61–70 of 90 posts
"Without admitting or denying the allegations in the SEC’s complaint, Rothenberg and Rothenberg Ventures agreed to settle the charges. The settlement is subject to approval by the federal district court for the Northern District of California which would determine the amount of disgorgement and civil money penalties. Rothenberg also agreed to be barred from the brokerage and investment advisory business with a right…
"Without admitting or denying the allegations in the SEC’s complaint, Rothenberg and Rothenberg Ventures agreed to settle the charges. The settlement is subject to approval by the federal district court for the Northern District of California which would determine the amount of disgorgement and civil money penalties. Rothenberg also agreed to be barred from the brokerage and investment advisory business with a right…
> Besides blowing investors' money on lavish staff events, which is a dick move but not necessarily illegal Can you talk a bit about where the line is between this being merely unethical as opposed to outright illegal?
> Defendants at all relevant times were investment advisers within the meaning of Section 202(a)(11) of the Advisers Act [15 U.S.C. § 80b-2(a)(11)].
My personal guess: that law makes various actions (self-dealing, lying about what investment funds are being used for, non-arms-length transactions, etc) crimes instead of civil torts.
Plus, you know, just plain fraud.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Out of curiosity, would you do it again? Has there been any damage to your professional life?
Article is about the whistleblower/commenter above. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-05-09/he-blew-t...
I hope he lands on his feet, or gets enough of a reward that he doesn’t have to work for a while, since finding work may be tough now. Doing the right thing isn’t always easy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually US citizens can legally perform arrests, we just don't have the same legal presumptions that peace officers do. Also it's obviously implied that the right to bear arms includes the right to use them under at least some circumstances. It would just be as ludicrous as saying freedom of the press only covers your right to own a press in your house or business and not your right to print things with it.
> Actually US citizens can legally perform arrests... And in doing so, they are acting as self-deputized agents of the state . They're temporarily "arming" themselves with the state's power to use violence in furtherance of its (legitimate) interests in enforcing its laws. They could not legally do that without the state's sanction. EDIT: Some countries don't even limit the power of "citizen's arrest" to their own ci…
The "0 lawsuits filed" stat on his website now seems a bit foreshadowing 150 Investments Made 175 Limited Partners 5 Years of Experience 0 Lawsuits Filed http://mikerothenberg.com/ Maybe he can post a "Days since last SEC action" sign in the office.
> The Actual Mike is not quite the virtual Gatsby
Jay Gatsby was a criminal. Of course he says he's "not quite the virtual Gatsby." But he's still essentially likening himself to a fictional criminal.
The "0 lawsuits filed" stat on his website now seems a bit foreshadowing 150 Investments Made 175 Limited Partners 5 Years of Experience 0 Lawsuits Filed http://mikerothenberg.com/ Maybe he can post a "Days since last SEC action" sign in the office.
From the page's title: > The Actual Mike is not quite the virtual Gatsby Jay Gatsby was a criminal. Of course he says he's "not quite the virtual Gatsby." But he's still essentially likening himself to a fictional criminal.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From the page's title: > The Actual Mike is not quite the virtual Gatsby Jay Gatsby was a criminal. Of course he says he's "not quite the virtual Gatsby." But he's still essentially likening himself to a fictional criminal.
Jay Gatsby was a criminal. That's gray. It's hinted and perhaps likely that he was a bootlegger. As that was legal before prohibition and after, it's hard for me to morally judge him a criminal what with his character never having been charged and convicted of any crime.
I'm curious to know: - Does the firm and/or the individual have enough money? i.e. will the settlement, once paid, make investors whole? - Why does stealing $7 three times get someone a life sentence, but stealing $7MM once get zero jail time?
> - Why does stealing $7 three times get someone a life sentence, but stealing $7MM once get zero jail time? It doesn't--stealing $7 isn't a felony, and no three-strikes state predicates a life sentence on three non-felonies. But to address your general point: there are two different kinds of things. Criminal law isn't just about the effect, but the culpability of the offender. Is the offender a "bad person?" How bad…
I had misunderstood this point. I thought the settlement was like the 'plea bargain' I've seen on American TV shows, i.e. that the settlement meant that would be no criminal charges.
Thanks for the thoughtful explanation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Jay Gatsby was a criminal. That's gray. It's hinted and perhaps likely that he was a bootlegger. As that was legal before prohibition and after, it's hard for me to morally judge him a criminal what with his character never having been charged and convicted of any crime.
Agreed. I also never understood why Al Capone has such a bad stigma when he was really just a run of the mill tax evader.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Capone#Saint_Valentine's_Da...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Outfit#Al_Capone's_emp...