? The circumstances surrounding this do not engender confidence in anyone
? Jury formed a view beyond a reasonable doubt that leading up to the charges, Barnes was prepared to allow incorrect information go to the ASX.
? There was the potential for serious loss although no evidence of this occurring
? The interests of market expediency had overcome due process
? Judge viewed the offences to be in the most serious category
? Offences such as this strike at the very heart of the economy
? The ASX process is based on honesty and trust, and this is particularly relevant in the electronic age.
? With mining stocks there is a requirement for unfailing honesty for shareholders to invest in an inherently risky sector
? The effect of the offences was to give the impression that Chameleon was in a better financial position than it actually was
? There is no element of contrition on Mr Barnes? part as he has already appealed
? Sentence must send a very clear message to others acting in a deliberate way
? Other non-mitigating factors were the number of offences and the period of time over which they occurred.
? Roberts sentence was discounted because he pleaded guilty (8 months, 5 months non-parole)
? Judge cited Williams / HIH as a precedent in determining sentencing
Bail was opposed by the Crown. Bail was granted on the sole reason his Court of Criminal Appeal hearing was next month, and that the CCA may stand the matter over for several months (therefore, he would have substantially served his sentence before appeal is resolved). In his application, his barrister claimed Barnes had received threats over his personal safety.
Bail conditions were as follows:
? $50,000 surety from two acceptable persons each ? Report daily to police in Perth ? Surrender any travel documents and passport. Not allowed to go near a port of departure.
His appeal in the CCA is listed for 11 May.
Its good t to see facts than fiction for a change on this site.
Go get the read on the ASIC site too if you dont believe me:
