In a 2013 video, Jim Staley likens his securities infringement to running an unknown stop sign because he didn't know his product was was deemed a security in Missouri (Despite the March 2009 notification from Missouri Securities Division). In this video, Staley claims that he would “never intentionally break the law”, however, Staley fails to mention how he continued to illegally sell the B&B product after the cease and desist while continuing to make materially false statements to his clients knowing they would lose their money. This if fully covered in his 2015 guilty plea. Source: http://www.tinyurl.com/plea-page6 If Jim ran a stop-sign, why did he continue to sell the product after the cease and desist?  



Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted.
"Fair Use" guidelines: www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html

Staley 2013 C&D Explanation

user963311699