Originally Posted by teal
Originally Posted by RandyR
I know Splatt very well and believe in his integrity, I am guessing he only felt it would be made worse by involving the law.


I only know what I see here and bounce that off of my life experience. My life experience is telling me that the "truth" isn't in this thread and that if the law was involved - it wouldn't get worse for Art or the situation.


So you're saying Art has a legitimate reason to still have the man's stock? If so, what might that be?