Worthington Share Discussion Threads

[spikeyj] 24/11/2022 16:45

? weren’t their lawyers called something like Sue, Grabbit and Runn?

[saracen3] 24/11/2022 16:39

Can anyone remind me who the brokers to Worthington were ?

[saracen3] 24/11/2022 12:24

I was referring to London South East for their bulletin board monitoring.

[cliffpeat] 24/11/2022 12:05

Saracen3 - Presume LSE = London South East and not London Stock Exchange?

And - what makes you think this?

It is also interesting that WRN was in breach of many Companies Act filing requirements that carry significant penalties but don't seem to be included in the FCA charges.

I don't know but assume that the LSE (Stock Exchange) rules also require compliance with company law. Does SE ever take action to ensure directors who breach them are not permitted to be on Boards of listed companies in the future. I suspect not!

[saracen3] 24/11/2022 09:04

I think LSE`s role is under investigation by the FCA.

[sweet karolina2] 24/11/2022 08:54

So it would seem this BB is upstanding citizens Vs supporters and cheerleaders for conmen.

Great game on. All just for fun because nothing on here makes any difference to anything really.

So fan of oik, just how do you look yourself in the mirror each morning? I know I could not if I were doing the things you do. Are you getting paid by someone? I have not and have not even asked to be paid for anything I have done; I have done it all as duty of a good upstanding citizen.

[fanofgeniusdazza] 23/11/2022 14:15

Well said Jonh, singing off the same hymn sheet, so SK your saying you at no time stuck you nose in, liar,drunken sailor, Adrian.

[sweet karolina2] 23/11/2022 12:39

The old adage you can't con an honest person does spring to mind. Also what the judge who sent AE down last time said:



"Judge Denis Lloyd told Earley: ''When you deal with other people's money and public money, you must account for how you do it.''

The Judge added that he felt little sympathy for greedy investors who had given Earley their money."

However there were a lot of ordinary decent people who bought their shares in Main Market (forget to mention Standard) Official List WRN in the normal ways PIs buy shares. Yes it looked too good to be true and indeed it was not true, but only some were tipped the wink to get out before suspension, whilst others were piling in to what they had been led to believe, through RNSs and other IR comms channels was going to be a multi £Bn global conglomerate (classic pump and dump). This was not a victimless crime and did not just impact the stupid and greedy. That is why there are laws to protect ordinary people against this sort of thing and why regulators exist to prosecute those who break them. The WRN 5 are being prosecuted because FCA have sufficient evidence to bring the charges, it has nothing at all to do with what anyone has posted or will post on a BB and those who try to insinuate that it does are clearly the real slimeballs. The trouble is it will be 10 years after the event by the time the verdict is in and nearly everyone will have forgotten the ordinary victims. However, in the morning and at the going down of the WRN 5, we will remember them.

[jonhbri04] 23/11/2022 12:35

We've all heard the phrase 'innocent until proven guilty'. This is the assumption that underpins criminal proceedings in the UK. Under Article 6 (2) of the Human Rights Act 1988, it is the prosecution's job to prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that the person on trial is guilty of the offence they stand accused of, not slime balls to make false allegations on BBs.

[spikeyj] 22/11/2022 19:06

tbf, i kinda think that anybody who is stupid enough to buy
shares in a pub or rented hotel room kinda deserves most of
what follows from that, just from a darwin award perspective?

(special exception for amanda staveley, who tends imv to know
what she’s doing, it’s the other parties who need to look out.
Edit: - and amanda uses very, very classy hotels for her deals.)

[sweet karolina2] 22/11/2022 18:44

Humans should also have the right not to be scammed. It always amuses me that the worst scum in society always bleat on about their rights and go running for the protection of the law whenever they feel threatened. That pathetic attempt by AE to threaten to sue me for warning people that the gifted shares scheme was most likely a scam for instance. How many WHET shares got sold down the pub by some of the defendants and accomplices? How well did that work out for those that bought them? Who is concerned about their rights?

Caveat emptor maybe, but for scammers it is caveat vendor too.

[fanofgeniusdazza] 22/11/2022 17:35

SK more like despicable slime ball.
Everyone charged with a criminal offence shall have the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to the law.
Article 6 of the Human Rights Act protects our right to a fair trial – and is fundamental to the rule of law and democracy. It's means court cases must be heard in public by an independent and impartial judge not speculated and prejudged by trolls on a BB.

[sweet karolina2] 22/11/2022 09:45

I am a fraudster's worst nightmare.

[roydyor] 22/11/2022 09:34

Well, they have both got the bit between their teeth. lol

[spikeyj] 21/11/2022 22:08

SK is a chestnut mare? - who knew?!

[saracen3] 21/11/2022 18:52

They were going to be a FTSE company with no dilution !!

[saracen3] 21/11/2022 18:49

Has Anubis weighed their souls yet? The Egyptians had some great punishments.

[arthur_lame_stocks] 21/11/2022 18:20

Hey sk

Did you know there's an entire webpage devoted to you?

[sweet karolina2] 19/11/2022 16:24

I assume Elizabeth is no relation to James Holmes - wasn't he the accomplice AE asked to find a pension fund trustee with previous experience of successful heists?