What I stated is that the TA thought they had proper authority based on some illegal document which Les provided, which the TA never bothered to verify.They simply accepted it at face value. If my assumption is correct Chapin might not have know about it. I do not know that MDMN needed signed documents from MMC , where is this coming from?
1 Like
The complaint states that Les signed on behalf of MMC and Chapin signed on behalf of MDMN.
The only way the T/A would accept instructions for Les is if the company (Board or CEO/Pres) provided written instructions to the T/A upon which the T/A would rely on. The T/A does have a sample signature of those officers that can transact share issuances on behalf of the company.
I am in the camp that somewhere along the line, some one gave Les the keys to the T/A.
That is exactly my point the TA thought someone gave Les the keys. Has Chapin verified that he signed the document? Not to my knowledge. That is why I stated some illegal document. This is all assumption on my part, and Chapin maybe involved, I just doubt it, due to his background in law enforcement that he would be so stupid to leave a paper trail!
I believe MMC documents pertained to MMC , ie Les, getting the check for $100,000. The money went to Lesās bogus company and MDMN got nothing.
Madman,
I prefaced my post with āNot a prediction, but rather a hopeā.
And concluded with āIMOā.
Everything else is included between those two lines.
Iāve said repeatedly we need to see what comes out from the Chile Explore Conference and the Informational meeting.
Iām still of the belief weāll have to wait to hear directly from those in the know at the Informational Meeting. There are many questions awaiting definitive answers.
Also see:
Unfortunately, we donāt know. Itās speculation who got what. No exhibits exist for the complaint, no contract, no cancelled check, no wire info. Until we can look at this info, we donāt know what went where and who did what. Right now we only have an allegation (not proven fact) in the complaint that Les negotiated the deal on behalf of MDMN and MMC, Les signed for MMC, Chapin signed for MDMN, they paid the money, didnāt get the stock. Without more, we cannot speculate as to what each party was required to do, what each party actually did, and who is at fault (if anyone). Itās why IMO MDMN needs itās own counsel to aggressively go after the plaintiff and the other co-defendants Les, and I will add Chapin and the T/A to the mix, with discovery requests to find out what they communicated to whom about this deal. Once this discovery tendered, taken with the signed contract and money info we will get a significantly clearer picture of what happened.
In the complaint, MMC is stated to be a wholly owned subsidiary of MDMN, if the money went directly to Lesās MMC Mining, there is no way the T/A would issue the shares nor would a clearing firm clear the cert.
JMO
So, 1/2 the shares (100,000,000 class C shares) in the company (1.4B common shares after conversion?) are going to be sold for less than $1M? Does that make sense?
Did you note back in 2012 that 7,350 of its preferred shares were issued in repayment of shareholder loans - $1,551,186?
IMO, we need an attorney who represents just us. We do not know anything about what is going on in the background. Iāll be damned if we have to hear of secrets going on, different versions of this story, misinformation again. Weāre finished with that. Enough of that! Has MDMN hired a lawyer yet for this fiasco? The lawyer will have to know we need transparency for the shareholders. I think we need to w rite a group letter to Goodin. We have been left in the dark for so long and because of that we have been screwed many times.
I know. Doesnt make sense. Just speculation. Hopefully, we can get the exhibits. Maybe when people go out for the info meeting, someone can drop by the Clark County Court Clerkās office and make a copy of the entire file.
I pointed out earlier when I reviewed the court docket for the Nevada case, the same attorney represents MDMN, Goodwin, and Les. Other parties havenāt been served yet. I expressed my disbelief of this arrangement and the strong potential conflicts which would exist, preventing the attorney from properly representing MDMN. So yes, we have an attorney, but IMO, it may not be doing us a lot of good due to the conflict of interest which exists. IMO we need an independent attorney from any other defendant, as MDMN may have to allege wrongful acts by the other co-defendants to try to defend itself in the lawsuit. One attorney cannot do that against his/her own client.
this is really cute you guys are now legal experts and mining is secondary. Here is the truth we dont know shit! we never did and probably never will. All of them seems to have a dirty ass in this. How did auryn not know the friggin OS doubled on them? Didnt they have people in MDMN for this very reason and where did the CAP at 1.5 go? Chapin was the one who spearhead doubling the OS as to not have a hostile take over (instead they took the keys to register and took the shares themselves) So start there. Chapin, LES and JJ all three Im sure JJ took shares for property we kept seeing our hector acres going up and NO ONE questioned HOW!!
I suggest stop with the lawyer craP CAUSE I know IM not wasting more money on a lawyer on this PIG! What I do want is fuckin clarity!! HOW we got here and where to we go from here!!! CAN the property save my investment IS auryn the same wolf in sheepās clothing or are they the real deal? WHERE is this 5% for LDM going? That should be given back to MDMN they shouldnāt be rewarded for bad business practices!! THEY stole the jewel of the property and the gold that came out of it! WE NEVER SAW A DIME FROM THIS. wake up!! this has been going on for a very long time and blaming Claro BS shares is laughable. IT WAS THEM UNLOADING FROM 8 CENTS DOWN
12 Likes
Geoly37, if you want clarity and donāt want to hear all the legal mumbo jumbo, go get clarity from the BOD and please provide us the info so we all can have clarity. Absent you getting clarity by whatever means you chose, I donāt think there is anything wrong with trying to piece together what happened from the crumbs we have.
Good luck and look forward to your information.
1 Like
Actually, I am a legal expert. 
And my daughters will agree Iām quite cute!
I agree with you RE getting clarity and expressed my hope Auryn/Masglas/MDMN will do so as they progress in their analysis of the share problems. I also feel the current case in Nevada would be a very strong tool in helping the analysis and discovering what has actually been happening. The Nevada court has already required all parties to preserve discovery, including electronic discovery (ie: emails). MDMN just needs to ask (ie: serve co-defendant, Les, Goodwin, etc. with discovery request); however, why would the attorney who represents both Les, Goodwin, & MDMN serve discovery on himself? Thatās my point RE the conflict. Get new counsel, get the discovery, and let the shareholders know what is actually going on.
2 Likes
real simple you guys are talking in cirlces and honestly getting legal representation is a joke they take what ever is left of our investment. I suggest looking into criminal charges. Throw in the days brother for allowing this kind of shit to happen and why hasnāt MDMN already moved our shares out of their office? Why wasnāt anyone warned that the OS was double then they were reporting? THIS IS FRAUD!!
Jake I really didnt even get to your post. You are on the right track with all this. I was talking about the BS for the last few days.
I agree, criminal charges should be warranted; however, if you were a prosecutor, would you file a criminal case with the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt based upon the word of the BOD of a pink sheet company who has already swapped out numerous BOD members, been involved with a scammer Ulander, and who has pending litigation against it from two different parties, and who has just now had to restate their share count due to internal fraud? Or would you say, hey it sounds good, but do you guys have any proof? Hence the discovery. Get the proof. Then many doors will open up for MDMN.
3 Likes
ok. sorry. Be kind though!
agreed like I said your on the right track. I suggest looking at ALL parties too
1 Like
Absolutely look at all the parties. Right now though, only Plaintiff, Les and Goodwin have filed appearances in the Nevada case. Only can make requests of them right now. Once other parties served and file appearances, you can file requests to them. But I feel Plaintiff and Lesā email will be very enlightening and will lead to other people/proof of other malfeasence beyond just this case.
1 Like