interesting article, page-16

Fokinel

You say you have reviewed the case (Again).

Yet your opion leaves me a little confussed. After reading the facts you base your opinion on MMX being part of a group that called for a deferral of the case to review evidence or what ever it was that was produced at the last miniute.

You make no reference to any of the case facts
1. Did MMX take the money from CHM? If so how & where etc.
2. Why did the liquidators not claim for this money?
3. Did CHM ever intend to buy Jack Hills? Where they ever going to be a partner?
4. CHM money MAY have been used but under what provision. Loan/stealing/Corruption what?

I am a MMX holder but still warry of the details & a little concerned. But please arguing they are likely to loose based on deferral is really weak. Any person would take extra time to review something if allowed. Especially Lawyers.

So have another read & bring some facts to the table for discussion.