RE: Evidence4 Jan 2019 11:07
I'm not surprised that Mole has not posted recently. There are too many different opinions some with little basis in fact and some where the interpretations of evidence leave one wondering why the reading and understanding of the same papers can differ so much.
As an example RB40 has illustrated that Hope has a duty to OMF as well as FRR. True, but this has led him into a conflict of interest where he has favoured OMF over FRR. This is a breach of fiduciary duty to FRR. This is clear from the filings we know about, so why some people say that the emails, for example, show Hope in a good light is beyond me when they show a continuing conflict of interest.
There is an old saying, "Read, Mark, Learn and Inwardly Digest", it should then go on to say, think carefully before committing thoughts to paper. Some of you have not been doing any of that properly. It would aid the debate if you did.
If this sounds patronising to some, I could care less but I feel better for saying it.