The Shadowrun Situation

Stahlseele · Post by **Stahlseele** » Fri Sep 17, 2010 3:22 pm

well, at least something . .

Troll · Post by **Troll** » Fri Sep 17, 2010 4:58 pm

I'm sorry, could I ask for a little refresher? Which bond?

I'm almost up to date on all the legal crap at CGL but not completely.

Stahlseele · Post by **Stahlseele** » Fri Sep 17, 2010 6:34 pm

CGL wanted each of the three main prosecutor to pay 25k up front for their troubles of going to court against them . .

Ancient History · Post by **Ancient History** » Fri Sep 17, 2010 10:02 pm

Oh no. It was $75k each. Item number 28.

Neurosis · Post by **Neurosis** » Fri Sep 17, 2010 10:58 pm

Any speculation on why they pulled it?

Ancient History · Post by **Ancient History** » Fri Sep 17, 2010 11:09 pm

My guess is because after two weeks the judge hadn't signed off on it, but I really have no idea one way or t'other.

rojo · Post by **rojo** » Fri Sep 17, 2010 11:24 pm

Ancient History wrote:My guess is because after two weeks the judge hadn't signed off on it, but I really have no idea one way or t'other.

Ancient-
I read over the last couple of postings on that link. I didn't find anything that said it had been withdrawn. After reading it, it looks like the response was due this last Weds and the hearing on the bonds was next Weds. Is it just not posted yet? Or I might have just missed it!

Rojo

(Did the judge have to sign the order to have the hearing, maybe that is what I missed?)

Ancient History · Post by **Ancient History** » Sat Sep 18, 2010 12:11 am

RECAP hasn't posted the latest version of the docket report yet. The motion was withdrawn on the 15th.

rojo · Post by **rojo** » Sat Sep 18, 2010 12:55 am

Thanks-
I was reading everything I hadn't look at yet and didn't find it.
Rojo

Ancient History wrote:RECAP hasn't posted the latest version of the docket report yet. The motion was withdrawn on the 15th.

Stahlseele · Post by **Stahlseele** » Sat Sep 18, 2010 11:06 am

Ancient History wrote:Oh no. It was $75k each. Item number 28.

Ah, okay, numbers are not my friends <.<

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Sat Sep 18, 2010 6:28 pm

In general, when those motions are filed, they have no weight at all. It's literally just some lawyer trying to get a judge to issue a decree by oh-so-subtly suggesting one by writing all the legalese out and leaving space for the judge to sign it. If the judge signs it, the result is exactly as if the judge had written the whole damn thing himself. If the judge does not sign it, there is no impact whatsoever. It's just idle speculation of what the judge might want to say unless and until it actually gets a signature.

A seventy five thousand dollar bond for court costs on a twenty thousand dollar loan is pretty much laughable. If CGL could rack up that kind of court costs they could have just paid their fucking debts. Even with all the money Loren ran off with, the company as a whole is still only a couple hundred thousand in the hole. The entire concept of the bond was laughable, and I still don't understand why they didn't go for something more plausible like five thousand dollars.

-Username17

TheFlatline · Post by **TheFlatline** » Sun Sep 19, 2010 9:22 pm

Either they have a crap lawyer (which is possible, I mean christ, the lawyer had to get into an argument over the timing of his filings so he wasn't late), or they were hoping to scare the shit out of the plaintiffs and are just harassing them.

Stahlseele · Post by **Stahlseele** » Sun Sep 19, 2010 9:51 pm

Probably both.

Wageslave · Post by **Wageslave** » Tue Sep 21, 2010 2:13 am

I'm with Stahlseele on that one, although I'm leaning more to it being an intimidation tactic.

Centurion13 · Post by **Centurion13** » Wed Sep 22, 2010 1:45 am

By gum, I just discovered this. Old news to the rest of you, but this sounds soooooo...familiar. Especially the part where the guy discovers more and more ways to milk the cow and never gets caught.

Until he does.

But by then it is too late to recover the lost funds.

http://hamptonroads.com/2009/07/game-co ... yal-family

Cent13

Neurosis · Post by **Neurosis** » Wed Sep 22, 2010 6:45 am

Interesting read.

The main difference in this case is the complete and total lack of criminal prosecution. : /

Edit: Also, remorse.

theye1 · Post by **theye1** » Wed Sep 22, 2010 8:58 am

In all seriousness, it's quite common for victims of Fraud to still be friends and even defend the people who stole from them. It's sadly human nature.

edit: I personally find it disturbing that Coleman has no apparent remorse for things he has done, and they still stand by him.

TheFlatline · Post by **TheFlatline** » Wed Sep 22, 2010 6:09 pm

So I gotta ask... what is it about gaming companies and embezzlement? It's like a forbidden mixture of peanut butter and chocolate.

Neurosis · Post by **Neurosis** » Wed Sep 22, 2010 6:10 pm

@TheFlatline:

It is that gaming companies usually begin as small business evolving out of a hobby, and they do not have a very good grounding in the business side of things. At least that's my take on it.

theye1 wrote:In all seriousness, it's quite common for victims of Fraud to still be friends and even defend the people who stole from them. It's sadly human nature.

edit: I personally find it disturbing that Coleman has no apparent remorse for things he has done, and they still stand by him.

Well that was really not the case in the article linked to. Their friendship is ruined forever by the, you know, decade of grand larceny.

Anyway, I think I have less issue with anyone forgiving Coleman than I do for Coleman MAKING NO FORM OF APOLOGY.

virgil · Post by **virgil** » Wed Sep 22, 2010 6:21 pm

From Coleman's perspective, why should he feel remorse? He's getting away with it so far, piles of people have defended his honour, and it's looking like he's keeping the license.

Ancient History · Post by **Ancient History** » Wed Sep 22, 2010 6:41 pm

Apologizing would involve at some public or private level admitting what he did. Which could be bad for him, since confessing to your crimes is the first thing any lawyer will tell you not to do.

virgil · Post by **virgil** » Wed Sep 22, 2010 7:01 pm

mean_liar · Post by **mean_liar** » Wed Sep 22, 2010 7:05 pm

TheFlatline wrote:So I gotta ask... what is it about gaming companies and embezzlement? It's like a forbidden mixture of peanut butter and chocolate.

They usually lack the staff and/or foresight to have the person writing the checks be different from the person keeping the books.

Non-business folk just call all of that, "accounting" and give it to one person.

Clutch9800 · Post by **Clutch9800** » Wed Sep 22, 2010 7:05 pm

Remember that Decipher was very close to buying FASA back in 1999-2000.

The deal fell through when Decipher began to unravel.

I can remember when Decipher was a big time player.

Clutch

BeeRockxs · Post by **BeeRockxs** » Wed Sep 22, 2010 10:50 pm

Ancient History wrote:Apologizing would involve at some public or private level admitting what he did. Which could be bad for him, since confessing to your crimes is the first thing any lawyer will tell you not to do.

No one here knows if LLC apologized to the other owners of CGL.

The Gaming Den

The Shadowrun Situation

Decipher and FASA