Then there is Reyes. Reyes is, I suppose, a "typical" shareholder in the eyes of the court, and is mind boggling to real shareholders - by always agreeing with the give-aways to Tenor. Not even a peep of concerns for shareholders. Giving the impression that shareholders are "represented." Maybe a shill (probably the wrong word) for Tenor-Crystallex to put up some false front representation and make it easier for the judge to believe shareholders agree with this circus? It is an interesting question and could be speculated many ways. If true, would likely be difficult, if impossible, to prove. But, from the previous shenanigans it would not be much of a surprise if true.

If you haven't spoken to Tony then shame on you for spreading rumours and conjecture. If you haven't spoken to him how do you know and is mind boggling to real shareholders - by always agreeing with the give-aways to Tenor. Not even a peep of concerns for shareholders. Giving the impression that shareholders are "represented." Maybe a shill (probably the wrong word) for Tenor-Crystallex to put up some false front representation and make it easier for the judge to believe shareholders agree with this circus?

This is the type of sensationalism that is destroying free speak. To paint the picture that he is a shill without any facts should be libel. If you have any facts then please post them.

I have contacted Tony and discussed his presence in the case. Maybe you should as well before making innuendos about a person. While I may not agree with him on all points at least he has skin in the game and in the legal proceedings. I have lots of speculation about you and your posts but at least I ask you why you do what you do.

A new low for you JC!