Summary

The People of the State of California vs Sylvia Celeste Brown and Kensil Dalzell Brown

Only after that date, and by virtue of the Department’s investigation, did the Crosses discover defendants’ misrepresentations, omissions, and failure to qualify the offering with the Commissioner of Corporations of the State of California.
Defendants criminal activities could not have been discovered by the Crosses earlier, because they were unsophisticated investors, who had no knowledge of the regulations regarding qualification of securities, and further, had no way of knowing that a substantial portion of their investment had been channeled into other ventures by the Browns.
Source: Wikisource

The People of the State of California vs Sylvia Celeste Brown and Kensil Dalzell Brown

Even after the Crosses learned of the loss of their investment, Defendants Kensil Brown continued to provide assurances that the investment had been a regrettable, but ordinary business loss due to lack of capital, and that their money could be recovered through the sale of mining equipment. After repeated efforts to get their money back, the Crosses finally registered a complaint with the Department of Corporations on June 7, 1989.
Source: Wikisource

The People of the State of California vs Sylvia Celeste Brown and Kensil Dalzell Brown

If the above-named defendant (s) is/are presently on probation in Santa Clara County, any evidence presented at a preliminary hearing in the instant case will be used not only as a basis for a holding in this case but also as a circumstance for a violation of probation and, at any formal hearing on that violation of probation, the People will move the transcript of the preliminary hearing into evidence as a basis for the violation.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature