling of CMKM Diamonds Inc. stock.” Anderson Rev. First Amended Complaint, p. 17, para. 48. Essentially, the Anderson case involved allegations against an entire industry. In contrast, the superseding criminal indictment in the Edwards case charges a more clearly defined group of defendants: insiders at one company (CMKM) and people who enabled them.
Additionally, in the course of investigating and litigating the Edwards criminal case, government personnel in the District of Nevada have not encountered any evidence indicating that a government agency conducted a sting operation against naked short sellers of CMKM stock. Government personnel in the District of Nevada have also not come across any evidence of any settlement fund (much less any settlement fund with trillions of dollars) potentially available to pay possible claims of CMKM shareholders. The criminal investigation in the District of Nevada resulting in the United States v. John Edwards, et al., indictment involved no sting operation.
We hope this statement clarifies the differences between United States v. John Edwards, et al., with the facts alleged in David Anderson, et al., v. Christopher Cox, et al. The public is reminded that defendants are innocent until proven guilty. Thank you.
www.justice.gov/usao-nv/victim-witness-assistance/us-v-john-edwards-et-al-cmkm
Read more: tfant53.proboards.com/thread/10741/interesting-added-doj-cmkm-site?page=1#ixzz43TTeAgmA
Scheduled Court Hearings
Status Hearing - May 16, 2016 @ 11:00am and August 1, 2016 @ 1:30pm
Trial Date - August 9, 2016 @ 9:00 am
(Nickolaj Vissokovsky will not get a court date until he makes his initial appearance in Nevada)
Are they expecting an appearance in this century?
If that onion with his thousand layers to peel, showed up in Vegas, no telling what would happen. Mayhem comes to mind LOL
It's been added below this
A false rumor has circulated that confuses the criminal prosecution in the District of Nevada (United States v. John Edwards, et al., 2:09-CR-00132-RLH-RJJ) with a civil suit out of the Central District of California that has now been dismissed (David Anderson, et al., v. Christopher Cox, et al., 8:10 –CV-00031-JVS-MLG). There are many variations of this rumor. However, in short, the Anderson civil case is not related to the Edwards criminal case. In Anderson, the plaintiffs allege that the SEC and other agencies of the U.S. Government conducted a sting operation against “illegitimate brokers, dealers, market makers, hedge funds, and other persons and entities that had engaged in naked short selling of CMKM Diamonds Inc. stock.” Anderson Rev. First Amended Complaint, p. 17, para. 48. Essentially, the Anderson case involved allegations against an entire industry. In contrast, the superseding criminal indictment in the Edwards case charges a more clearly defined group of defendants: insiders at one company (CMKM) and people who enabled them.
Additionally, in the course of investigating and litigating the Edwards criminal case, government personnel in the District of Nevada have not encountered any evidence indicating that a government agency conducted a sting operation against naked short sellers of CMKM stock. Government personnel in the District of Nevada have also not come across any evidence of any settlement fund (much less any settlement fund with trillions of dollars) potentially available to pay possible claims of CMKM shareholders. The criminal investigation in the District of Nevada resulting in the United States v. John Edwards, et al., indictment involved no sting operation.
We hope this statement clarifies the differences between United States v. John Edwards, et al., with the facts alleged in David Anderson, et al., v. Christopher Cox, et al. The public is reminded that defendants are innocent until proven guilty. Thank you.
www.justice.gov/usao-nv/victim-witness-assistance/us-v-john-edwards-et-al-cmkm
Read more: tfant53.proboards.com/thread/10741/interesting-added-doj-cmkm-site?page=1#ixzz43TTeAgmA