Who to sue ?

[aarthrj3811]

~Art~
Who to sue ?

It is real clear that it is not the Treasure Hunting Device manufacturers…Art

~SWR~

So....Are you going to validate your claims?

Sorry SWR ..We can not find but one case where the manufacturers officers were tried in a court of law by a Judge and Jury..They were found not guilty…Art

 

[aarthrj3811]

~SWR~

So....tell us, Art. What became of the device in that trial?

In other words...what ever happened to that LRL where the officers where found not guilty?

A Federal Judge Banned it for Mail fraud before the officers were tried by a Judge and Jury..
The full text and discussion can be found at http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,331120.0.html

 

[aarthrj3811]

A Federal Judge banned it for mail fraud? Are ya sure about that, Art?
How did the Long Range Locator commit mail fraud?
I think you are skewing the rulings a tad bit. Like 100%

That is all explained at http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,331120.0.html
In my opinion the Jury has spoken..Art

 

[aarthrj3811]

~SWR~

You do know, however....that Long Range Locators was banned in the USA. The Jury ruled the Long Range Locator as being fraudulent, and scientifically unsound. As noted, the manufacturer was not treated as soundly.

Wow.. http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,331120.0.html

 

[aarthrj3811]

~SWR~

In my opinion... the Judge/Jury has spoken.

Banned in the USA
Yes a Judge with no jury did ban the sale of those devices in 1996..A few years later a Jury found them not guilty

 

[aarthrj3811]

~SWR~

Found them not guilty?
The Long Range Locators were found not guilty?

Duhhhhh…You do not know what the job of jury is? I sure hope you have someone to bandage your hands from all the straw that is slipping..Art

 

[aarthrj3811]

SWR

Found them not guilty?
The Long Range Locators were found not guilty?

~Art~Duhhhhh…

You do not know what the job of jury is? I sure hope you have someone to bandage your hands from all the straw that is slipping..Art

~SWR~

So...not answering the questions is typical. Adding the drivel and piffle was to be expected.

Total confused and clueless is Art

.
What’s wrong SWR..Did I not give you something to twist and spin?

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

good afternon swr, aa, fenix etc.

Don Jose de La mancha

 

[aarthrj3811]

~SWR~

So...not answering the questions is typical. Adding the drivel and piffle was to be expected.
Total confused and clueless is Art.

Sorry that my answer confused you and you had to post it again…Art

 

[aarthrj3811]

Re: Who to sue ?
Reply To This Topic #32 Posted Today at 03:54:25 PM
Quote

Quote from: aarthrj3811 on Today at 03:29:42 PM
~SWR~
Quote
In my opinion... the Judge/Jury has spoken.
Banned in the USA

Yes a Judge with no jury did ban the sale of those devices in 1996..A few years later a Jury found them not guilty

Found them not guilty?

The Long Range Locators were found not guilty?

Re: Who to sue ?
Reply To This Topic #33 Posted Today at 04:22:20 PM
Quote Modify Remove

~SWR~
Quote
Found them not guilty?
The Long Range Locators were found not guilty?

Duhhhhh…You do not know what the job of jury is? I sure hope you have someone to bandage your hands from all the straw that is slipping..Art

The question has been answered…Art

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

HI aa, I see that swr is violating the rules again, he posted -->

So...not answering the questions is typical. Adding the drivel and piffle was to be expected.

Total confused and clueless is Art.

Apparently, Art is to busy twist/spin/duck/dodge to answer the questions.

Probably....because they know the answer supports the anti-fraudsters

*******
So...not answering the questions is typical. Adding the drivel and piffle was to be expected.

Total confused and clueless is Art.

Apparently, Art is to busy twist/spin/duck/dodge to answer the questions.

Probably....because they know the answer supports the anti-fraudsters

Don Jose de La Mancha