I was recently asked the following from a member and asked if I could provide my opinion, so I am!
Can Les Price now be charged with a crime(s) in a court of law for his illegal actions now that this civil matter has been resolved? If he can be charges criminally, what is the likelihood of such charges? What could be done that would facilitate the court system to charge LP if they were otherwise reluctant to do so?
Civil and criminal matters run independently from from each other, but they often do have connections to each other. It would be like two different train companies running on different tracks, but sharing stations. For example, a party in a civil case can use a plea in a criminal case as an admission by the other party to an act. Criminal cases have a a higher burden of proof than civil cases. In criminal cases, the govt must prove “beyond a reasonable doubt” the defendant committed the alleged crime and if so, then a conviction occurs. In effect you a talking about a 90%+ proof of guilt. In a civil case, you have a lower burden of proof of “preponderance of the evidence.” In effect you are talking about 51% proof of liability. Therefore, a finding of criminal guilt can be used in a civil case as proof the act occurred without having to prove it a second time; however, you can’t use a finding of civil liability in a criminal case as it has a lower standard of proof. These concepts occurred in the OJ criminal and civil cases. The jury found OJ not guilty in the criminal case (under 90%+), but found him liable in the civil case (greater than 51%).
Further, any settlement of the Okanadian civil case will definitely contain statements the settlement occurred without the admission of liability by MDMN. One always includes this clause in a settlement as the defendant (ie: MDMN), does no want to make an admission which another third party could use against them. Also, at this time, we don’t know if the settlement includes Price. Often when you have multiple defendants, the plaintiff and one or more of the defendants can settle a case for a lesser sum and then the settling defendant would still testify against other defendants. IMO, MDMN probably has this type of settlement with Okanadian. Based upon the info we do have, Price stole from MDMN as well as from Okanadian in the same transaction. IMO, it would benefit MDMN to settle with Okanadian to limit its financial exposure and remove the liability issue, and MDMN and Okanadian both have plenty of incentive to nail Price with a large civil judgment based upon fraud (non-dischargeable in any bankruptcy proceedings).
Prosecutors, especially at the Federal level (whether US or Canadian) don’t like to bring cases which they might lose. These high level prosecutors often position themselves for further careers in private practice and of govt and being the prosecutor who lost a case against the “big fish” or regularly losses cases does not help one’s career advancement. We can see this occurring through the number of plea agreements given to lower level criminals in a big mob case for example. They need to make sure they lock down the testimony and evidence against the big fish by letting the little fish off the hook. So, in our case, the prosecutor would need to feel he/she has a “slam-dunk” before they would bring charges against Price. Especially because, IMO, we are not talking about a large fraud case and us (as victims) were penny stock investors, not elderly grandmothers (we are not media-worthy).
Because the criminal and civil courts run on two separate tracks and the criminal case has a higher burden of proof for guilt, IMO the settlement of Okanadian civil litigation and, the BC cases (hopefully soon), would have little effect what-so-ever as to whether a govt entity brings a criminal case against Price. IMO MDMN will definitely, if they have not done so already, tender the documents and other evidence they have disclosed to the appropriate govt authorities and maybe the govt authorities have not completed their review or are waiting for more info before they make a decision; however, the govt cannot use anything in a settlement agreement against Price (if he is a party to the Okanadian settlement or when/if he settles the BC cases) as the settlement agreement would definitely contain the clauses where Price admits no liability. If the cases all settle, which IMO seems more likely than not, nothing in any of the civil cases would help sway the decision of the govt to bring charges. The prosecutor would only have the documents or other evidence MDMN has given them or they would secure through their own investigation, subpoena. The govt would still have to prove its case on its own.
I was involved in a similar situation with a client where she partnered with another person to operate a tax business and the other parties’ insurance business together. The insurance business stole from the tax business and from its customers (of which my client and her business were one the affected parties) through commingling insurance premium payments with general funds and not issue policies, but stealing the premiums. Even though we had written proof through bank statements and even an admission the other party on the stand, neither the state nor the feds brought any criminal actions against the guy. The FBI even came out to review our evidence (took copies) and interviewed my client. Subsequently we secured a $435k judgment against the other party for breach of contract, fraud, forgery. My client still hasn’t seen a dime as its been appealed three times (we have won all three) and he keeps transferring assets to duck collection efforts.
To circle back around due to all of the above, IMO, if MDMN has tendered everything it has to the govt and the govt has not brought any criminal charges against Price, the govt will most likely not do so now unless some new “smoking gun” evidence comes to light. I hope, and will gladly admit to a bad prediction if the govt does bring charges; but, I wouldn’t hold my breath to see if it happens. At this point, IMO, we need to all remove our focus from punishing Price (even though he deserves every bit of it and any other bad thing which could happen to him) and keep it upon MDMN and Auryn’s efforts to clean up MDMN, make the mountain saleable, going public, and completing a merger/buyout with a mid-major or major. IMO, MDMN has removed the bad actors and these persons would not benefit from MDMN and Auryn’s efforts going forward.
