Saturday, February 26, 2011

An ESS Investor's Story

Yesterday I received a truly heartbreaking email from the granddaughter of a woman that was scammed by David Feuerborn and Thomas Jennings.  After a few back-and-forth emails she gave me permission to post her story.

Her story begins when her grandmother was informed that some of her friends from church attended a presentation given by David Feuerborn and Thomas Jennings.  She decided to attend one of David’s and Tom’s many presentations, and was impressed by the table top demonstration and the claim that the chemical was environmentally safe and non-toxic. (Now we all know that they use carcinogenic, toxic chemicals which could never be used in a commercial process.)

The granddaughter went on to tell me, “My grandmother was told that she would make millions of dollars off a small investment of just a few thousand.”  She went on to say, “My grandmother even asked to meet with Dave personally before investing in ESS.  Dave came to her house and told her that he had a vision from God which told him how to create his ‘miracle chemical’.  I assume he saw the Christian icons hanging around her small house and decided to use this story to persuade her to invest.  Dave also told my grandmother that she should ‘pray on this investment’, and even prayed with her in order to induce her to invest.  My grandmother was so impressed by Dave’s religious zeal that she decided to invest half of what was left over in her retirement savings into ESS ($30,000).

Eight months after her investment, my grandmother attempted to contact Dave and ESS.  Her calls went unanswered.  Then my mother tried to get information from ESS.  All her calls were ignored as well.  When we had finally realized that this was a scam we attempted to call various state agencies in what became a futile attempt to get her money back.  Little did we know that Dave had taken the money and purchased his sports cars, condominiums, and everything else the IRS has recently discovered.  My grandmother became very sick, and her last days on earth were spent struggling to pay medical bills while Dave and Tom were spending her money on BMWs and Porches.  Even if they are claiming that the money they used was a ‘loan’, how does that make what they did right?”

I was speechless after I read her story.  It is truly heartbreaking, and I am sure there are many more like it.  David and Tom are said to have scammed more than six hundred people and tens of millions of dollars with this chemical scam.  I look back to the last sentence from her email, "Even if they are claiming that the money they used was a ‘loan’, how does that make what they did right?"  I keep asking myself the same question.  

I am sure each investor has a story to tell.  We may never get our money back, but at least we can have some hope that these men will be behind bars, and will never be able to scam anyone ever again.  My sympathies go out to this granddaughter and her family.

-ESS Investor 
 


Wednesday, February 23, 2011

Criminal Case Update: JUDGE WON'T ALLOW FEUERBORN AND JENNINGS TO CONFUSE THE JURY WITH THEIR FRAUDULENT CHEMICAL!

ORDER GRANTING GOVERNMENT'S MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE CERTAIN EVIDENCE RELATING TO EFFECTIVENESS OF DEFENDANTS' TECHNOLOGY FOR EXTRACTION OF PETROLEUM; GRANTING GOVERNMENT'S MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE TESTIMONY OF KEVIN STUDLEY; GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT DAVID J. FEUERBORN'S MOTION IN LIMINE TO PRECLUDE INTRODUCTION OF "MUG SHOT" DIAGRAM DEPICTING "LAVISH PURCHASES" BY DEFENDANTS” (Case 2:10-cr-00346-SJO; Page ID 1317).

I have some great news for all the ESS Investors!  The Honorable Judge Otero DENIED Feuerborn and Jennings from presenting information about the toxic, chlorinated chemical!  They can’t distract the jury from the real issue at hand, which is how Feuerborn and Jennings secretly funneled millions of dollars of investor's money to themselves to purchase Porches, BMWs motorcycles, lavish condominiums, interior decorating, jet skis, etc.

Unfortunately the Judge decided that the Government could not use the mug shots of David and Tom in their presentation materials, but he is allowing the Government to show pictures of the lavish items that they purchased with investor money.

Let’s pray that the Jury convicts David Feuerborn and Thomas Jennings for stealing our money and breaking the laws of the United States of America.  Too many people have been hurt by these individuals and their chemical fraud scheme. 

-ESS Investor 

Monday, February 21, 2011

Feuerborn’s Attorney Admits That There Were No Loans!

I find the latest tactic to dismiss David Feuerborn’s tax evasion charges very convoluted.  His original motion to dismiss and the follow up memorandum are very contradictory to one another.

“Loans” or not “Loans”, that is the question

The Government is alleging that David Feuerborn and Thomas Jennings created a Bogus Eco-Logic bank account at Wells Fargo Bank in order to funnel investor money to themselves.  Further, the Government is alleging that Feuerborn and Jennings used the funneled money to make lavish purchases such as condominiums, exotic sports cars, jet skis, motorcycles, interior decorating, etc. 

Then you have David and Tom that are alleging that the money which was funneled to them through the Bogus Eco-Logic Account was paid to them in the form of loans.  This is their sole defense, because if the money was paid to them in the form of a “loan”, and not as income, then it would not be subject to federal income tax laws.  If this is their defense then why would Neil Evans state the following in his Criminal Motion to Dismiss, “[t]here were also ledgers showing how David Feuerborn and Tom Jennings spent cash and cashier’s checks for legitimate business purposes (and not as loans), contained in Mr. Feuerborn’s vehicle” (Case 2:10-cr-00346-SJO; Page ID# 805).  Well, they can’t have it both ways.  Here you have a motion filed in the Criminal Case by David Feuerborn’s attorney where he specifically admits that they were not loans!

The Mysterious Computers

In the same Criminal Motion to Dismiss mentioned above, Feuerborn states that certain computers were confiscated from his BMW which contain “exculpatory” evidence.  In this motion Neil Evans states, “[t]he Prosecutor had access to the subject computers since 2007 or 2008 – but claims that he had no duty to turn same over to Defendants, or even disclose their existence, because he had no intention to rely upon these computers for any purpose”(Case 2:10-cr-00346-SJO; Page ID# 815).  This statement is contradictory to his Neil Evans’ previous statement that Assistant U.S. Attorney Vandevelde made available a “forensic copy” of the computer’s drives! 

The above statement is also contradictory to David Feuerborn’s Declaration which was attached to the follow-up memorandum.  David Feuerborn states, “I then asked an attorney to seek the recovery of the BMW, Sylvia Scott of Freeman and Freeman in Los Angeles.  I learned from Ms. Scott that my car was supposedly part of the case in Louisiana and that it would not be released to me.  I also requested of Ms. Scott that she obtain the release of all items, records, cash and computers from the car” (Case 2:10-cr-00346-SJO; Page ID# 1122).  Thus Feuerborn knew about the computers since 2005, but he is just now bringing it up.  Also, for the first time, Feuerborn is claiming that the records seized from his BMW were illegally seized by police officers.  I find this odd because Feuerborn also states, “I knew from attending this Court Hearing in Louisiana, that financial records which were in my car were seized on August 12, 2005, were transported by Deputy Schierman to Louisiana for this hearing.  During this hearing on 8/22/05, I personally observed Deputy Schierman hold in his hands, while testifying, copies of green ledgers which were contained in the Blue Milk Crate contained in the trunk of [m]y BMW on 8/12/05” (Case 2:10-cr-00346-SJO; Page ID #1123).  Why didn’t Feuerborn claim that his Fourth Amendment Right had been violated during this hearing?  If Feuerborn knew about the BMW since 2005, which he readily admits, then why is he just now claiming that his Fourth Amendment right has been violated?  He also had two California attorneys (Sylvia Scott and Ron S. Bamieh) attempt to get the release of the BMW and the items Zackary Barkery concealed within it.  In Feuerborn’s Declaration there is not one mention that either attorney made the claim that the search and seizure was illegal.  Thus, it is evident that this is just another frivolous attempt to get Feuerborn and Jennings off the hook for committing fraud.

Let’s hope the Judge sees through this ploy.  This hearing will occur on Wednesday, February 23, 2011.

-ESS Investor                 

Saturday, February 19, 2011

Neil Evans Attempts a Smoke and Mirrors Defense for David Feuerborn

Neil Evans has mastered the art of creating smoke and mirrors in an attempt to get his client(s) off the hook for frauds that he knows have occurred.  David Feuerborn, Tom Jennings, and Larry Shultz clearly defrauded a public company with their chemical fraud by claiming that it was non-toxic, and by doing so committed securities fraud.  They have no legal defense so all their attorney can do is file numerous motions to dismiss to delay the litigation, and his clients requirement to answer the charges against them (because they can’t answer the charges without admitting their guilt).   

Evans is now using the same tactic in the Criminal Case.  David Feuerborn cannot answer why he did not file a tax return for six years in a row.  Thus he is attempting to divert attention away from that fact by stating that the IRS would have never discovered his fraud if sheriffs had not searched his car in “violation with his constitutional protection from illegal search and seizure.”   
  
First and foremost the IRS can easily look up someone’s tax history in their database.  When an IRS agent searched for David Feuerborn’s information in the IRS database he noticed that David had not filed a tax return in SIX years.  This caused the IRS agent to investigate the matter further.  When one searches bank records it is easy to find all the bank accounts controlled by a certain signatory.  This would have unveiled the Bogus Eco Logic Bank Account which was held at a major bank, Wells Fargo.  Thus, his fraud was discovered without the use of any documents contained in his BMW.  The U.S. Attorney even states that he is not using any evidence confiscated by the sheriff’s department in his case-in-chief against Feuerborn and Jennings!

Furthermore, cops are within their right to search and seize evidence when they believe that evidence might be destroyed.  In this case David Feuerborn’s son-in-law, Zackary Barker, attempted to remove evidence from David Feuerborn’s and Arthur Feuerborn’s houses (they are not contesting this fact).  This attempt was witnessed by the Ventura County Sheriff’s Department.  When they stopped Zackary Barker and questioned him Zackary admitted to officers that, “Defendant Feuerborn instructed Barker to go to defendant’s residence, get defendant’s computer, and hide the BMW, briefcase, and computer in a ‘safe’ place” (Case 2:10-cr-00346-SJO ; Page ID #978).  (Personal Note:  Innocent people do not act in this fashion.)  Zackary admitted that he was attempting to hide evidence, which gives the cops every right to search and seize that evidence in order to protect it from being destroyed.  In addition, a search warrant was granted to search and seize the items in David’s car.  Every action the cops took was legal and proper. 

I am writing this to point out all the holes in Neil Evans’ latest motion where he is attempting to get the Criminal Case dismissed.  His charges against the IRS, Ventura County Sheriff’s Department, and the U.S. Attorney are without any merit whatsoever.  These types of frivolous/meritless motions to dismiss should be met with sanctions against Evans for wasting the court’s time and resources. 

-ESS Investor  

Thursday, February 17, 2011

Most Outrageous Motion Yet

The latest motion filed by Neil Evans, on behalf of David Feuerborn, was very offensive to me, and should be offensive to all ESS investors.  It truly shows the arrogance of David Feuerborn and his belief that he can scam investors and do anything with investor money.  The latest motion is entitled Motion in Limine to Preclude Introduction of “Mug Shot” Diagram Depicting “Lavish Purchases” by Defendants (“Mug Shot Motion”).  Apparently Neil Evans thinks that using the mug shots of David and Tom during the trial would be prejudicial to the Jury.  Personally I think the mug shots embody the true nature of David and Tom.

The most infuriating part of the Mug Shot Motion is where he states, “[h]ow the Defendants spent the money once it was received is completely irrelevant.  For example, if the Defendnat in good faith believed that the money received was a loan, how he spent the money is completely irrelevant.  If the money was a loan, it was a loan.  There are no Internal Revenue Rules or Regulations that redefine whether money was a loan or income, based upon how the money was spent.”  He goes on to state, “if the money was legitimately received as a Loan, Defendant was free to blow every penny on anything he wanted to spend it on, and such expenditure would be completely irrelevant to this case” (Case 2:10-cr-00346-SJO Page ID # 951-952).

Freestone states that it gave money to David and Tom.  If so, then I would like some evidence that David and Tom used this money to pay back ESS if they actually believed that the money they received from ESS was a “loan” and not income.  If the Defendants did not use this money to pay back ESS then it contradicts the claim in the Mug Shot Motion that the Defendants used a “good faith” effort to repay this money. 

It’s clear that David and Tom received money from ESS in the form of INCOME.  They just didn’t want to pay their taxes, just like they didn’t want to spend investor money on the “technology”.  Instead they spent investor money on RVs, exotic cars, interior decorating, motorcycles, condominiums, and other luxury items.  In their own words they think they are “free to blow every penny on anything.”  Since they got away with scamming investors they thought that they could scam the IRS too.  David didn’t even file a tax return in the six years he received money from ESS. 

The Mug Shot Motion shows the true character of David Feuerborn and Thomas Jennings.  They don’t feel any obligation to ESS shareholders, and don’t feel the need to explain their lavish spending habits that occurred at our expense. 

All of the latest motions will be heard on February 23, 2011 (delayed by one day).

-ESS Investor  


Wednesday, February 16, 2011

Evidence Their Machine Causes Cancer

It has been a busy day today.  David Feuerborn's attorney filed the Criminal Motion to Dismiss and he has now filed an Opposition to Motion in Limine to Exclude Evidence Regarding the Technology ("Opposition Motion").   

In the Opposition Motion Feuerborn is affirming his belief that Larry Shultz is an "expert" witness.   He continues to claim that the “technology” is not a fraud and that he wants to show videos of the “technology”.  I am sure these videos include the table top jar demonstrations that Dave has become so infamous for.  The Opposition Motion states that "[Feuerborn] is, personally, the co-owner of the trade secret and patent rights under this technology" (Case 2:10-cr-00346-SJO; Page ID 861).  I still haven't seen any "patents" on Dave's miracle soap!  Neil Evans claims that there are some sort of patent rights to this “technology” in his Opposition Motion.  I challenge him to produce evidence that there are any patents filed on Dave's miracle soap to date.  

Their Machine is a “Cancer Risk”

Larry Shultz, David Feuerborn and Thomas Jennings are still claiming that their process is safe and non-hazardous (even in the latest Opposition Motion).  Larry M. Shultz proposes to testify as an expert witness that the technology can make millions billions of dollars and is non-toxic.  (Note: What does that have to do with conspiracy to defraud the Government and not filing an income tax return for six years in a row?)  Well an anonymous tip came in about another document (issued by the California South Coast Air Quality Management District) on the internet that indicates that their process poses a cancer risk:

“1/INSTASLLATION/CONSTRUCTION OF A HYDROCARBON RECOVERY SYSTEM W/O PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT. 2/OPERATION OF A HYDROCARBON RECOVERY SYSTEM W/O PERMIT TO OPERATE, 3/OPERATING HRS EXCEEDING R1401 MAXIMUM POTENTIAL CANCER RISK” (South Coast AQMD)

I am sure Feuerborn, Shultz, and Jennings will say that the South Coast Air Quality Management District is a corrupt organization that is maliciously trying to damage them because they want to steal their technology (LOL, it’s getting comical at this point).  Larry Shultz and his co-conspirators have already organized a smear campaign targeted at the company suing them that discovered the same findings as the Ventura District Attorney, the Louisiana Attorney General, the California Department of Corporations, and now the South Coast Air Quality Management District.

Larry Shultz

The exhibit to the Opposition Motion, which lists Shultz’s accolades, is truly comical.  It claims that Larry M. Shultz has been a very successful inventor!  Might I ask why he filed for bankruptcy (which is also listed on PACER) in the last few years if he has been so successful?  Shultz is nothing but an “expert” front-man that Feuerborn and Jennings are using to con more investors.  Shultz also has a vested interest in seeing Feuerborn and Jennings get off so that he can keep the chemical scam going.  Thus, he is willing to say and do anything to try and get them off the hook in the Criminal Case.

-ESS Investor     

Motion to Dismiss in the Criminal Case and David Feuerborn Sues Ventura County

This would be laughable if it wasn’t true.  David Feuerborn, Thomas Jennings and Larry Shultz have shown that they like to operate within certain patterns.  My previous blog entries have indicated these various patterns.  I believe we have a new pattern that has arisen out of Feuerborn’s latest Motion to Dismiss in the Criminal Case. 

David Feuerborn filed a Motion to Suppress all Evidence Regarding Alleged Tax Evasion; All Evidence Regarding Alleged Bogus Eco-Logic Account; and to Dismiss All Tax Evasion Charges Against David Feuerborn due to A) Use of Evidence Obtained Illegally; B) Destruction of Exculpatory Evidence; Failure to Disclose Exculpatory Evidence or To Continue Trial (“Criminal Motion to Dismiss”).  David, Tom and Larry love to file motions to dismiss because they never like to face the facts and answer the evidence against them.  They know they are guilty of tax fraud and chemical fraud, and they know that the evidence against them is so overwhelming that they will be exposed if anyone has a chance to present that evidence in a court of law.  This is why they have filed two motions to dismiss in the Civil Case, and why they are now attempting this Criminal Motion to Dismiss as a last ditch effort in their tax fraud case.

(NoteWhere is a motion to dismiss the charges against Thomas Jennings?  Did David Feuerborn throw his buddy under the bus to save his own tail?)

The Criminal Motion to Dismiss discusses how David Feuerborn’s son-in-law, Zackery Barker, removed a computer from David Feuerborn’s residence in Camarillo, CA, as well as ESS business records, and bank documents from the Bogus Eco-Logic Account.  The Sherriff’s Department saw Zackery Barker remove this computer and documentation (presumably in an attempt to destroy evidence) and they arrested Mr. Barker and seized the computer and documents he was attempting to hide from the authorities at Feuerborn’s bequest.  One briefcase Mr. Barker was attempting to hide from authorities contained $9,000 in cash! 

(Note: The Criminal Motion to Dismiss that David filed implicates Zackery Barker, David Feuerborn’s son-in-law, as a co-conspirator that attempted to destroy evidence during the course of a criminal investigation.  This is a clear example that Feuerborn doesn’t care who he hurts in order to save his own skin.

Neil Evans (David’s attorney) is claiming that the confiscation of this documentation and the computer was a violation of David’s fourth amendment rights.  What a joke!  The Sherriff confiscated evidence that David’s son-in-law was clearly attempting to remove from Feuerborn’s residence and destroy!  (That seems like probable cause for a search and seizure to me!)  Furthermore, Neil Evans is claiming that without that documentation the Government wouldn’t have a case against Feuerborn (remember he doesn’t mention Jennings).  What about the other 42,000 pages of evidence the U.S. Attorney provided?  What about the black and white fact that David didn’t file a tax return during the years he managed and operated ESSWhat about the ESS and Bogus Eco-Logic Account bank records that show how the money was spent and who it went to?

In the Criminal Motion to Dismiss Feuerborn’s attorney states that, “[w]ithout these records [seized from Feuerborn’s car] the entire basis theory alleged in the Counts against Mr. Feuerborn, including the alleged “conspiracy theory” that Defendants deposited money in a ‘Bogus Eco-Logic Account,’ would not have been developed or established” (Case 2:10-cr-00346-SJO ; Page ID #805).

Feuerborn also makes the claim in the Criminal Motion to Dismiss, and in his previous Studley Motion, that the computers that Mr. Barker was attempting to destroy for Mr. Feuerborn were not operating when he took possession of them last month.  I have a theory that Feuerborn intentionally destroyed these hard drives when they were in his possession in an effort to put forth the latest Criminal Motion to Dismiss.  I think the U.S. Attorney should investigate this theory. 

Ventura County Lawsuit

David Feuerborn filed a lawsuit against Ventura County claiming that an illegal search and seizure took place by the Ventura County Sherriff’s Department.  The best part of this lawsuit is the list of items that David claims were confiscated by the Sherriff and never returned.  That list is as follows: 1) Corporate Check Books, 2) Corporate Stock Books, 3) Ledgers, 4) Haliburton Briefcase, 5) $9,000 cash, 6) Wallet, Checkbook, and credit cards, 7) Milk Crate with Records, 8) Motorcycle Jacket (leather), Black, 9) Motorcycle Gloves (leather) Black, 10) Motorcycle Helmet, Black, 11) Motorcycle Glasses, 12) Angel Paintball Gun, 13) Two compressed air cylinders, 14) Toolbox with contents, 15) Cell Phone, 16) Three thumb drivers (computer).  I guess he is upset that the Sherriff’s Department confiscated his motorcycle gear, because without it he could not ride the motorcycles he purchased with ESS investor’s monies.

This is getting all too bizarre.  Clearly David Feuerborn and Thomas Jennings have no legal defense against the tax fraud and conspiracy allegations so they are attempting anything and everything to avoid going to trial.  I can’t wait for the U.S. Attorney’s response to these ridiculous accusations against the Government and Ventura County. 

-ESS Investor

Tuesday, February 15, 2011

Government Files Another Motion

The Criminal Trial of David Feuerborn and Thomas Jennings is still scheduled for February 22, 2011.  The government database where I gather my information has been quiet until the Government filed a new Motion yesterday. 

The U.S. Attorney’s Office filed a Motion in Limine to Exclude Testimony of Kevin Studley (“Studley Motion”).  It would appear that David Feuerborn and Thomas Jennings filed their reciprocal discovery (which included the Studley Motion) on February 8, 2011 in compliance with Judge Otero’s order.  In this filing “Defendant Feuerborn has also suggested that the government is somehow responsible for the damage to the computers Ventura County allegedly caused, as well as for Ventura County’s alleged failure to produce ‘green ledgers’ that were seized at the same time as the computers. This suggestion of misconduct is entirely baseless. Even assuming evidence has been lost or destroyed and even assuming that the IRS was responsible for Ventura County’s actions (both of which the government disputes), the Supreme Court has held no constitutional violation arises unless the evidence ‘possess[es] an exculpatory value that was apparent before the evidence was destroyed’ and ‘the defendant would be unable to obtain comparable evidence by other reasonably available means.’ California v. Trombetta, 467 U.S. 479, 489 (1984). Not only that, defendant must also show bad faith on the part of the police. Arizona v. Youngblood, 488 U.S. 51, 58 (1988); see also Guam v. Muna, 999 F.3d 397, 400 (9th Cir. 1993). Here, whatever the state of the computer hard drives, the government has produced working forensic copies of the drives, and the government has produced the underlying bank records for the Bogus Ecologic Account. Moreover, there is no indication that any of the evidence had any apparent exculpatory value or that any official, let alone any official involved in this federal investigation, acted in bad faith” ( Case 2:10-cr-00346-SJO ; Page ID #797).   

Once again, this is the same tactic that David Feuerborn, Thomas Jennings and Lawrence Shultz always use.  They try and claim that the agencies and companies that have uncovered their fraud are corrupt, and they spread lies about these organizations in an attempt to discredit them.  These claims are baseless attempts to shift the attention away from their frauds (tax fraud and chemical fraud).  These individuals have scammed millions of dollars from investors with the use of toxic chemicals.  Millions of dollars of investor money were placed, by David and Tom, in bogus bank accounts in order to funnel money to themselves so investors would not find out they were using the money to buy cars, motorcycles, RVs, condominiums, etc.  We aren’t drinking the Kool-aid anymore, and neither will the Jury!

We are assuming that the Studley Motion and the Government’s Motion to exclude the testimony of Larry Shultz and Paul Sicotte will be heard on February 22, 2011 (the first day of the trial).  Unfortunately we won’t know if they will be able to enter evidence about the chlorinated chemical until that hearing.   This case is about how David Feuerborn and Thomas Jennings classified regular income as loans in order to avoid paying the IRS.  David has such a big ego that he never even filed a tax return during the years he received his fraudulent payments!  Dave's ego and the fact that they are currently in a lawsuit about their toxic chemical is proof that they will not stop their fraud unless they are in prison.  Hopefully Judge Otero will give them the maximum penalty! 

We should hear something in the Civil Case soon.  I will keep everyone posted on both cases, and hopefully we can all celebrate a guilty verdict which will finally stop these fraudsters.   

-ESS Investor

Tuesday, February 1, 2011

A Plea for Justice to Stop Larry Shultz, David Feuerborn, and Thomas Jennings

It’s February 2011!  That means only 21 days until the Criminal Trial of Feuerborn and Jennings.  David Feuerborn, Thomas Jennings, and Lawrence Shultz have been, and will continue to scam investors unless they are stopped.  A conviction in the Criminal Case will go a long way to help stop their scam.  We can only hope that the Judge will give them a long prison sentence after they are convicted.  While the Criminal Case is mostly about tax fraud, these individuals have scammed more than $20 million from investors over the last 18 years on their environmental cleanup scam.  They scammed money from church-going grandmothers and grandfathers in Louisiana and California who gave them all of their life savings in hopes of riches.  Little did these, mostly elderly, investors know that David Feuerborn and Thomas Jennings were purchasing condominiums, motorcycles, exotic cars, interior decorating, RVs, houses, etc., with their money and spending only enough on their “machines” to keep the investors investing.    

For those that don’t know, Feuerborn, Jennings and Shultz use chlorinated chemicals that are extremely toxic and harmful, and they use them in table top demonstrations to investors in order to raise money for separation machines that use these toxic chemicals.  They will claim that they are environmentally safe and will provide fake documents to investors that want due diligence, but Louisiana and California authorities have confiscated their “solvent” during demonstrations and determined that 80%+ of the chemicals contained within their “solvent” are carcinogenic and can evaporate into a toxic chlorinated gas.  They will claim that these law enforcement officials are corrupt and maliciously placed chlorinated chemicals in their “solvent” to undermine them.  They are constantly using honest companies that uncover their scam, as well as federal and state law enforcement officials as scapegoats by stating that they are all out to get them or out to steal their technology.  I find this amusing because every company that has sued them just wants to get away from them (including the most recent lawsuit filed against them by Freestone), and every law enforcement agency just wants to stop them from scamming more investors.  

The Judge in the Criminal Case ordered the legal counsel for Feuerborn and Jennings to comply with the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, and submit reciprocal discovery as well as any discovery they wish to present in their Criminal Case by February 8, 2011.  We know that Feuerborn and Jennings want to present evidence on the chemical’s effectiveness, but I have a feeling the Judge will not allow this evidence because it has nothing to do with their tax fraud indictment (even though the money in question derived from their chemical scam).  In fact, the two people they want to testify on the chemical’s “effectiveness” are individuals that have money invested and ownership in the technology.  They don’t have any credentialed chemists willing to testify on their behalf.  

Let us all hope that Feuerborn and Jennings will be convicted and get ten or more years in prison.  Let us all hope that federal investigators begin an investigation on Larry Shultz so he cannot continue this scam after his partners are in prison.  These individuals need to be stopped once and for all.  Prison is the only way to stop these arrogant, egotistical, pathological individuals.  If we cannot stop them they will continue to expose people to their chlorinated, toxic chemicals, and continue to defraud investors.  

-ESS Investor