Was Matt Nelson lying to the community when he said that employees were not involved in reholdering? 6 6

[buttock]

On 2/2/2024 at 9:47 PM, DougC said:

if it were criminal legal action then yes. CGC is perusing civil action against a defendant that will prove to be judgement proof, so there will be no consequence for anyone. If this case actually appears before a judge it will likely be a default judgement; any financial verdict will be unenforceable, but it will be a nice looking piece of paper.

The ugly truth of a very sensationalized civil legal system is that it is very rare to actually receive any compensation as the plaintiff.

That may be true, but my point is that they've done what they can legally.  My response was to another question, and is essentially, "what else would you expect them to do?"

[Iconic1s]

On 2/2/2024 at 3:40 PM, drotto said:

From a legal perspective, unfortunately, No. He was specifically being interviewed about swapgate. In regards to that scandal, they do not believe it is an inside job. So the stament is true. 

 

I am sure he knew about the second scandal, and legal likely said keep your mouth shut. It is a different matter, and it is not public. Legally, you never want to open your company up to additional liability, and disclosing this new case could have done that. So this was Selective omission, because it technically is a separate matter with no bearing on the first one.

 

It looks awful from a PR standpoint. They either did not consider that or the believed the legal ramifications from early disclosure of this lawsuit were potentially more damaging to CGC.

He lied.  He likes to act like one of us… he’s a good ol’ boy collector, grader, restorer   He might have been at one point but he is no longer.., he’s the President of CGC (probably making bank) and he lied straight up to the entire community!  No excuses, this case that case … he lied and thought he’d get a pass cause he’s one of the boys. Well, he’s clearly NOT.  He lied!

[JollyComics]

So two CGC employees were fired.   Why didn't they get arrested?   Why is CGC suing them in the court while they are still free?

Matt is lying through his teeth.  This is getting shady.

[Jaylam]

On 2/2/2024 at 3:27 PM, newshane said:

Could someone please give me the Cliffnotes version? 

2 different cases? Please explain? 

EDIT: Ahh. So there was an outsider scheme...AND an insider scheme? wow! 

Yes, and both were happening at almost the same time. Related or just an amazing coincidence? Will we ever know the real truth and if there are any other scams and compromises going on that are still in the shadows that no one is savvy too yet? Tune in next week for the next episode of "Mystery Bullet Theatre". 

[Gaard]

I wonder if they knew each other?

Scum1 - "My way makes so much more $"

Scum2 - "Yeah,  but my way is so much easier!"

* high five *

[Sam T]

On 2/3/2024 at 1:38 AM, JollyComics said:

So two CGC employees were fired.   Why didn't they get arrested?   Why is CGC suing them in the court while they are still free?

This is so obvious and insightful that I kinda feel stupid for not saying this! The lawsuit as described by a guy on twitter (I still haven't been able to find the full text of the complaint) is very clearly describing a criminal act. The idea of filing a lawsuit BEFORE working with law enforcement to have criminal charges filed is just backwards. Generally the stat has more resources and a higher success rate w/ criminal charges than plaintiffs in civil suits. Also, CGC wouldn't be paying for the investigative resources so it would literally save them money while also solving the problem of these two folks.

 

Going civil before criminal is a very sketchy move...through...his...teeth 🤣

[Buzzetta]

The interview was about the slab switching based out of Queens, NY.   He was asked if there were any CGC employees involved in that scam.  It was asked and he answered "no."

 

When the police have pulled me over and asked if I realized I was speeding, regardless of my answer, does anyone believe I am going to bring up my 100mph + drive though Canada when I had my mustang? 

[JollyComics]

On 2/3/2024 at 7:39 AM, Sam T said:

This is so obvious and insightful that I kinda feel stupid for not saying this! The lawsuit as described by a guy on twitter (I still haven't been able to find the full text of the complaint) is very clearly describing a criminal act. The idea of filing a lawsuit BEFORE working with law enforcement to have criminal charges filed is just backwards. Generally the stat has more resources and a higher success rate w/ criminal charges than plaintiffs in civil suits. Also, CGC wouldn't be paying for the investigative resources so it would literally save them money while also solving the problem of these two folks.

 

Going civil before criminal is a very sketchy move...through...his...teeth 🤣

Slightly off subject: this is very similar to the husband and wife's criminal act at CGC - https://patch.com/illinois/arlingtonheights/worker-accused-stealing-600k-arlington-heights-dentist

The dentistry owners knew something wrong with money and had to let the detectives investigating until all evidences were sufficient against two employees.  The owners knew that losses would not be recoverable.   I think this is the appropriate way to let the law enforcement to arrest them. They might not want to get involved.  An embezzlement is a capital felony crime.

But CGC goes the different mode?   Is CGC trying to win the lawsuit and bring the money back from the thieves?   Are they doing own investigation, not police?   No criminal charge?  They may know that they may not able to recovered from the losses if they are going to the jail.  That's my theory.

[CGC Mike]

I am not going to let comics general get overrun with threads regarding the 2 current issues.  Unless something new arises, There will be no more spinoff threads allowed.  While we do allow criticism, tread very lightly singling out current, individual employees of our company.  I have allowed some talk regarding this in the 2 main threads.  Creating a thread with the sole purpose of doing what I have mentioned above will not be tolerated.