What, then, does "Surely Justice will need to keep one eye open and raise his eyebrows' after learning ASIC has been subject to many many many wrongdoings callings..." have to do with "Sufficient evidence must be provided to affirm the arguments made out to the court. The court must be satisfied on the balance of probabilities that one case is more plausible than the other"?
Firstly you state that the judge must weigh up items that have nothing to do with the evidence that will be led, then, a moment later, when challenged, spew some guff about the balance of probabilities, and evidence.
You may not be schizophrenic, but for someone who claims that "non holders & cronies are delusional ! Your elevated anxiety is now evident", your posts are coming across as increasingly schizophrenic.
- Forums
- ASX - By Stock
- SP1
- ASIC v ISX Hearing
ASIC v ISX Hearing, page-39
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 3,342 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)
Featured News
Add SP1 (ASX) to my watchlist
Currently unlisted public company.
The Watchlist
CC9
CHARIOT CORPORATION LTD
Shanthar Pathmanathan, MD
Shanthar Pathmanathan
MD
Previous Video
Next Video
SPONSORED BY The Market Online