« CA1: what do to about threatening gestures, partially conflicting defenses, and crack | Main | NY: Prosecution based on required surrender of illegal gun violated 5th amendment »

April 03, 2007

Comments

Laser

We are simply aghast at the amount of mitigation to avoid compliance with statutory "unambiguous" language in the case of In re: eToys 01-706 (DE Bankr. 2001)

Whistle blowing provided proof, by submission of Court docket items, of over 140 statutory violations.

Several "key" resignations have occurred as there is an apparent, deep intent to "cover up" the whole issue.

The most appauling is the fact that the US Asst Trustee Frank Perch stated in a Motion To Disgorge Traub Bonacquist & Fox (eToys D.I. 2195) that the US Trustee had forewarned the parties (Disgorge Motion parts 19 & 35) not to engage in replacing key personnel of the debtor with anyone connected to the professionals in the case.

Not only was the warning ignored, Traub Bonacquist & Fox confessed in the March 1 2005 hearing that his firm paid Barry Gold 4 separate pre and post petition payments of $30,000 each from Jan to May 2001 whereupon Barry Gold was placed in eToys as a "wind-down coordinator" at $40,000 per month (for 2 days work every two weeks) who then became CEO and eventually confirmed Plan administrator.

After the Asst US Trustee resigned the attorney for Region 3 has successfully covered up the facts with the following contract with Traub's firm.

WHEREAS the United States Trustee shall NOT seek to compel any additional disclosures of TBF.

Dates have been falsified and issues expunged under the Pretense or Color of Law to dismiss the Court approved Liquidation entity and the eToys equity holders from bringing the facts before the court(s).

It is easy to say items have not been proven when you keep striking and expunging them from the record.

The Court stated NO LAW existed that required the paid associate of the Traub firm (the court approved counsel for the Creditors Committee) to apply as a post petition "wind down coordinator" (please see the Oct 4 2005 OPINION)

Disregarding the fact that over 100 perjury counts have occurred and disregarding 327(a), 2014, 101(14), the Judicial Canon's of Conduct 3(B)3 and 18 USC 3057(a).

The Attorney for the US Trustee Region 3 also has disregarded "ad hoc" 327(a) and the fiduciary duties of Law under 28 USC 586(a)(3)(F).

The Courts in the Delaware case of eToys have quite literally, entered the Twilight Zone!

The comments to this entry are closed.