Johannes John Westergaard obituary, New York, SEC, fraud, lawsuit, death

This is obviously very old news. This was John Westergaard's obituary in the New York Times. There's a jpg version below the text. 

John Westergaard, 72, Founder of Mutual Fund, Is Dead

Published: February 10, 2003

John Westergaard, a stock picker who built his career on the belief that small companies could richly reward investors who went looking for them, died on Jan. 31 at Calvary Hospice in the Bronx. He was 72.

The cause was prostate cancer, said his son, Emile Westergaard.

In addition to spending more than 40 years prospecting for undiscovered small company stocks, Mr. Westergaard served as treasurer for Daniel Patrick Moynihan from the earliest days of his political career through four Senate campaigns.

Mr. Westergaard started on Wall Street as an analyst for Standard & Poor's, the securities rating service, but in 1960 he opened a research firm with a friend, William Prime. Their company, Equity Research Associates, offered analytical services to small brokerage firms that could not afford research departments.

The financial services industry was not consolidated then as it is today, and with hundreds of firms vying for business, few could afford to assign an analyst to researching small companies full time.

Equity Research Associates was eventually acquired by Ladenburg, Thalmann & Company, a brokerage firm.

In the 1980's, Mr. Westergaard founded the Westergaard Fund, a mutual fund that tried to carry out his ideas about finding emerging companies and investing shareholders' money in them. But the results were disappointing. Stocks of small companies generally lagged the market during the bull market of the early and mid-1980's, then crashed harder than the rest of the market in October 1987. Mr. Westergaard closed the fund that November.

He continued to publish research, however, first mailing his newsletter to subscribers, and later faxing it. His descriptions of small companies were still able to move stock prices and trading volume.

As Mr. Westergaard's publishing business grew, he eventually took it to the Internet, starting a Web site devoted to small company stocks. He also was the host of an investment radio show, "Johnny Dotcom's Journal," where he interviewed executives of fledgling companies, and he offered a service to companies in which he tried to monitor electronic rumor mongers and to counteract the stories they spread.

Blending these various lines of work proved problematic. In 1997, Mr. Westergaard wound up in a heated online battle with a mysterious chat room visitor called Pluvia, who was leaving negative electronic postings about a financially troubled company Mr. Westergaard represented, Premier Laser.

Mr. Westergaard posted a $5,000 reward for Pluvia's identity, touching off an online debate about free speech, the right to remain anonymous, and the propriety of Mr. Westergaard's strategy, which called for companies to pay him fees for disseminating information about their prospects.

This came to the attention of the Securities and Exchange Commission, which in 2000 filed civil fraud charges against Mr. Westergaard. The S.E.C. said that Mr. Westergaard ought to have made it more clear to his readers that the companies he was writing about were paying him. The complaint was one of many that the agency filed against online stock tipsters, but it stood out because of the way Mr. Westergaard chose to fight it.

Instead of agreeing to a fine or temporary suspension, Mr. Westergaard wrote a letter to Arthur Levitt, chairman of the S.E.C. at the time, saying that he was terminally ill with cancer and that the S.E.C. had ruined him. Word that the agency was investigating his business had leaked as he was about to enter a financing round, Mr. Westergaard said, and the scrutiny had scared potential lenders away. He had had to lay off his research staff and close the business, he said, and because he held 47 percent of the equity, he was destitute.

Amid the publicity that followed, a former United States attorney for the Southern District of New York, Paul Curran, stepped in and represented Mr. Westergaard for free. The case was settled in October 2001 with the S.E.C. dropping the fraud charges and pursuing only a charge that Mr. Westergaard had violated an anti-touting disclosure provision. Mr. Westergaard neither admitted nor denied wrongdoing, although he said he did not commit fraud.

A judge said no civil fine was imposed because of Mr. Westergaard's financial condition.

Mr. Westergaard later created a Web site where he hoped other people unhappy about their dealings with the S.E.C. could communicate.

Mr. Westergaard was born Johannes Westergaard, to immigrants from Norway, and was raised on Long Island. He became interested in Democratic Party politics while studying at Williams College in the early 1950's, and ran unsuccessfully for the New York State Senate. He attracted attention to one campaign issue, the dating of milk containers, by leading a cow through Wall Street.

Later, after meeting Mr. Moynihan at the Samuel J. Tilden Democratic Club, Mr. Westergaard agreed to serve as his campaign treasurer when he ran for New York City Council president. Mr. Moynihan lost that race but the two men remained friends, and in 1976 Mr. Westergaard became treasurer of Mr. Moynihan's first successful Senate race.

In addition to Emile, Mr. Westergaard is survived by three other children, Cathrine and Kermit, owners of the Stinger bar in Brooklyn; and Elizabeth, a musician in California. He is also survived by three grandchildren.

_______
john westergaard, john, westergaard, westergaard fund, sec, y2k, securities fraud, securities and exchange commission, lawsuit, litigation, scam, con man, shyster, stock promoter, paid, liar, fraud, paid tout, new york, ppd, pre paid legal, johnny dot com, radio show, interview, ppd, umcc, bikr, sued, freedom of speech, radiowallstreet.com, bob thayer, westergaard.com, wsys, wbn.com, qekg, biker's dream, analyst, westergaard online systems, paid tout, shyster, piece of shit, small cap, pink sheet, penny stock, pump and dump, disclaimer, independent, pluvia, edgars, standard & poors, securities analyst, premier laser,

John Westergaard attacks the SEC with bullshit claims

This is from the website John Westergaard made to attack the SEC in 2000. Westergaard claims he was dying of prostate cancer which had metastasized and spread to his spine. His excuse for the disclaimer mixup is totally crazy. He weaves and spins his words to make it all seem like a tiny technicality and the SEC is a mean villain. Most stock promoters would remove their disclaimers such as Kathy Knight-McConnell, Matt Brown, Francois Goelo and more. Kathy is out of business. Matt is in prison. I don't know what happened to Goelo but I doubt  he ever became a Cayman Island citizen.

INTRODUCTION: A Federal Agency Plays GOTCHA!

Friday afternoon, May 26, 2000: The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission phoned counsel for Internet publisher Westergaard Broadcasting Network.com, Inc. alleging that the company's disclosure statement was out of compliance with section 17(b) of the Securities Act of 1933. While the Westergaard disclosure statement clearly explained to readers -- as the law requires -- that the Westergaard service presented client sponsored research of a genre similar to the client sponsored debt service ratings of Standard & Poor's and Moody's, reference to a set sponsor fee of $48,000 had been removed a few weeks earlier to reflect a change in marketing and pricing strategy.

The $48,000 fixed fee had been dropped in favor of a new marketing plan where up to fifty carefully selected smallcap companies would be showcased at no fee in order to establish critical mass for the Web site and research credibility. For the disclosure statement to say that a $48,000 fee was charged was inaccurate and misleading. Note that neither Standard & Poor's nor Moody's publicize fees at their Internet sites.

The SEC found the explanation unacceptable. Its position was that some dollar figure was technically required to be shown according to regulation 17(b) of the '33 Act. Whether the figure was accurate was not the issue. The law says there has to be a dollar amount -- no exceptions granted!!!

Violation of section 17(b) is the regulatory equivalent of jaywalking. No investor lost money or was otherwise misled or damaged by absence of the $48,000 figure. No nefarious intent was charged. According to Assistant Enforcement Director Erich T. Schwartz there was no issue over the quality of the research product published by Westergaard. The alleged violation had existed for only a few weeks. There was no commercial gain to the Westergaard companies, John Westergaard or anyone else by removal of the dollar figure. The change had been made strictly in the interest of accuracy.

Links to a site-wide disclosure statement clearly establishing that the research was client sponsored remained in effect on virtually every one of several thousand Web site pages. When appropriate there continued to be specific dollar disclosure references at each of 15 WBNcyberstations™ which were a proprietary Westergaard publishing format.

Upon receipt of the SEC's phone call on May 26th the statement was changed in a matter of minutes to their satisfaction by inserting the words "up to $48,000". Not a big problem so it seemed.

SO IT SEEMED, BUT THERE WAS MORE.....

Yes, there was more -- a lot more! The SEC had a long standing agenda to put Westergaard Broadcasting Network.com and its parent, Westergaard.com, Inc. out of business. Having learned on May 17, 2000 from a regulatory filing that the parent company, Westergaard.com, Inc., was engaged in a $2 million private placement, the Commission seized the opportunity to allege the 17(b) violation, to issue subpoenas to Westergaard's clients and to place the company on notice that it would be charged with securities fraud.

As a result of the SEC violating the privacy of Westergaard.com, Inc. and its publishing subsidiary in this manner, the business became inoperable literally overnight. Clients were advised not to speak with Westergaard analysts. $1.5 million in private placement funds already deposited were returned to investors. The business was forced to shut down August 15, 2000.

Investors lost tens of millions of dollars, 18 professionals lost employment, a promising new paradigm of investment research designed to thwart stock manipulation was squelched, and John Westergaard -- an internationally respected investment analyst with a 43 year history of publishing research on smallcap companies without once becoming the subject of a regulatory action, a litigation or an arbitration -- was made destitute.

WHY DID THIS HAPPEN?

Why would a government agency arbitrarily and capriciously destroy a vibrant, honest, ethical business? No one reviewing the case -- including former Enforcement Director William McLucas of Wilmer Cutler & Pickering (McLucas was recently appointed to lead the Enron investigation), who on initial perusal called the agency's actions "vindictive", and associates of four other major New York and Washington law firms -- believed that the SEC would pursue such drastic action over a trivial 17(b) violation. Obviously the SEC's interest in Westergaard had to have been about something else.

That something else was John Westergaard's invocation two and a half years previously of a publisher's right to protection of free speech under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

The Commission had investigated Westergaard and the company he founded for over two years prior to May 26, 2000 precipitated by a dispute over a November 1997 SEC request for information about the company's operations. Westergaard had agreed then to fully co-operate on questions relating to securities regulation -- but as a matter of priciple not to open itself to an SEC fishing expedition for information unrelated to regulatory issues and thereby violating its corporate right to privacy.

Such was the genesis of the case of The SEC v. John Westergaard and the First Amendment.

The SEC is sensitive to claims of First Amendment protection. It suffered a critical defeat in a previous case in the 1970s, a precursor to the Westergaard matter. Richard Holman, publisher of The Wall Street Transcript, had issued several editorials critical of the SEC. The Commission retaliated by seeking to force theTranscript to register as an investment adviser, thus employing its regulatory authority to squelch a news publication.

Holman fought. The case dragged on in federal courts for 10 years (SEC v. Wall Street Transcript Corporation) with certain constitutional aspects being heard by the U. S. Supreme Court. Eventually, in 1978, a federal judge decided in Mr. Holman's behalf, ruling that the Transcript was a news organization. The SEC was severely embarrassed. The case is frequently referenced in securities cases and in law schools as an egregious example of regulatory overreach.

The Westergaard case is a replay of SEC v. Wall Street Transcript Corporation.Challenged by Westergaard on First Amendment grounds, the SEC retaliated as they did in the Holman matter not by addressing the constitutional issue of whether Westergaard was on sound footing in claiming First Amendment protection, but by applying its regulatory authority to squelch the business.

This time the Commission would not leave itself open to protracted litigation by challenging a viable business with resources to carry on an extended battle in federal court as occurred in The Wall Street Transcript case.

The SEC would first destroy the business by launching a preemptive strike and shut the business down and pursue John Westergaard personally.

In so doing, the SEC acted illegally in employing its regulatory mandate to violate the right of protection to a publisher accorded by the First Amendment. A student of constitutional law noted as follows:

"Considering that this problem (the Westergaard case) had early in its genesis a dispute over the applicability of constitutional rights of transmission of information, the Commission's action in unnecessarily loading on a fraud charge where none was needed is a classic act of intimidation of the press by government regulators intending to chill the free exercise of constitutional rights. In sum, the Commission said, 'Invoke your constitutional rights and we'll call you a crook instead of merely a business out of compliance."

That the SEC v. Westergaard was not about securities regulation became transparent when in October 2000 the SEC dropped fraud charges against the Westergaard companies (both parent and subsidiary) but continued to pursue John Westergaard personally for fraud.

The SEC v. Westergaard was thus revealed for what it was -- a personal vendetta by an agency of the federal government pursued against a citizen for invoking a constitutional right, incidentally a terminally ill man in his 70th year who had lived his entire life by the rules and demonstrated on numerous occasions his concern for matters of social importance and for persons less fortunate than he.

Ironically, his unblemished 40 year history in the securities industry worked to his disfavor. A former senior official of the Commission explained: One has to understand that the SEC employs intimidation by example and John Westergaard was the perfect showcase -- clean record, international reputation, widely known and respected in financial circles plus there was the Moynihan relationship with the prospect that the tabloids in New York would pick thestory up. The headline they were hoping for was:

"MOYNIHAN FINANCE CHIEF ACCUSED OF SECURITIES FRAUD"

If the SEC could destroy a man of high reputation and high connections such as John Westergaard, imagine the fear they could engender among the truly illegitimate yoyos out there? The Chinese have been engaged in a crackdown against crime by executing people for minor crimes with a bullet to the head with local townspeople forced to watch. They call it "Kill the Chicken to Scare the Monkey".

Westergaard had enlisted during the Korean war for three years of military service although he could have opted out medically, had fought for the rights of minorities as a Williams College student in the 1950s, had marched with Martin Luther King in support of civil rights for African Americans in the '60s, had worked pro-bono for 40 years as chief financial officer in support of Daniel Patrick Moynihan's career in public service and four terms in the U.S. Senate, and had supported environmental issues, corporate responsibility initiatives, technical schooling for poor immigrants, freedom for political prisoners (Amnesty International), and numerous other publicly spirited causes.

Evidence of good citizenship mattered nothing to the Securities and Exchange Commission. It was committed to destroying John Westergaard financially, physically and emotionally. It would make bogus charges of fraud and employ extreme and false pejorative language designed to damage Westergaard's reputation.

During a meeting at SEC offices in Washington on June 13, 2000 to discuss the charges against the companies (parent and subsidiary), the Commission learned that John Westergaard was terminally ill with prostate cancer that had metastasized to the spine.

The Commission also learned that one of Wall Street's most highly respected executives, Bill Grant, former president of Smith Barney and Vice-Chairman of Smith Kline, was serving as chairman of Westergaard.com, Inc. Realizing that Grant had the resources for a protracted fight whereas Westergaard was in a weakened state, the Commission shifted gears and advised counsel two days later that it would pursue him personally -- he would be personally charged with securities fraud. The fraud charges against Westergaard Broadcasting Network.com and its parent would be later dropped.

Until the SEC learned about Westergaard's health condition there had not been even a hint that fraud charges would be brought against him personally. The alleged reason was that as a contributing editor Westergaard had relayed to the webmaster the decision to change Westergaard Broadcasting Network.com's marketing philosophy and therefore the need to alter the disclosure statement (A case of "kill the messenger" to borrow a phrase.)

NOTE: The SEC did not claim that it was Westergaard's decision to change the marketing strategy which precipitated the alleged violation, only that he had passed on the decision to the webmaster. more here http://web.archive.org/web/20020609153011/http://westergaard.com/intro.html

_______ john westergaard, john, westergaard, westergaard fund, sec, y2k, securities fraud, securities and exchange commission, lawsuit, litigation, scam, con man, shyster, stock promoter, paid, liar, fraud, paid tout, new york, ppd, pre paid legal, johnny dot com, radio show, interview, ppd, umcc, bikr, sued, freedom of speech, radiowallstreet.com, bob thayer, westergaard.com, wsys, wbn.com, qekg, biker's dream, analyst, westergaard online systems, paid tout, shyster, piece of shit, small cap, pink sheet, penny stock, pump and dump, disclaimer, independent, pluvia, edgars, standard & poors, securities analyst, premier laser,

John Westergaard's son Emile Westergaard filed chapter 7 bankruptcy

I went to get some docs about John Westergaard and ran across his son's bankruptcy. John Westergaard's first child Emile Westergaard filed for bankruptcy in New York December 2013. It seems he sued his ex Lauren Chung and spent $4.6 million in legal fees. The case is in the New York Supreme Court as I read this case # 309926/12. He has $100K assets and owes $5.8M. His rent is $13,600/month. He pays $17,000/mo in alimony and child support for his two ex wives Miki Westergaard and Lauren Chung and five children. He filed for bankruptcy to reduce his rent and alimony. He's being evicted from  his apartment and states he has no income.

He claims his income was $1.4M in 2011, 715K in 2012, 225K in 2013 but now has no job. He owes back alimony and taxes to the IRS and state. What a mess. Who would spend $4.6M in legal fees for a divorce when there are no assets? They were in business together. His ex is a PhD.

_______
 john westergaard, john, westergaard, westergaard fund, sec, y2k, securities fraud, securities and exchange commission, lawsuit, litigation, scam, con man, shyster, stock promoter, paid, liar, fraud, paid tout, new york, ppd, pre paid legal, johnny dot com, radio show, interview, ppd, umcc, bikr, sued, freedom of speech, radiowallstreet.com, bob thayer, westergaard.com, wsys, wbn.com, qekg, biker's dream, analyst, westergaard online systems, paid tout, shyster, piece of shit, small cap, pink sheet, penny stock, pump and dump, disclaimer, independent, pluvia, edgars, standard & poors, securities analyst, premier laser,

John Westergaard and SEC lawsuit docket

U.S. District Court
Southern District of New York (Foley Square)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:00-cv-09776-DAB

S.E.C. v. Westergaard, et al Assigned to: Judge Deborah A. Batts Demand: $0 Cause: 15:77 Securities Fraud

Date Filed: 12/27/2000 Date Terminated: 10/11/2001 Jury Demand: None Nature of Suit: 850 Securities/Commodities Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff

Plaintiff
Securities and Exchange Commission	represented by	C. Joshua Felker  Securities and Exchange Commission 450 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20549 (202) 942-2787 LEAD ATTORNEY Erich T. Schwartz  Securities and Exchange Commission 450 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20549 (202) 942-4589 LEAD ATTORNEY Jason R. Gettinger  Securities and Exchange Commission 7 World Trade Center 13th Floor New York, NY 10048 (212) 748-8190 LEAD ATTORNEY John B. Bulgozdy  Securities and Exchange Commission 5670 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1100 Los Angeles, CA 90036 323 965-3322 Fax: 323 065-3908 Email: bulgozdyj@sec.gov LEAD ATTORNEY John L. Hunter  Securities and Exchange Commission 450 FIfth Street, N.W. Mail Stop 8-1 Washington, DC 20549 (202) 942-4825 Email: hunterj@sec.gov LEAD ATTORNEY Thomas C. Newkirk  Securities and Exchange Commission 450 Fifth Street, N.W. Mail Stop 0801 Washington, DC 20549 (202) 942-4550 LEAD ATTORNEY
V.
Defendant
John Westergaard	represented by	Paul Jerome Curran  Kaye, Scholer, Fierman, Hays & Handler 425 Park Ave. New York, NY 10022 212/836-8000 Email: MAOSDNY@KAYESCHOLER.COM LEAD ATTORNEY Richard J Halloran  Kaye Scholer Fierman Hayes & Handler 425 Park Avenue New York, NY 10022 (212)836-8000 LEAD ATTORNEY
Defendant
Westergaard.Com, Inc. TERMINATED: 01/19/2001
Defendant
Westergaard Broadcasting Network.Com, Inc. TERMINATED: 01/19/2001

Date Filed	#	Docket Text
12/27/2000	1	COMPLAINT filed. Summons issued and Notice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(c). (tp) (Entered: 12/27/2000)
12/27/2000		Magistrate Judge James C. Francis is so Designated. (tp) (Entered: 12/27/2000)
01/19/2001	2	FINAL JUDGMENT; that dft. Westgaard Broadcasting Network.com, Inc. it agents, servants, employees etc. are hereby peranently restrained and enjoing as set forth in this Final Judgment; there being no just reason for delay, the Clerk of the Court is hereby directed, pursuant to Rule 54(b) of the F.R.C.P. to enter this Final Judgment forthwith and without further notice. ( signed by Judge Deborah A. Batts ); Mailed copies and notice of right to appeal. Entered On Docket: 01/22/01. (pl) (Entered: 01/22/2001)
01/19/2001	3	FINAL JUDGMENT AS TO DEFT WESTERGAARD.COM, INC, that deft Westergaard, its agents, servants, employees etc are permanently restrained and enjoined from violating Sec 17(b) of the Securities Act of 1933 by the use of any means or instruments of transportation or communication in interstate commerce or by the use of the mails, to publish, etc as further set forth in this document ( signed by Judge Deborah A. Batts ); Mailed copies and notice of right to appeal. Entered On Docket: 1/23/01. (cd) (Entered: 01/23/2001)
02/20/2001	4	AMENDED NOTICE of attorney appearance for John Westergaard by Richard J Halloran. (jp) (Entered: 02/21/2001)
02/27/2001	5	STIPULATION and ORDER, reset answer due for 4/10/01 for John Westergaard . ( signed by Judge Deborah A. Batts ) (kw) (Entered: 02/27/2001)
04/12/2001	6	STIPULATION and ORDER, reset answer to complaint due for 4/18/01 for John Westergaard . ( signed by Judge Deborah A. Batts ) (ae) (Entered: 04/12/2001)
04/26/2001	7	STIPULATION and ORDER, reset answer to the complaint due for 5/3/01 for John Westergaard ( signed by Judge Deborah A. Batts ) (lam) Modified on 04/30/2001 (Entered: 04/27/2001)
05/03/2001	8	ANSWER to Complaint by John Westergaard (Attorney Paul J. Curran from the Firm: Kaye Scholer LLP) . (cd) (Entered: 05/04/2001)
06/28/2001	9	NOTICE of attorney appearance for S.E.C. by Jason R. Gettinger. (tp) (Entered: 06/29/2001)
07/05/2001	10	SCHEDULING ORDER; that the estimated non-jury trial time is one week; a conference is scheduled for 8/7/01 at 4:30 p.m. ( signed by Judge Deborah A. Batts ); Copies mailed. (kkc) (Entered: 07/05/2001)
08/29/2001	11	NOTICE OF MOTION by S.E.C. for an order purs. to Local Rule 1.3(c) and the Court's Individual Rule 31 admitting John L. Hunter pro hac vice to the Bar of this Court as counsel for pltff . No return date indicated. Declarations of Jason R. Gettinger, and of John L. Hunter in support are attached. (sn) (Entered: 09/04/2001)
09/07/2001		Memo endorsed on motion; granting [11-1] motion for an order purs. to Local Rule 1.3(c) and the Court's Individual Rule 31 admitting John L. Hunter pro hac vice to the Bar of this Court as counsel for pltff. ( signed by Judge Deborah A. Batts ); Copies mailed. (Sent document to the Attorney Admissions Clerk). (kw) (Entered: 09/10/2001)
10/11/2001	12	FINAL JUDGMENT AS TO DEFT JOHN WESTERGAARD; Deft John Westergaard, his agents, servants, employees, attorneys-in-fact, etc., are permanently restrained and enjoined as further set forth in this Judgment. The attached Consent of Deft John Westergaard, is incorporated herein with the same force and effect as if fully set forth herein. Deft Westergaard shall fully comply with the undertakings set forth in the Consent. The Clerk of the Court is directed, purs. to Rule 54(b) of the F.R.C.P. to enter this Final Judgment forthwith and without further notice. ( signed by Judge Deborah A. Batts ) Entered On Docket: 10/15/01. (sn) (Entered: 10/15/2001)
10/11/2001		Case closed. (sn) (Entered: 10/15/2001)

_______ john westergaard, john, westergaard, westergaard fund, sec, y2k, securities fraud, securities and exchange commission, lawsuit, litigation, scam, con man, shyster, stock promoter, paid, liar, fraud, paid tout, new york, ppd, pre paid legal, johnny dot com, radio show, interview, ppd, umcc, bikr, sued, freedom of speech, radiowallstreet.com, bob thayer, westergaard.com, wsys, wbn.com, qekg, biker's dream, analyst, westergaard online systems, paid tout, shyster, piece of shit, small cap, pink sheet, penny stock, pump and dump, disclaimer, independent, pluvia, edgars, standard & poors, securities analyst, premier laser,

John Westergaard and SEC settle lawsuit

The only reason the SEC did not impose a fine was because John Westergaard swore that he was totally broke and dying of prostate cancer. 

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
Washington, D.C.

LITIGATION Release No. 17192 / October 16, 2001

Securities and Exchange Commission v. John Westergaard, et al., U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Civil Action No. 00-9776) (DAB)

SEC SETTLES INTERNET TOUTING CASE AGAINST JOHN WESTERGAARD

On October 11, 2001, the Honorable Deborah A. Batts entered a Final Judgment by consent concluding the Securities and Exchange Commission's litigation against John Westergaard. The Commission's complaint, filed on December 27, 2000, alleged that Westergaard and his companies, Westergaard.com, Inc. and Westergaard Broadcasting Network.com, Inc., violated Section 17(b) of the Securities Act by failing to fully disclose the compensation they received to promote issuers. The complaint further alleged that John Westergaard violated Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder by falsely claiming his Internet site provided "independent" analysis.

According to the complaint, John Westergaard and his companies were promoting issuers on web pages called "cyberstations," in press releases describing the company's coverage of issuers on the web site, and in Internet radio-broadcast interviews of officers of issuers. The complaint alleged that the press releases and Internet radio broadcasts referenced the web site, but failed to disclose that issuers paid Westergaard.com to promote their securities. It also alleged that the web site itself failed to identify the amount of compensation issuers paid.

Without admitting or denying the Commission's allegations, Westergaard consented to the entry of a permanent injunction against future violations of Section 17(b) of the Securities Act. The Court did not impose a civil penalty on Westergaard based on his sworn Statement of Financial Condition. Westergaard.com, Inc. and Westergaard Broadcasting Network, Inc. previously settled the charges against them by consenting, without admitting or denying the Commission's allegations, to the entry of an order permanently enjoining them from violating Section 17(b) of the Securities Act. See Lit. Rel. 16842 (December 27, 2000).

http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/lr17192.htm

_______
john westergaard, john, westergaard, westergaard fund, sec, y2k, securities fraud, securities and exchange commission, lawsuit, litigation, scam, con man, shyster, stock promoter, paid, liar, fraud, paid tout, new york, ppd, pre paid legal, johnny dot com, radio show, interview, ppd, umcc, bikr, sued, freedom of speech, radiowallstreet.com, bob thayer, westergaard.com, wsys, wbn.com, qekg, biker's dream, analyst, westergaard online systems, paid tout, shyster, piece of shit, small cap, pink sheet, penny stock, pump and dump, disclaimer, independent, pluvia, edgars, standard & poors, securities analyst, premier laser,

John Westergaard sued by SEC for not disclosing payment received from stocks he touted

Here is one of quite a few lawsuits against John Westergaard by the SEC.

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
Washington, D.C.

LITIGATION Release No. 16842 / December 27, 2000

Securities and Exchange Commission v. John Westergaard, et al., U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Civil Action No. 00 Civ.9776)

SEC NAMES WESTERGAARD, TWO ENTITIES IN INTERNET TOUTING CASE

The Commission today sued John Westergaard, Westergaard.com, Inc., and Westergaard Broadcasting Network.com, Inc. (collectively WCI or defendants) for broadly disseminating on the Internet and through press releases purportedly "independent" analysis of publicly-traded securities when in fact defendants had been paid to publish that analysis. The complaint alleges that the defendants charged small-cap publicly traded companies up to $48,000 to publish positive reports about them that were disseminated through three media: press releases, an Internet radio show, and an Internet website. The complaint also alleges that Westergaard misled prospective investors by falsely claiming the analysis was "independent," and that all the defendants failed to comply with mandatory requirements to disclose compensation received in connection with the publication of securities analysis, in violation of Section 17(b) of the Securities Act of 1933. As alleged in the complaint:

• WCI widely disseminated press releases to draw attention to its positive analysis of companies. WCI received compensation from four issuers that were the subject of five such press releases. Each of these favorable press releases, failed to disclose that WCI was paid to publicize the issuers' securities. Two of the press releases included the false claim that the research was "independent."
• Westergaard interviewed executives of five client companies on a weekly radio show he hosted known as "Johnny Dot.com," that was broadcast on an Internet radio station featuring investment-oriented programming. The interviews presented favorable views of the companies and their prospects. Westergaard did not disclose on the radio show broadcasts the compensation the companies had paid.
• The full text of the analysis was disseminated through an Internet site called Westergaard Broadcasting Network, or WBN, that Westergaard founded, and served as publisher and editor-in-chief. During a prior Commission inquiry into Westergaard's disclosure of the amount of compensation received from issuers covered on the Internet site, Westergaaard added the required compensation disclosure to his web site. On or about April 14, 2000, after he was notified that that inquiry was closed, Westergaard deleted the amount of compensation from his disclosure. Thereafter, he continued to publish analyses of six companies for which WCI received compensation, and a seventh that had agreed to pay in the future.

Simultaneously with the filing of the Complaint, Westergaard.com, Inc. and Westergaard Broadcasting Network, Inc. settled the charges against them by consenting, without admitting or denying the Commission's allegations, to the entry of an order permanently enjoining them from violating Section 17(b) of the Securities Act.

As to John Westergaard, the Complaint seeks a permanent injunction against violations of Section 17(b) of the Securities Act, Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and civil penalties.

http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/lr16842.htm

_______
john westergaard, john, westergaard, westergaard fund, sec, y2k, securities fraud, securities and exchange commission, lawsuit, litigation, scam, con man, shyster, stock promoter, paid, liar, fraud, paid tout, new york, ppd, pre paid legal, johnny dot com, radio show, interview, ppd, umcc, bikr, sued, freedom of speech, radiowallstreet.com, bob thayer, westergaard.com, wsys, wbn.com, qekg, biker's dream, analyst, westergaard online systems, paid tout, shyster, piece of shit, small cap, pink sheet, penny stock, pump and dump, disclaimer, independent, pluvia, edgars, standard & poors, securities analyst, premier laser,

John Westergaard tells people to mortgage their house to buy shares in worthless company which went bankrupt

John Westergaard, wbn.com, stock promoter, securities fraud, con man, dead, 

This is just the first of many posts. I will be reposting everything I posted before John Westergaard thankfully left this earth in 2003. I took my wbn page down after he died and all his tout jobs went bankrupt or didn't perform. It's been 11 years since he died. I think that's enough time. 

This is what stock promoters say about scam companies. Bikers Dream BIKR had no real business except printing and selling shares. I made a full report which I will post next. Shorters saw my report and shorted BIKR from $7 to pennies in just a few days. The stock was actually worth $0. I did not short the stock. I posted my reports so  people would not be ripped off by evil John Westergaard. 

After he posted this shares dumped. Every time share price dumped John Westergaard would state "Take advantage of this fantastic buying opportunity!!! take advantage of this great low share price, back up the truck, load 'em on up, I'm nibbling, nibbling, Time to nibble nibble, yum yum yum." John Westergaard posted on Yahoo, Raging Bull, Silicon Investor. I think he was dead before ihub started. 

John Westergaard was promoting BIKR. This is cut/paste of his actual post, what a piece of shit he was.

Yes, Do Mortgage the House But Not Yet!!
by: westergaard 02/24/98 04:39 am EST
Msg: 179 of 97243

I have only known of one instance where someone went out and mortgaged the house to buy a stock. He was employed by an advertising agency handling the Xerox account in 1960 I believe it was, even before Xerox was Xerox. The man became very very rich. All of us following this thread have the potential opportunity for becoming rich on this stock which I define as making a million dollars (not rich maybe, but better than a kick in the pants). I would assume that everyone here can afford to buy 10,000 shares which is less than $20,000. I would then borrow on the house to buy another 5,000 shares when the SEC approval comes through. Let's say the stock is then 2 1/2. Then I'd borrow again when some tangible evidence comes through that the system is functioning to plan and that 4-5 gorillas have signed up (FIDO, Vanguard, etc.). Let's say the stock is then at 4. Now you've got circa $50,000 invested in 20,000 shares. When the stock hits 10 you buy another 5,000 shares on margin, borrowing $50,000 against an equity of $200,000. When the stock hits 40 you've got $1mm less your cost of $100,000. It's so easy, isn't it? I've seen this done on a few occasions. I had a client who did this with Commodore, investing $400,000 and taking out over $12mm. The reason he was able to do that was because he stayed focused!!! That's the key: focus, focus, focus. Don't get caught up in this trading bullshit. John W.

_______
john westergaard, john, westergaard, westergaard fund, sec, y2k, securities fraud, securities and exchange commission, lawsuit, litigation, scam, con man, shyster, stock promoter, paid, liar, fraud, paid tout, new york, ppd, pre paid legal, johnny dot com, radio show, interview, ppd, umcc, bikr, sued, freedom of speech, radiowallstreet.com, bob thayer, westergaard.com, wsys, wbn.com, qekg, biker's dream, analyst, westergaard online systems, paid tout, shyster, piece of shit, small cap, pink sheet, penny stock, pump and dump, disclaimer, independent, pluvia, edgars, standard & poors, securities analyst, premier laser,