In the following link you will find evidence that the CFTC had no interest is proving if a crime was committed. In the document you will find the following results: Patricia Gomersall Civil Case Testimony
First thing first, Randall is not the owner of My Big Coin (John Roche is, and is listed nowhere in the criminal trial. Imagine being found guilty for a company you didn’t own
- Randall Crater, Mark Gillespie, John Roche and Michael Kruger were all defendants in the Civil Case, but somehow, only Randall Crater was cited in the criminal case. How is this possible if Randall wasn’t the owner and John Roche was?
- The CFTC claimed there were 28 victims, but only spoken to one person (they spoke to this person after the case was filed, how can they claim there were 28 victims without speaking to any of them?)
- The lead CFTC agent had no clue about crypto currencies, or even what a crypto wallet was.
- (How can they investigate something they have no knowledge of and determine if a crime was committed?
- The prosecutors and the FBI had exonerating evidence, but the judge helped blocked them from testifying citing the Touhy regulation( based on my research, the Touhy regulation does not apply to criminal cases)
- With the judge allowing the exonerating evidence to be suppressed, this violated Randall’s 6th Amendment right to a fair trial
- THERE IS DOCUMENTNTED PROOF OF FBI WITNESS INTIMIDATION IN THIS CASE
- The lead detective for the CFTC claimed that Randall Crater solicited potential customer for MBC Pay but had no evidence on what exactly Randall did as a solicitation, She claims that one email from Randall to John Lynch AFTER Mr. Lynch had already purchased MBC was considered a possible future solicitation (How is this possible?)
- During the CFTC’s investigation, they did not at any point attempt to reach out to Randall Crater or his attorney, they just filed the lawsuit. (I have never heard of an investigation by a government entity that never actually spoke to the defendant or their attorney before a case was filed
- The CFTC has used the My Big Coin case to try to regulate crypto, they even lied to Congress call My Big Coin a Ponzi Scheme, which they knew was false. They mentioned My Big Coin by name in the hearing.
- The CFTC cited a cancellation of a contract between MBC and Mastercard as the basis of the False/Misleading Press release for MY BIG COIN Pay 2 days later/ She even acknowledged that MBC and MBC Pay were two separate companies(Furthermore, she never attempted to Contact Adam Tracey, who was listed as the contact for the press release. for any kind of clarity, she just took the cancellation at face value. (again, the cancellation letter was to MBC, NOT MBC Pay
- The CFTC agent never tried to verify if the cancellation letter was authentic or not
- The CFTC received documents for the investigation from FINRA, but never spoke to anyone at FINRA, nor did she make any attempts to talk with anyone at FINRA
- The CFTC took no steps to verify if the MasterCard prepaid cards were ever issued
- The attached the cancellation letter in their declaration to the court without every trying to verify it.
- The CFTC filed the complaint, and cited that MBC was not backed by gold, and never, I repeat never tried to verify if it was MBC was backed by gold,
- The CFTC agent received documentation from Randall, but never tried to verify it.
- The CFTC said they spoke with John Roche requesting documents, and John said his ex-girlfriend destroyed them, they then called the ex-girlfriend, didn’t know what to believe after the conversation, and never tried to follow up with John Roche or even subpoena any documents.
- Under oath the CFTC agent stated the had no evidence that MBC was NOT Backed by gold, and they did nothing to verify if it was or not.
- The CFTC never tried to verify who was in charge of the website
- the CFTC claims they watched a YouTube video, but in fact they were unable to because of the CFTC’s firewall, she lied under oath
- the did not know wat “Decentralized Virtual Currency” meant, (how can they investigate something they don’t have a clue about?)
- The CFTC agent never tried to verify that the funds deposited in the Greyshore account were actually from MBC customers, they claimed that it was, but did not actually investigate.
- The CFTC agent testified that the referenced accounts looked like fraud to her, but did not do anything to investigate whether or not fraud was actually committed.
In Conclusion, from reading the transcript of the CFTC agent’s testimony, they did not try to investigate if any crime was actually committed. They saw someone that had a lot of money and assumed fraud was committed. In fact, they never even attempted to speak to Randall Crater, they just filed the case stating things as facts without verifying them, how is this possible?