4-7-16 SFRX Vs Volentine Hearing

BAY AREA COURT REPORTING, INC.
Page 1
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE THIRTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA
SEAFARER EXPLORATION
CORP,
Plaintiff
CASE NO.:
14-CA-8902
vs.
Division "L"
DARRELL VOLENTINE,
Defendant.
__________________________________________________________
Defendant's Verified Amended Motion for Contempt and
Sanctions Against Plaintiff's Counsel, Craig Huffman
and/or ClearTrust, LLC; and Plaintiff's Motion for Contempt
and Show Cause
___________________________________________________________
Before the Honorable Steven Scott Stephens
Hillsborough County Circuit Court Judge
____________________________________________________________
DATE:
April 7, 2016
TIME:
11:00 a. m. - 12:17 p. m.
PLACE:
Hillsborough County Courthouse

800 East Twiggs Street
Fifth Floor
Tampa, Florida 33602
REPORTED BY:
ELIZABETH GOTCH, RPR

Notary Public
State of Florida at Large
Page 1 - 62
Bayareareporting@gmail.com
(866)240-9500

Page 2
1
2
3
4
5
APPEARANCES:
CRAIG A. HUFFMAN, ESQUIRE
Securus Law Group, P. A.
14036 Racetrack Road, Number 234
Tampa, Florida 33626
(888) 914-4144
Attorney for the Plaintiff
6
7
8
EVAN KIDD, ESQUIRE

730 1st Ct
Palm Harbor, Florida
(727) 512-4971
evankidd@gmail.com
34684
Attorney for Defendant

10
11
12
13
14
15
I N D E X
Argument
Ruling
Certificates of Reporter
Plaintiff's Witness:
Kyle Kennedy
Direct
45
Page
3, 52
36, 56
62
Cross
51
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
(866)240-9500

Page 3
1
* * * * *
P R O C E E D I N G S
* * * * *
THE COURT:
All right.
Well you got here on time
and everything's good.
I can't really get the spelling
of your name off of your signature here.
that for the reporter, please.
We're on the record now so go ahead.
MR. KIDD:
10
11
12
13
Sure.
Attorney Evan Kidd, E-V-A-N,
last name K-I-D-D.

THE COURT:
All right.
And let's get appearances
from the others.

MR. HUFF:
Your Honor, Craig Huffman on behalf
14
of Seafarer Exploration.
15
Kyle Kennedy, Chief Executive Officer of
16
Seafarer Exploration Corporation.
17
18
19
20
So let's do
THE COURT:
Present with me is
All right.
What all do we have on the
agenda for today from your standpoint?

MR. HUFFMAN:
All right.
Just asking counsel:
Is
Mr. Volentine appearing by phone or ...
21
MR. KIDD:
No.
22
MR. HUFFMAN:
23
THE COURT:
I'll be appearing.
Okay.
I think we told him last time that he
24
can't appear by phone.
25
MR. HUFFMAN:
Okay.
(866)240-9500

Page 4
1
THE COURT:
We don't have phone appearances, in
general, in here unless we have to make special
arrangements for people who are, you know, in the
hospital or something like.
5
6
7
MR. HUFFMAN:
I'm assuming counsel has the correct
filings.
THE COURT:
I don't know.
But I'm still waiting
for you to tell me what we have on the agenda for
today.
10
MR. HUFFMAN:
The first matter that we have is:
11
Our matter has been pending on a Motion for an
12
Order to Show Cause.
13
Judge Foster.
14
THE COURT:
This was previously filed before
So there has not been any show cause
15
order issued yet.
16
issued.
17
MR. HUFFMAN:
18
THE COURT:
19
MR. HUFFMAN:
You're just asking to get one
Correct.
Okay.
Judge Foster had set a date.
20
However, in between he was recused, and we are
21
rebringing this motion just to --
22
23
24
25
THE COURT:
Was there a motion to ask Judge Foster
to disqualify or what happened?

MR. HUFFMAN:
Yeah, there was a recusal by the
defendant.
(866)240-9500

Page 5
1
2
THE COURT:
He filed a motion asking him to step
down.
MR. HUFFMAN:
THE COURT:
MR. HUFFMAN:
6
7
Yes.
And that's when the case --
And he granted that.

That's when the case came to your
court.
THE COURT:
Well, see, that's important because
when -- when there's been a predecessor judge granting
a Motion to Disqualify, it changes the standard by
10
which subsequent motions or successful motions would be
11
decided.
12
MR. HUFFMAN:
13
THE COURT:
14
MR. HUFFMAN:
15
THE COURT:
16
Go ahead.
18
THE COURT:
21
22
So just to --
what's on the agenda today because -MR. HUFFMAN:
20
Go ahead.
Well I just want you to tell me
17
19
Yes, sir.
Okay.
-- I'm going to ask the other side
what they think is on the agenda today also.

MR. HUFFMAN:
Okay.
Then the other side -- this
is the defendant's motion -- is -THE COURT:
Well he'll tell us.
23
can speak for himself.
24
MR. HUFFMAN:
25
THE COURT:
He's here.
He
Okay.
What is it that you would have in mind
(866)240-9500

Page 6
1
2
for today, sir?

MR. KIDD:
Your Honor, we have a Response in
Opposition to the Plaintiff's motion as well as our own
Amended Verified Motion for Contempt and Sanctions
Against the Opposing Attorney and --
6
7
THE COURT:
Are those in the -- I saw the motion.
I didn't see the response.
MR. KIDD:
THE COURT:
Don't get nervous.
No, sir.
It's hard for me to find things in the
10
docket these days because, for whatever reasons, our
11
clerks computer system doesn't number the pleadings so
12
we can, you know, make it easy to find.
13
MR. KIDD:
14
MR. HUFFMAN:
15
THE COURT:
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
Of course.
Like probably every other court except
for the ones that use that same vendor.

MR. KIDD:
As far as we're aware, there hasn't
been a response.
THE COURT:
Okay.
So what's the nature of -- well
let me ask plaintiff's side first.

You're asking for an Order to Show Cause.
What
kind of conduct are you --
23
MR. HUFFMAN:
24
THE COURT:
25
Like Federal court.
Correct.
-- referring to that you're asking me
to show cause?
(866)240-9500

Page 7
1
MR. HUFFMAN:
There was a consent entered -- and
this was a very large consent -- on September 30, 2014.
That consent by Mr. Volentine included liability,
damages, and a permanent injunction.
The permanent injunction, which is the point that
I'm here for today, banned him from directly,
indirectly, posting anything about Seafarer, its
employees, officers, directors or anything.
to that.
10
11
12
Now what happened is:
He agreed
Judge Cook had the case --
okay? -- and then subsequently Judge Foster.

But Judge Cook accepted that as far as the
13
injunction went and as far as the liability aspect,
14
but rejected the damages portions as we needed a basis
15
in fact to have the damages.
16
17
So on October 7th -- as the pleading are there -she entered the approval on the permanent injunction.
18
THE COURT:
Of what year?
19
MR. HUFFMAN:
20
Subsequently, what Mr. Volentine did is he made
Of 2014.
Okay?
21
numerous postings on an internet site, which is a stock
22
coverage site called InvestorsHub, and some other
23
locations that were -- actually had the right to do --
24
with Kyle Kennedy, accusing Kyle Kennedy, Mr. Kennedy,
25
of doing insider trading, doing manipulative stock
(866)240-9500

Page 8
1
trades actions.
THE COURT:
MR. HUFFMAN:
After the injunction was entered.

Correct.
And what I did is -- in
the original motion is, the time frame that I used was
actually April through July of last year, of 2015.
Okay?
July of 2015, then the matter went before
Judge Foster.
And that's when I filed the original was in
THE COURT:
Would you interpret the injunction as
10
barring the gentleman from making factual posts that
11
were truthful?
12
13
14
15
MR. HUFFMAN:
Well he wasn't suppose to post
anything, but -THE COURT:
I understand that.
But I'm asking if
that's what you would ask me to do.
16
MR HUFFMAN:
17
THE COURT:
No.
Or are you just telling me that's a
18
different case because you're not relying on the
19
injunction to -- to proceed against him for anything
20
that he did that was truthful, only from untruthful
21
things?
22
23
24
25
MR. HUFFMAN:
Untruthful things we can certainly
proceed on.
THE COURT:
That's what I'm saying.
That's what
you're asking me to proceed on.
(866)240-9500

Page 9
1
MR. HUFFMAN:
THE COURT:
Correct.
It would be a really difficult
situation if somebody asked me to proceed on an
injunction against making posts on the internet if the
truth defense was successfully brought forth.
Even though your right would technically be in
violation of the injunction, it may be a privileged
violation of the injunction.
9
10
11
12
MR. HUFFMAN:
THE COURT:
It's an academic question.
14
THE COURT:
that he continued to make posts that -MR. HUFFMAN:
17
THE COURT:
20
Right.
Because you're only -- you're saying
16
19
Correct.
-- turned out to be -- factually
accused the gentleman of insider trading.

MR. HUFFMAN:
Insider trading, manipulative
trading, giving stock --
21
MR. KENNEDY:
Pump and dump.
22
MR. HUFFMAN:
Yeah.
23
24
25
We don't
need to get distracted by it.

MR. HUFFMAN:
18
I understand what the court's
saying, and it's an interesting --
13
15
Right?
Pump and dump, giving stock
to relatives and -THE COURT:
Yeah, I saw your papers.
The way that
you refute that is by saying that he hasn't sold any
(866)240-9500

Page 10
1
2
shares ever.
MR. HUFFMAN:
Not only he's never sold any shares,
but all of the production of documents now, on all the
subscription agreements, promissory notes, show that
they have a floor.
6
7
8
9
10
Okay?
So if someone buys it at a penny, if the stock

goes down, they're losing money.
All of these promissory notes and subscription
agreements have floors except a couple of commercial
lenders.
11
THE COURT:
What do you mean by "floors"?
12
MR. HUFFMAN:
In other words, when you convert --
13
if you loan the company $5,000 or a subscription
14
agreement of $5,000, because this is a reporting at
15
company, you can't immediately get free trading shares
16
in exchange for that note.
17
So you have to wait six months -- okay? -- at a --
18
THE COURT:
19
MR. HUFFMAN:
20
THE COURT:
21
22
So the shares are restricted.

Correct.
They were restricted shares from the
beginning, is what you're telling me.

MR. HUFFMAN:
Well, right.
But when you go to
23
-- when you go to get the shares, you're now at a fixed
24
price -- okay? -- of, let's say, a penny.
25
If the share price is at half-a-penny, it doesn't
(866)240-9500

Page 11
1
matter.
You still got it at a penny.
lost 50 percent.
THE COURT:
MR. HUFFMAN:
THE COURT:
MR. HUFFMAN:
THE COURT:
MR. HUFFMAN:
9
10
11
12
13
14
Who would do that?
Okay?
In our case about Mr. Volentine is that he's a
substantial cause of the drop in market.
THE COURT:
I understand that's what your argument
is --
THE COURT:
20
Well first of all -- no, no, no.
What I'm saying is, subsequently, the drop in market.
16
19
Family members, friends --
-- that only trades for half-a-penny?
MR. HUFFMAN:
18
Anyone who would -- well --
Who would buy something --
15
17
So you've just
Right.
-- but that's not really pertinent to
today's -MR. HUFFMAN:
No, it's not, but those are some of
the accusations being made.

THE COURT:
All right.
Let's find out what the
21
other side has to say about that one and also about
22
whatever his motion for today was about.
23
Go ahead, sir.
24
MR. KIDD:
25
In response to the Plaintiff's Motion to Show
Thank you, Your Honor.
(866)240-9500

Page 12
1
Cause, our first argument is simply that they have a
procedural defect.
Criminal Procedure states that --
THE COURT:
That isn't a state court rule, but go
ahead.
court rules.
purpose, though.
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Rule 3.840(a) of Federal Rules of
It's better because -- I'm bound by the state

That is the right rule to cite for this
MS. KIDD:
Go ahead.
Sure.
So a rule to show cause must be
based on the judge's own motion or the affidavit of any

person having knowledge of the facts.
THE COURT:
Are you saying that their Motion for
Order to Show Cause is not supported by an affidavit?

MR. KIDD:
Correct.
It is not -- it is not true
and verified.
THE COURT:
Do you-all have an affidavit in
support of your motion?

MR. HUFFMAN:
Judge, we did not file an affidavit
in support of the motion.

Is he -- I'm using the civil contempt.
Is that
the applicable standard?
21
THE COURT:
22
MR. HUFFMAN:
23
THE COURT:
24
What you're relying in there is the criminal
25
That's where we're going to go next.

Right.
That's exactly what we're going to do.
standard, and that's for incarcerating somebody
(866)240-9500

Page 13
1
irrespective of whether they have the right to a purge.

How are you asking for something that's civil in
2
3
this case?
MR. KIDD:
MR. HUFFMAN:
Yeah, it's criminal contempt.
in this.
THE COURT:
MR. HUFFMAN:
things.
Oh, there could be any number of
Pick one, the best one that you think
you can convince me is realistic.

MR. HUFFMAN:
12
13
What remedy would you be looking for?
There could be --
THE COURT:
10
11
I'm not asking for criminal contempt
Yes.
Number one, it would be a
reiteration of the ban -- okay? -- and -THE COURT:
14
You want me to re-enter the injunction
15
and write we really mean it this time at the bottom of
16
it?
17
MR. HUFFMAN:
Judge, I've seen that before and --
18
and other sanctions.
19
THE COURT:
Okay?
Monetary sanctions.
But tell me what, though.
What
20
really, I mean ... because it sounds to me like most of
21
the things that you could be thinking of to redress
22
past conduct would be things that constitute punitive
23
measures rather than coercive measures.
24
25
And, as you know, the difference between criminal

and civil contempt is whether it's coercive rather than
(866)240-9500

Page 14
1
punitive.
MR. HUFFMAN:
Right.
And we are not looking for
the punitive side.
We are looking for him to abide by
it.
did violate the injunction.
We have presented overwhelming evidence that he
So there would also be the court costs involved as
far as attorney's fees in the course of the injunction.
THE COURT:
We get back to the question of what precise
10
11
Well that's a different issue.
remedy could we get under that, you know.

MR. HUFFMAN:
Well correct me if I'm wrong, but,
12
you know, the court can make findings that would have
13
civil contempt.
14
to a period of time.
15
THE COURT:
It could even include incarceration up
Well civil contempt can include
16
incarceration, but it can only include incarceration
17
where the person who has been incarcerated has the
18
ability to purge themselves of the contempt and ...
19
MR. HUFFMAN:
20
THE COURT:
21
Right.
-- and they can't undo something
they've done in the past.
22
MR. HUFFMAN:
23
THE COURT:
No.
So usually we would -- civil contempt
24
is available for getting people to, you know, sign
25
deeds that they won't sign or -- or make child support
(866)240-9500

Page 15
1
payments is probably the most common reason it's used,
things like that.
MR. HUFFMAN:
4
5
Right.
So what we're looking at is
for him to understand and abide.

Because there has to be a method sent here.
There's thousands of people who are reading these blogs
and posts, thousands of people.
shareholders.
case.
10
We have 4,000
Thousands of them are following this
Okay?
THE COURT:
Why aren't you asking for criminal
11
contempt then if that's -- if he is going to flagrantly
12
violate, in your estimation -- that's what you're
13
telling me he's done -- if he's going to flagrantly
14
violate an order of the court, then, you know, normally
15
what happens is a criminal contempt affidavit and
16
motion for order to show cause is filed.
17
If an order to show cause is filed, that operates
18
as a criminal law charging document.
19
a case -- a criminal law case number to it and we have
20
the hearing.
21
that is, notice of the charges, and a court reporter is
22
provided by the state --
The Rules of Criminal Procedure apply;
23
MR. HUFFMAN:
24
THE COURT:
25
have to do.
The clerk assigns
Right.
-- and all of those things that we
If they're going to be facing more than
(866)240-9500

Page 16
1
six months of incarceration, they have to be afforded a
jury trial.
3
4
But we typically can certify incarceration of no

more than 179 days.
MR. HUFFMAN:
THE COURT:
7
8
9
10
11
Right.
I hope you're getting the message
that I've done this before.

We'll do it again, if need be.
know how to use that.
I mean, it's -- we
It's a realistic remedy, is what
I'm trying to tell you.

MR. HUFFMAN:
The reason why, Your Honor, is
12
because when we were here on December 1st and this
13
matter was brought before the Court, you told me and --
14
you didn't direct me which direction to go.
15
However, by the end of that hearing, it was
16
directly contemplated that it would be a civil matter
17
and it would be an order to show cause.
18
December 6th, I sent all of this into the Court.
19
THE COURT:
And on
Well you can -- as long as you're not
20
talking about jail, there are other remedies, I guess,
21
that you could be asking for in connection with a civil
22
case.
23
MR. HUFFMAN:
24
THE COURT:
25
Right.
And I think that's what you were
mentioning --
(866)240-9500

Page 17
1
MR. HUFFMAN:
THE COURT:
3
4
5
6
That's correct, Your Honor.
-- a few minutes ago in terms of
the -MR. HUFFMAN:
Now a subsequent violation would
certainly change things, but we're not there yet.

THE COURT:
Well right now a new injunction that
compels the gentleman to do the same thing that he did
would be -- you know, once we've done it, it would be
done again already.
And, I mean, I don't know what
10
you're asking me to do that could prevent that at this
11
point.
12
MR. HUFFMAN:
Well, Judge, again, there are
13
sanctions.
14
enforcement measures.
15
There are monetary sanctions, there are
THE COURT:
All right.
So his answer to your
16
point, which is correct, if he's asking -- excuse me --
17
if he's asking for a criminal contempt, it would just
18
have me send the sheriff out and pick your fellow up
19
and, I guess, extradite him back to ... you know,
20
we've done things like when we had to.
21
But that's not what he's asking for at this point.
22
What he's asking for is basically going to be a
23
monetary sanction for the violation.
24
you're getting to.
25
and do the enforcement.
That's what
And the cost of having to come in

So that's what he's talking
(866)240-9500

Page 18
1
2
about.
MR. KIDD:
Well, Your Honor, I stick by my
original point that there's procedural defects here.
If he wants to claim that he's making a claim for civil
contempt and not criminal, then, you know, where's the
purge provision next to the suggestion of
incarceration.
defects to it, so ...
THE COURT:
Like there's -- procedurally this has
Well I'm pretty sure we're taking the
10
incarceration off the table at this point because
11
I can't incarcerate him pending his promise to actually
12
obey the law.
13
MR. KIDD:
Understood.
In that case, I would also
14
argue that in this entire case, the defendant has been
15
acting pro se and ... it's challenging now even the
16
order to -- sorry -- the gag order, essentially, to not
17
to speak about the company or anything.
18
challenging that as well.
19
his favor, then there wouldn't really be a basis for
20
contempt.
21
THE COURT:
He's
And if that were to go in
Well, actually, if you violate a court
22
order while it's in effect, while you're challenging
23
it, it's still a basis for contempt.
24
in Federal court, the guy would be in jail already.
25
If he did that
The state court enforcement mechanism is much
(866)240-9500

Page 19
1
weaker than the federal court enforcement mechanism.
And since I am state a court enforcement mechanism, I
don't like saying that, but it is.
MR. KIDD:
Right.
THE COURT:
A federal judge would issue a warrant,
and a marshal in the -- in the state where the state
where the gentleman lives would have picked him up by
now because you're not allowed to just challenge an
injunction and violate it while you challenge it.
10
11
Where is he challenging it; is that here in this

case?
12
MR. KIDD:
I believe so, yes.
13
THE COURT:
14
MR. KIDD:
15
THE COURT:
16
MR. KIDD:
17
THE COURT:
18
the injunction.
All right.
No.
Not here today, no.
No, no, I just mean in general.

Yes.
You mentioned that he was challenging
19
MR. KIDD:
20
MR. HUFFMAN:
21
anything on that.
Sure.
22
THE COURT:
23
MR. HUFFMAN:
24
THE COURT:
25
Well, I mean --
Judge, there's been no filing or
None that you know of.

Well --
It could be in a different -- he could
have collaterally attacked it in a different court
(866)240-9500

Page 20
1
somewhere else and you wouldn't know.
MR. HUFFMAN:
That's correct.
THE COURT:
So in any case, we have the one issue of him not
I mean, it's possible.
being here today.
better than sending nobody or ...
MR. KIDD:
THE COURT:
He sent you.
And that's a whole lot
Sure.
But usually when you have these kinds
of things, the only real question the Court decides is
10
whether it's facially sufficient to support the
11
entry of an order to show cause.
12
And this time he's just talking about an order
13
for civil contempt.
14
sanctions.
15
16
What would you be proposing to do at an

evidentiary hearing to prove that there was --
17
Mr. HUFFMAN:
18
THE COURT:
19
He's just asking for monetary
Prove the postings.
I'm sure you want to prove the
postings, but how are you going to do the hard part?
20
MR. HUFFMAN:
21
THE COURT:
22
MR. HUFFMAN:
Oh, prove the --
Yeah.
I mean --
Well, yeah.
Well this whole case is
23
about him assuming things.
24
different standings.
25
pump and dump, an insider trading, and now things have
He's taken so many
At first, he said that this was a
(866)240-9500

Page 21
1
dwindled down to, well, the company's not accurate in
its press releases.
You know, so we have multiple -- I have the CEO, I
have the CFO, I have numerous -- I have the auditors
available, everyone who can bring in the evidence to
contradict everything that he states.
THE COURT:
Once again, though, if you prove it's
all false, if you prove that the guy -- even if you
were able to prove that the guy just sits around and
10
makes stuff up for sport --
11
MR. HUFFMAN:
12
THE COURT:
Right.
-- if you're able to do that, what's
13
the -- how do you get past the next couple of links
14
that you need in your chain; that is, how do you show
15
it caused any damages and how do you show that --
16
MR. HUFFMAN:
Well that's for the finder of fact,
17
in deed, to make that nexus.
18
and you can show that --
19
THE COURT:
20
MR. HUFFMAN:
21
THE COURT:
22
MR. HUFFMAN:
23
the evidence is there.
But we show the postings
Well isn't that me?

It is.
Yeah.
24
THE COURT:
25
MR. HUFFMAN:
But we show the -- Judge, I believe

This isn't my first rodeo.
Well I'm asking you so let's hear it.
Okay.
So he makes a posting on a
(866)240-9500

Page 22
1
Tuesday -- all right? -- or a number of postings,
saying that there's insider trading, they're stealing
treasure.
that's out there on the east coast.
5
6
Because this is a treasure recovery company
THE COURT:
Okay?
I thought he was saying that there
isn't any treasure.
MR. HUFFMAN:
Exactly.
Right.
Or he says there
isn't any treasure or they're stealing it, or they're
giving these fraudulent and security ... and then the
10
next day there's a massive sale.
11
Okay?
Or have people available who can come in and
12
testify that would have put money into the company
13
directly, but they read his postings and they did not.
14
We also have people available who said they read
15
his postings.
16
They sold, thus driving down the price because they
17
sold.
18
19
They were shareholders of they company.
THE COURT:
But when they found out it was false,
did they buy it back and drive the price back up?
20
MR. HUFFMAN:
21
THE COURT:
Well, Judge that's not really -No, it is.
You've got to understand.
22
You can't show a temporary change in price which --
23
you know, if the price goes down tomorrow because of
24
something that somebody said that was false, the rest
25
of the world realizes it's true the day after
(866)240-9500

Page 23
1
tomorrow, the price goes back up, then you don't have
any damages --
MR. HUFFMAN:
THE COURT:
MR. HUFFMAN:
Judge, I --
-- if that what happens.

I understand the theory.
However,
this was an ongoing -- our original lawsuit is an
ongoing period of time -- I believe covered a period
of six months -- that could show the diminution in the
value of the value of the stock price.
10
That continued.
Okay?
Even during the time of
11
his violation of the order -- okay? -- there was
12
reactions in the market -- okay?
13
postings.
14
THE COURT:
15
MR. HUFFMAN:
16
THE COURT:
-- because of his
What I'm trying to tell you is -I can also argue res ipsa loquitur.
No, you can't.
There is -- there is a
17
bunch of people out there -- I used to be one -- who
18
used scientific method to try to evaluate the changes
19
in stock prices as a result of the release of
20
certain kinds of information --
21
MR. HUFFMAN:
22
THE COURT:
23
24
25
Right.
-- true or false information -- into
the marketplace.
And there are accepted scientific methods for
being able to determine the difference between
(866)240-9500

Page 24
1
information release and randomness or temporary blimps
based on information being false that everybody pretty
quickly figures out is false.
MR. HUFFMAN:
THE COURT:
Right.
All the stuff that you showed me in
the Complaint originally -- in the original Complaint
-- I realize you're talking about different stuff
now, but the stuff that was in the Complaint was the
kind of information, which if it was false, would
10
usually be found out by the rest of the market to be
11
false and any sort of damage to the stock price that
12
came from that bad information would be -- would be
13
likely to be recovered.
14
15
16
17
MR. HUFFMAN:
Court that -THE COURT:
Well you might want to read the book I
wrote on the subject.
18
MR. HUFFMAN:
19
THE COURT:
20
I would have to disagree with the
I will do so.
I don't think you will.
I don't think
you can find it.
21
MR. HUFFMAN:
22
THE COURT:
That sounds vague, Your Honor.
I wrote -- I wrote a book in 2000
23
called "The Uncertainty of Legal Rights".
24
how the prices of stocks changed when information about
25
litigation events was released.
It was about
(866)240-9500

Page 25
1
And there's a lot in there about how the
methodology that had been developed to try to deal with
-- the biggest problem is that when the market goes up
or down, all the stocks go up or down -- right? --
and --
6
7
8
9
MR. HUFFMAN:
Well that's true.
They're external
forces.
THE COURT:
And then there's a lot of other things
too, and it's hard to identify any one change in stock
10
as being attributable just to one isolated thing.
11
not saying you can't do it.
12
expect me to assume that.
13
I'm
I'm just saying you can't
You might have done better in a different county
14
where the person didn't come from that industry, but
15
the -- there's not going to be an assumption that the
16
change in stock price today resulted from an action
17
yesterday.
18
And just to be clear, some of the evidence you
19
were pointing me to is in the right direction.
20
have people who actually said I didn't buy the stock --
21
MR. HUFFMAN:
22
THE COURT:
If you
Right.
-- they're still going to have to
23
answer the question, well when you found out what was
24
said was false, did you buy it then?
25
to you even at an even lower price, so did you buy it
It was available
(866)240-9500

Page 26
1
2
then?
And then if you show, yeah, they bought it then
... I mean, you -- if you have that kind of evidence,
we'll hear it, is what I'm telling you.
MR. HUFFMAN:
But then you have dilutive effect.
Because at a lower price, you -- in order to take in
$10,000, for instance, if you're at a penny -- okay? --
it's a million shares.
two million shares.
10
If you're at half-a-penny, it's
So the dilutive effect on the
company is also there.
11
But, Judge, obviously Mr. Kennedy can speak
12
because he was -- he started three broker dealers and
13
has been licensed in the security industry.
14
wants to speak.
15
THE COURT:
I know he
I'm not letting him, but ...

And I'll hear from him if it's
16
necessary to hear from him about anything we're doing
17
today.
18
little different.
19
MR. HUFFMAN:
20
THE COURT:
But today, we're focused on something that's a
Right.
I'm just telling you, you can't expect
21
anybody to make the assumption that information
22
released one day causes the stock price the next day
23
without other surrounding information that tends to
24
give that more credence than --
25
MR HUFFMAN:
Well I understand --
(866)240-9500

Page 27
1
2
3
4
THE COURT:
Listen to me.
-- because it happened
after, it might have happened because of.

MR. HUFFMAN:
book.
Okay.
And I will find the Court's
Okay?
THE COURT:
I think I have one here.
MR. HUFFMAN:
Okay.
It's only --
But the point being, is we're
here because Darrell Volentine violated the court
order which he agreed to.
THE COURT:
Yeah, I understand.
And tell me more
10
about what happened with the damages under the
11
preceding situation.
12
decided not to agree to the damages part of the
13
agreement between the parties.
14
MR. HUFFMAN:
15
THE COURT:
You told me that Judge Cook
That's correct.
I guess we heard that correctly.
16
So where is that damages thing now; did it ever get
17
resolved or not get resolved?
18
19
MR. HUFFMAN:
No.
That's why we're here, is to
prove damages.
20
THE COURT:
And did you or he plead a jury trial?
21
MR. HUFFMAN:
We actually -- Judge, I can't
22
recall, but we -- somewhere along the line it went to
23
the judge -- okay? -- and he agreed.
24
THE COURT:
25
MR. HUFFMAN:
All right?
To do what?
Have just a nonjury trial.
(866)240-9500

Page 28
1
THE COURT:
Okay.
MR. HUFFMAN:
THE COURT:
And now that would be me.
That would be you.
And I'm thinking that what you need to
do is to schedule your trial sooner rather later where
all of these pretrial thing are is less of an
impediment to getting --
MR. HUFFMAN:
THE COURT:
Let me -- let me point out, Judge --
Please.
The nice lady here can only
take down what one of us say at a time.
10
Go ahead.
What do you want to point out?
11
MR. HUFFMAN:
On December 1st, pursuant to this
12
Court, at that hearing you had asked for a trial order
13
to be presented.
14
On December 6th, I sent in the Trial Order.
Okay?
15
The only thing to be determined -- and Mr. Volentine
16
had asked that the nonjury trial be in the latter part
17
of March, which has now passed.
18
19
I sent this in to your chambers, submitted it

through JAWS with the cover letter.
20
THE COURT:
21
MR. HUFFMAN:
I then --
Did you get it back?

I then contacted -- in January,
22
after hearing nothing -- and I was told that I should
23
have had a pretrial date although I was instructed when
24
I left here to leave that blank and one would be sent.
25
THE COURT:
Oh, no, no, no, that's not what
(866)240-9500

Page 29
1
happened.
I'll tell you why it's not what happened
because it won't get processed if there's a blank in
it.
MR. HUFFMAN:
THE COURT:
Okay.
And it's possible for me to have said
something that would have given you that impression, I
guess.
MR. HUFFMAN:
THE COURT:
Correct.
But I wouldn't have specifically said
10
leave it blank because I know exactly what would happen
11
if you left it blank, which is exactly what did
12
happen.
It won't get processed if it's blank.
13
MR. HUFFMAN:
14
THE COURT:
15
MR. HUFFMAN:
16
THE COURT:
17
MR. HUFFMAN:
18
THE COURT:
19
to happen.
20
to get it done.
21
Right.
So we had a --
Let's do it again.
Okay.
All right.
That's my answer to that.
Okay.
We'll do it again, and we'll get that
I'm sorry we had that confusion about how
Because what we -- what you really needed, I
22
guess, was a different order than the standard order
23
because the standard order has that blank in it.
24
I'm sure I didn't make because I doubt that I thought
25
it through to that degree while we were here before.
And
(866)240-9500

Page 30
1
MR. HUFFMAN:
And I had actually done that before
without the blank because I did -- all I did is I took
that out in a previous order.
THE COURT:
Yeah.
MR. HUFFMAN:
So --
And by the way, this matter was set
before Judge Foster for trial on December 1st of last
year before his recusal.
THE COURT:
this whole business.
10
Let's hear defense's counsel about
I'm not trying to ask you any more than you want
11
to tell about the relationship you have with the client
12
or anything, but I noticed you're making a special
13
appearance and I don't know if that means that you're
14
onboard through the trial or not or if that's decided
15
yet even.
16
MR. KIDD:
That's yet to be determined.
You know,
17
the client's financial situation is not one where he
18
could afford a retained attorney, you know, on call
19
whenever he needed it.
20
So as of right now, I'm just here on this matter.
21
Potentially, I could be involved in future matters.
22
Potentially, he could continue on pro se.
23
determination we make at a later date.
24
25
THE COURT:
All right.
That'll be a
So what else -- what about
the motion that you wanted to bring; what's that all
(866)240-9500

Page 31
1
2
about?
MR. KIDD:
Okay.
The Amended Verified Motion for
Contempt.
that Attorney Huffman made statements on December 1st.
5
6
7
Essentially, what we're claiming here is
THE COURT:
That was the one where he said he
didn't have a certain documents.

MR. KIDD:
Correct.
And subsequently admitted
that he did have them, which was -- constitutes, you
know, lying in open court, which is a contemptible
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
offense.
THE COURT:
MS. KIDD:
THE COURT:
THE COURT:
Yeah.
But exactly which ones, I need
Right.
Take your time.
I'm not trying to
-- it's not a memory test.

MR. KIDD:
here.
I understand.
I got copies some copies
This is --
22
THE COURT:
23
(PAUSE)
24
MR. KIDD:
25
Mr. Volentine subpoenaed some
to know.
18
21
Okay.
documents related ClearTrust and Seafarer.
MR. KIDD:
20
Exactly
what documents are you talking about?
17
19
Well let's figure that out.
That's okay.
Take your time.
It looks to be mostly records; such as,
transfer journal, registra journal.
(866)240-9500

Page 32
THE COURT:
1
2
Well let's pick the one -- pick one of
those records that you are advancing the contention.

And I realize this was filed pro se by your client
3
4
and not you --
MR. KIDD:
THE COURT:
Yeah.
-- but you still ... if you're going
to press a motion like that in court, you've got to be
able to identify exactly what it is you're talking
about because that's the only way you can be fairly
10
expected to be able to speak to it.

So you need to pick one document that -- at least
11
12
one document, let's just start with one -- that says
13
what you're relying on.
14
MR. KIDD:
15
(PAUSE)
16
THE COURT:
17
now.
Sure.
Just pick one.
Exhibit C ...
So it's been a couple of minutes
It doesn't seem like that is readily available.
18
MR. KIDD:
19
THE COURT:
Yeah.
Yeah.
I'm trying to understand the ...

You kind of have to be ready to
20
do that when you come in if you're going to press a
21
motion for contempt against somebody.
22
can do that, we're going to have to drop the
23
Motion for Contempt at this point.
24
25
MR. KIDD:
So unless you
I believe it was having to do with
issuance for shares in regards to ClearTrust.
Because
(866)240-9500

Page 33
1
Mr. Volentine was able to receive the documents in
regards to Seafarer, and Mr. Huffman, despite claiming
that he did not have access to the same documents for
ClearTrust on December 1st, then in an e-mail on
February 16th claimed that he was in possession of the
documents, but that he needed to go over them to make
sure they duplicative of what he already said.
THE COURT:
So how would you know -- even if we
just assume that to be true, how would that amount to
10
proof that he didn't tell the truth back at the first
11
time when it's possible he could have acquired them
12
between date number one and date number two?
13
14
MR. KIDD:
have them as a matter of law.
15
THE COURT:
16
MR. KIDD:
17
18
Because ClearTrust was required to
So what if they broke that law?

Well then, alternatively, we would like
sanctions against ClearTrust.

THE COURT:
Well I think the SEC is the one who
19
gets to enforce those kinds of things.
20
have documents that you're required to have, then
21
there's regulators who take control over that stuff.
22
I'm not one of those regulators.
23
state court.
24
regulators want to do if they want to.
25
If you don't
This is just a
We actually have to defer to what the
But we don't have the authority to just make a
(866)240-9500

Page 34
1
sanction to somebody in a case for not complying with
the Federal regulation that requires them to keep
documents.
That's why I asked the fellow what law he was
talking about last time.
state court judge in a state court case to enforce the
things that are within the authority of the state court
judge to enforce.
Because you can only ask a
And the requirement that they maintain certain
10
regulations that comes from federal law is something
11
that -- certainly we don't condone people breaking it,
12
if that's what they do.
13
authority to just reach out and start writing up
14
sanctions for that in the course of this case because
15
there's due process requirements that apply to it.
16
But we don't have the
People have to be given notice of exactly what
17
they are alleged to have done wrong and have to be
18
given a hearing where they can explain what they -- you
19
know, what they're being charged with or give evidence
20
of their -- you know, their own viewpoint.
21
So I can't enter any sanctions against anybody for
22
not having documents that the federal regulations
23
require them to have, and I can't enter any sanctions
24
against the attorney even if I assume that what you're
25
telling me about the two different points in time is
(866)240-9500

Page 35
1
2
correct.
Because if he didn't have them or didn't know
about them at one point and then he knew about them at
another point and he said I know about them and gave
them over to you, that's what we want people to do.
MR. KIDD:
THE COURT:
He hasn't given them over, Your Honor.

Well that's a different story.
If he
hasn't given them over, then we would be talking about
a motion to compel discovery, not some sort of motion
10
11
to attack the gentleman's honesty and things like that.

So I understand that and maybe we'll be back here
12
on the motion to compel discovery.
13
that your client's motion for contempt is an effort to
14
erect a false equivalency.
15
But it seems to me
There is substance to the motion that the other
16
side has raised for contempt against the defendant if
17
it turns out to be true that he has actually continued
18
to make false claims against the company after
19
submitting to and agreeing to and having the court sign
20
and serve an injunction against doing that.
21
that's happened, then that's a fairly serious matter.
22
And if
But if it -- and it seems to me like the
23
gentleman's effort to make a claim that the other side
24
has done something equally serious in violation of the
25
rules is, for the most part, manufactured.
(866)240-9500

Page 36
1
So I'm going to deny the Defendant's Motion for an
Order to Show Cause because it doesn't come anywhere
close to the standard that we need.
With regard to the Plaintiff's Motion for Order to
Show Cause, I think the only thing that I can do
prospectively is to order that the -- that the
defendant will be fined $2,500 every time he does it
going forward in the future automatically.
And that's as a fine and not as a recoupment of
10
damages.
11
against damages if they were -- if damages are ever
12
ordered.
13
Although it would probably be a set-off
And then if you can prove it happens going
14
forward, then the court can use that measure -- that's
15
how we do a coercive measure going forward when we
16
don't have, as a practical matter, the ability to use
17
the threat of incarceration.
18
MR. HUFFMAN:
Just so we're clear, that would be
19
-- since I'm the one who will be drafting this order,
20
that would be the Court's order, then, perspectively
21
going forward?
22
THE COURT:
It's to amend the injunction going
23
forward -- as a matter of enforcement, to amend the
24
injunction to, perspectively, going forward, provide
25
that the gentleman will be -- you know, this is how we
(866)240-9500

Page 37
1
coerce people going forward in civil contempt -- right?
-- is we give them a consequence that they don't want
if they continue to do it.
If he does that, it turns out that he had some
sort of a right to do it, maybe a protected privilege
or something like that, then we deal with that after
we can see what it is.
MR. HUFFMAN:
9
10
So we're not going to have an actual
order to show case hearing.

THE COURT:
Well I think that the order to show
11
cause hearing has presented enough evidence to justify
12
as an alternative -- you're basically -- the order to
13
show cause hearing and the last one, if you put them
14
together, you have sought to enforce the injunction,
15
and you're asking the Court to enforece the injunction
16
with the criminal or -- or civil contempt power.
17
And the Court, in order to do that, is going to
18
amend the injunction or enter an additional -- I guess
19
a separate order enforcing the injunction by specifying
20
that you've shown that the gentleman has -- by showing
21
that the gentleman has continued to do in the past what
22
the injunction prohibits, that going forward he has to
23
be -- in order to coerce him to not do that, he'll face
24
a fine of $2500 every time he does it.
25
But, of course, it's still going to be up to you
(866)240-9500

Page 38
1
to prove that he's actually done it order to have that
fine actually attached.
MR. HUFFMAN:
THE COURT:
MR. HUFFMAN:
THE COURT:
the post.
was false.
damages you.
It doesn't fall from the sky.

Okay.
You have to bring in the evidence of
You have to bring in the evidence that it

You don't have to bring in evidence that it
10
MR. HUFFMAN:
11
THE COURT:
12
Right.
Right.
But you'd have to do all those thing
to do that.
13
And if that doesn't serve to deter him, then we'll
14
have the kind of hearing that we have to have and we'll
15
deal with it that way.
16
MR. HUFFMAN:
17
THE COURT:
Very well.
So that's all the remedy that you can
18
get that's prospective, that's within the scope of
19
civil contempt, that you can support based on the
20
various different kinds of things -- requests that
21
you've made so far.
22
MR. HUFFMAN:
23
THE COURT:
24
25
Very well.
Anything you want to say at this
point, sir?
With regard to the possibility that any kind of
(866)240-9500

Page 39
1
criminal contempt would be issued from the state's
proceeding, you're correct, and that part would not be
done.
4
5
6
So is there anything else that you want to add at

this point?
MR. KIDD:
Just that, you know, the plaintiff's
side has an SEC specialized attorney who should have
known that the documents were at least suppose to be
in possession of Clear Channel and --
10
MR. HUFFMAN:
11
MR. KIDD:
12
ClearTrust.
ClearTrust, yeah.
I'm a radio fan.
Yeah, you got it.
13
-- ClearTrust, and that, you know, moving forward,
14
I will certainly advise my client of the decision today
15
and that he's refrain from, you know, any posts he
16
might make.
17
THE COURT:
18
MR. KIDD:
19
THE COURT:
20
MR. KIDD:
21
THE COURT:
He'll get something in -In writing?

In writing, right.
Sure.
One thing I -- I mean, it's kind of an
22
elephant in the room.
23
It's not purely an academic question.
24
you're asking -- I want to be clear, if you're asking
25
me to enforce the injunction, there's a question about
I asked you about it originally.

Because if
(866)240-9500

Page 40
1
enforcing that injunction.
truthful postings, you know, there would be an issue
about that, that I don't want to have to deal with.
MR. HUFFMAN:
THE COURT:
6
7
If it were to be applied to
Right.
What I'm doing today only applies to
any postings that contain false factual content.

MR. HUFFMAN:
And it would be our burden, then, at
a hearing that we would have to prove that under the
standard.
10
Right?
THE COURT:
If factual assertions are made and you
11
bring up a hearing and you bring any evidence at all
12
and it's false, then it would up to them, if they
13
wanted to assert that it was true, to -- you know, it
14
would shift to them once you had evidence of the
15
falsity.
16
MR. HUFFMAN:
I hate to get academic again, but
17
isn't that kind of giving the defendant in this case
18
the argument or the ability, in his mind, that he
19
thinks that he can post no matter how egregious it is.
20
Because in his mind, if he feels he's right, even
21
if he has no basis of fact and he's doing so however
22
recklessly in disregard to not knowing the facts, are
23
we kind of opening that up for him?
24
THE COURT:
Yes, indeed, and that's deliberate.
25
MR. HUFFMAN:
Okay.
(866)240-9500

Page 41
1
THE COURT:
Unfortunately, it has be done that way
because there's a First Amendment issue that overhangs
all of this stuff that we have to respect.
The First Amendment doesn't protect making
factually false speech.
against the gentleman posting, and it certainly extends
to factually false speech without question.
8
9
And there's an injunction
If you wanted to try a different approach to

remedies, it would be -- you know, I would consider
10
whatever they were.
11
tell him that he can't post -- period.
12
MR. HUFFMAN:
But I'm not in a position today to
Well, Judge, that's actually what
13
the stipulation he agreed to and that's what the order
14
enforced.
15
THE COURT:
I understand.
But I don't understand
16
why you would want to argue with me because this point
17
is obvious.
18
You buy yourself a big, long, expensive
19
appellate process if you try to enforce the injunction,
20
that he agreed to even, against any posting at all even
21
if it's true.
22
And right now I'm happy.
And I would like to be
23
able to do more, because it does appear under the
24
circumstances that the gentleman isn't going to obey
25
the court order and we take that seriously.
(866)240-9500

Page 42
1
MR. HUFFMAN:
THE COURT:
Yes, sir.
But, you know, what I'm saying, the
$2500 per incident thing that I'm talking about is
designed to be a deterrent.
deterrent against the stuff that he's not allowed to do
under the injunction.
do under the injunction.
MR. HUFFMAN:
THE COURT:
It's designed to be a
I'm certain he's not allowed to
Right.
And I hope that we'll see that it
10
amounts to some kind of a deterrent because the -- you
11
know, he'll have to be able to support the truthfulness
12
of what he's doing to some degree if your client comes
13
in and testifies, no, that's not true.
14
I mean, it's hard to prove a negative.
It's much
15
easier to prove a positive.
So, typically, the people
16
who want to prove the truth of something are the ones
17
who have the burden of proving that.
18
So we'll see what happens.
Hopefully what will
19
happen is the gentleman will understand that the legal
20
process means something and will confine himself to
21
doing things that are legally permissible.
22
MR. HUFFMAN:
Only two clean-up items then,
23
Your Honor.
I would be bereft if I did not raise the
24
issue that given the Court's ruling, that there be some
25
remedy as to the attorney's fees and costs.
(866)240-9500

Page 43
1
THE COURT:
here for today?
For which of the proceedings we were
MR. HUFFMAN:
Actually the Order to -- for the
Motion for the Order to Show Cause on the Injunction
against Mr. Volentine.
THE COURT:
MR. HUFFMAN:
Okay.
And what would that be?
I'm not going to be excessive, but
there certainly has been time.
before Judge Foster, it was continued to --
10
THE COURT:
11
MR. HUFFMAN:
12
THE COURT:
13
14
Because it was filed
I understand.
-- December 1st to -Let me hear from the other side about
that.
MR. KIDD:
Your Honor, you know, I brought up
15
procedural defects at the beginning.
16
not perfect.
17
believe that attorney's fees are appropriate in this
18
situation.
19
This motion was
We had standing to defend it so I don't
THE COURT:
I'm certainly not going to find that
20
your handling of the defense was improper in any way.
21
But the underlying question is whether or not it
22
should of had to be brought in the first place.
23
think that's what he's -- his basis for his motion is.
24
I know you were disadvantaged because it's a long
25
file and you may not have had time to look at it.
And I
(866)240-9500

Page 44
1
certainly haven't.
anything you want to say about that.
MR. KIDD:
THE COURT:
But I don't know if there's
As far as the size of the file or ...

No, no.
As far as the underlying --
whether it should have been necessary to bring these
proceedings in the first place.
7
8
9
10
Maintaining a proceedings in bad faith is one

thing.
Certainly nobody is accusing you of that.
MR. KIDD:
THE COURT:
Sure.
Okay.
But taking the position or requiring
11
the commencement of additional unnecessary proceedings
12
is an entirely separate ground for holding somebody
13
responsible.
14
MR. KIDD:
Understood.
I think that, you know, my
15
client had enough ground to at least oppose this
16
motion.
17
the statements made under the basis of this motion are
18
true or not.
19
begin with.
20
You know, we haven't verified whether any of
The statements aren't even verified to
THE COURT:
Is there anything that you would want
21
to do to answer that concern that the gentleman's
22
raised?
23
MR. HUFFMAN:
Well other than -- there is no
24
transcript other than him admitting it before two other
25
Circuit Court Judges of this Court, and --
(866)240-9500

Page 45
1
2
THE COURT:
Do you have, like, a witness who can
offer evidence on it or something?
MR. HUFFMAN:
THE COURT:
MR. KENNEDY:
THE COURT:
Mr. Kennedy.
Raise your right hand, sir.
(Complying).
Your swear that the evidence you give
will be the truth and nothing but the truth?
THE WITNESS:
THE COURT:
Yes, sir.
All right.
Go ahead.
10
MR. HUFFMAN:
11
THE COURT:
12
MR. KIDD:
I have a copy here if you need one.
13
THE COURT:
I gave you back everything I got.
14
MR. HUFFMAN:
15
Judge, you have an Exhibit A.

I don't know what I have.
Okay.
I'll take this one,
Your Honor.
16
KYLE KENNEDY, PLAINTIFF'S WITNESS
17
EXAMINATION
18
BY MR. HUFFMAN
19
Q.
Okay.
20
A.
I'm a CEO of Seafarer Exploration, Corp.
21
Q.
All right.
Mr. Kennedy, what is your position?
You're familiar --
22
THE COURT
23
Say your full name, please.
24
THE WITNESS
25
THE COURT
Wait.
Hang on a second.
Kyle Gregory Kennedy.

Go ahead, sir.
(866)240-9500

Page 46
1
2
3
BY MR. HUFFMAN:
Q.
And you are Chief Executive Officer of
Seafarer Exploration, Corporation.
Correct?
A.
Yes, sir.
Q.
Are you familiar with the Injunction that was
6
7
8
ordered against Mr. Darrell Volentine on October 7, 2014?

A.
I think so.
clarify that?
Because you filed a lot of paperwork.
Q.
No.
10
A.
Oh, okay.
11
This was actually from Judge Cook.

Oh, when she asked him to stop posting
in any form, in any manner, in any way whatsoever --
12
13
When we say "injunction," can you
THE JUDGE:
you're talking about.
14
MR. HUFFMAN:
15
THE COURT:
16
MR. HUFFMAN:
17
18
It sounds like he knows what document
He does.
What's the next question?
Thank you.
BY MR. HUFFMAN:
Q.
Are you familiar with the postings that are
19
contained in what's been filed in Exhibit A to the
20
Motion for the Order to Show Cause?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q.
Do you recognize these names including the names
23
24
25
on these postings?
A.
I do recognize the names.
The names are
Darrell Volentine.
(866)240-9500

Page 47
1
2
3
Q.
Okay.
In particular, let's look at page 4.
is Buccaneer 961 to your knowledge?

A.
Who
That's a user name.
Buccaneer 1961 is Darrell Volentine, who admitted
that that's him and he's posting this.
to Judge Cook, and I believe he also admitted it again to
Judge Foster.
Q.
8
9
Okay.
THE COURT:
Before or after those posts, that you
have in your hand now, were posted?
10
11
He admitted clearly
THE WITNESS:
I'm sorry, sir.
Ask me one more
time.
12
THE COURT:
13
the fellow admitting that that was his user name.
14
THE WITNESS:
15
THE COURT:
16
THE WITNESS:
Was that before these posts that
No, sir, after.
He had already
posted --
19
THE COURT:
20
THE WITNESS:
21
Yes.
you're -- that you have in front of you?
17
18
Before or after -- you talked about
Those were already posted by then.

Yes.
BY MR. HUFFMAN:
22
Q.
Please look at the date.
23
A.
7.23.15.
24
Q.
Right.
25
A.
Oh, these were posted after --
(866)240-9500

Page 48
THE COURT:
1
2
Next
question.
THE WITNESS:
3
4
Ah, that's what I was asking.
Thank you.
BY MR. HUFFMAN:
Q.
Okay.
So who is Buccaneer 1961?
A.
Darrell Volentine.
Q.
All right.
And are those postings then -- do
those postings reveal any information that is prejudicial to
the company and untrue -- that you see?
10
A.
Yes.
11
Q.
Can you give me an example.
12
A.
Sure.
13
Q.
And, if you could, read us the date.
14
A.
This is an example.
15
Here's one on 7.19. it's the
one in front of me.
16
Q.
7.19 of what year?
17
A.
7.19.2015.
18
"scammy, trashy, so called cover stocks before and
19
"they all lost value.
20
"they were meant to be scammy from the beginning.
21
"E-A-H" and then "O-R-V."
22
means.
23
reflection to me.
24
"never meant to fly.
25
"be part of it."
It says, "I held the stock and other
Because unknown to shareholders,
I don't know what that
"More ammo for their evil master."
That was in
"But remember, some ducks were

But this one is real.
Glad to
(866)240-9500

Page 49
THE COURT:
What in there, in your estimation, has
referred it to your company?
did.
THE WITNESS:
4
5
THE COURT:
THE WITNESS:
THE COURT:
I see.
THE WITNESS:
13
THE COURT:
15
16
17
Go ahead.
What's next?
Anything else?
12
14
And they're all -- all pertain to
that particular company in columns or files.
10
11
I see, they're -- they're in the
group.
8
9
This all these posts are posted
under Seafarer Explorations post.
6
7
None of the part you read
Yeah, there's a ton of these.
No.
I mean, I'm asking your attorney
to ask you the next question.

BY MR. HUFFMAN:
Q.
If you could refer to this posting and what the
date on that is.
18
A.
The date on this one is July 24, 2015.
19
Q.
And the poster is who?
20
A.
Buccaneer 1961.
21
Q.
Okay.
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q.
Okay.
24
A.
Sure.
25
Q.
Can you read it?
So that was after the injunction.
Correct?
Can you go to that post?
(866)240-9500

Page 50
1
A.
"this stock, saying this or that, as is custom on junk
"stocks.
"time comes.
"time frame, et cetera, can be found on their Facebook
"page as questions were asked.
"purposes not to say exactly where they are.
"on top of treasure.
"we that.
10
Yes, sir.
It says, "So ones can't pump and dump
This one will give an awesome date when the

They must first prep everything.
Also, it's for security
We are on this wreck.
There she blows.
A good
ATM."
We are
We this,
I don't know what
that means.
"All that stupid hoopla surrounding idiots,
11
12
"etc cetera, and security purposes.
Real
13
"companies work this way.
14
"koward" spelled with a "K" -- "but a very smart
15
"person.
16
Q.
A mighty fine CEO isn't a
Watch and see."
Mr. Kennedy, on the coward that is spelled with a
17
"K", have you seen other references to the "K" and who that
18
is meant to be?
19
A.
Yes.
20
Q.
Who is that meant to be?
21
A.
It's meant to reflect me because of my initial KK.
22
Q.
And in other places you see the initials KK.
23
A.
Yes.
24
25
THE COURT.
Cross-examination.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
(866)240-9500

Page 51
1
BY MR. KIDD:
Q.
3
4
What in that do you find to be damaging to your
company or untrue?
A.
The theme or spirit is what I look at because it's
consistent.
And so they're constantly reading his line of what he
thinks.
And he posts 20 to 30 times a day sometimes.
Okay?
And so as a whole, when you read that this is a
pump and dump or that he's talking about being a coward or
10
when he's talking about how they sell the stock that's not
11
the way we sell the stock or how it works and it's
12
continual, it creates a perception in our mind even when he
13
just asks questions is this a pump and dump.
14
Okay?
If you ask that question, is this a pump and dump
15
60 to 70 times or more and that's all this audience reads
16
all day long day in and day out, month in and month out,
17
they develop a perception that maybe that's the truth.
18
Because I don't counter any of these.
The fact
19
is, I don't even go on-line to read any of these.
20
have to because my shareholders print them off and mail me
21
these things which I don't want to see.
22
I want to run a company.
I don't
Okay?
I want to do something
23
good, and this slows me down and costs money, and I don't
24
want that.
25
Okay?
THE COURT:
Hang on.
Is there another question?
(866)240-9500

Page 52
1
MR. KIDD:
THE COURT:
No, Your Honor.

All right.
the taking of evidence or is there more?
MR. HUFFMAN:
THE COURT:
Nothing else, Your Honor.
All right.
say about any of this stuff?
minutes to 12 and --
MR. KIDD:
THE COURT:
10
So I guess we're done with
MR. KIDD:
Anything else you want to

Because it's now six
Almost lunchtime.
That's what I was thinking.
You know, I would say that the majority
11
of what I heard was mere puffery and not anything that
12
could be found to be factually untrue.
13
with the plaintiff's assertion that he's been making
14
untrue statements.
15
THE COURT:
So I disagree
Well I understand what you're saying.
16
There's -- a lot of it sounds like ravings, and it
17
would not be expected to be a lot of effect,
18
realistically, on what intelligent people do with their
19
money.
20
But the law still protects you from having people
21
use terms like "pump and dump," which is a well-known
22
term in the securities industries for people who make
23
false claims about the future prospects of their
24
company all while they're actually selling their own
25
personal shares.
(866)240-9500

Page 53
1
And this fellow -- you didn't ask him before while
he was sworn in, but have you ever sold any shares of
the company yourself?
THE WITNESS:
THE COURT:
of the company?
No, sir.
Any of your family members sold shares
THE WITNESS:
No, sir, unless one of my brothers.
I've got three brothers, my parents, and my daughters.
And the only one that may have sold some stock for tax
10
reasons was my youngest brother.
11
THE COURT:
How many shares might he have sold?
12
THE WITNESS:
13
THE COURT:
14
THE WITNESS:
Oh, he might have sold --
15
MR. HUFFMAN:
You've got to understand --
16
THE COURT:
17
answer the question.
Less than a thousand?
I realize it's a penny stock.
18
MR. HUFFMAN:
19
THE COURT:
20
THE WITNESS:
21
22
23
24
25
An insignificant amount, Your Honor.
Just
Below a penny.
Yeah, I realize that.

He might have sold a million shares,
but -THE COURT:
That would be $10,000 -- less than
$10,000.
THE WITNESS:
Yes.
But he owns maybe between
20 and 30 million shares, maybe more.
I don't even
(866)240-9500

Page 54
1
know how many he owns.
THE COURT:
All right.
THE WITNESS:
But he doesn't sell.
family doesn't sell.
THE COURT:
My whole
Nevertheless, you made the point, and
unless there's something else that we need to talk
about today --
8
9
MR. HUFFMAN:
So we're not going to talk about the
attorney's fees?
10
THE COURT:
We haven't finished.
11
MR. HUFFMAN:
12
THE COURT:
Yes, sir.
We haven't got an answer about that.
13
But I don't give an answer until everybody tells me
14
they're done.
15
16
17
18
I'm asking you if you're done?
MR. HUFFMAN:
Nothing else as to this, just
dealing with the trial date.

THE COURT:
What about you, sir; anything else
that you want to say today?
19
MR. KIDD:
20
THE COURT:
Nothing further, Your Honor.

Any evidence that you want to put on,
21
anything like that?
22
MR. KIDD:
23
THE COURT:
No, sir.
You know, I've got to wonder what goes
24
through the mind of the defendant when he agrees to an
25
injunction that says he won't do stuff and then turns
(866)240-9500

Page 55
1
2
around and is going to do it anyway.

I mean, it's not the kind of thing a rational
person does because it exposes you to a lot of legal
liability that even if the things that he said were
opinion -- I mean, he's allowed to say I hate
Mr. Kennedy, I hate his company, they're big boo-boo,
heads all he wants.
a day if he wants.
Right?
And he can say it 50 times
What he can't do is make factual claims that are
10
false, and also you can't use words that imply things
11
that are false.
12
Defamation by implication was recognized by the
13
Florida Supreme Court in the case that we call Rapp,
14
R-A-P-P.
15
And as a result, the things that the gentleman
16
read to me while he was under oath are the kinds of
17
things that you're just not allowed to do.
18
So those findings are good enough to support the
19
idea that was necessary to bring a proceeding to
20
enforce the injunction and falls within the exception
21
of the Attorney Fee Shifting Rule.
22
Because if you have an injunction and people have
23
to enforce it because you break it or because there's
24
-- at least at this point there's prima facie evidence
25
that you broke it, then that's something where you end
(866)240-9500

Page 56
1
up having to pay the attorney's fees for the other
party.
So the court has two rulings that it makes today.
One of them, as I mentioned before, is that in order to
enforce the injunction, we need to prospectively
coerce the gentleman to not to do these posts that
contain either factually false or false factual
implications.
$2500 fine against each one to occur in the future.
To do that, the Court would assess a
10
That's my way of trying to prevent it going
11
prospectively.
12
And with regard to what's already happened, a
13
reasonable attorney fee for having to bring this
14
proceeding could be -- will be assessed against the
15
defendant, the amount to either be agreed upon by the
16
parties or resolved at a separate evidentiary hearing.
17
18
MR. HUFFMAN:
I would, if agreed to, for two hours
for $500 rather than --
19
THE COURT:
20
(Overtalk)
21
THE COURT:
Well we're not going to negotiate --
No, no.
Stop, please.
Please, stop.
22
We're not going to negotiate that here on the record.
23
You guys are going to talk about that.
24
it, submit an order.
25
doesn't have any authority to agree.
If you agree to
If you don't agree -- he's
(866)240-9500

Page 57
1
MR. HUFFMAN:
Okay.
THE COURT:
If you agree to it, then submit an order.
Don't put him in that position.
don't agree, we'll have a hearing.
simple.
MR. HUFFMAN:
6
7
It's just that
What would the court like to do as
far as a trial date in this matter?

THE COURT:
8
9
If you
I would like Mr. Kidd here to be able
to tell us whether he's going to do the trial, then it
10
would make sense to talk to him about his calendar.
11
But he can't do that yet, and we want to wait until he
12
can.
13
14
How soon before you might be able to give us an

answer about that, sir?
15
MR. KIDD:
16
THE COURT:
17
18
I would say a day or two.

Well I'll give you 10 days or so and
ask you to contact my -MR. KIDD:
Yeah, 10 days.
And I will try to make
19
an agreement with the client or else not make one, and
20
then I'll let you know that he will be pro se.
21
THE COURT:
I understand what you're up against.
22
But one way or the other, if you're going to be the
23
attorney, we want to extend to you the same courtesy we
24
extend to everybody else and make sure that we schedule
25
the trial date that's a day that fits with your
(866)240-9500

Page 58
1
schedule.
MR. KIDD:
THE COURT:

And if you're not, then we want to try
to extent to your client, pro se -- or who will be
pro se, the same courtesy although it's not as easy
with people who aren't attorneys.
They're entitled to the same degree of
consideration, but sometimes we have to schedule things
at times that they consider to be inconvenient because
10
the number of things they consider to be inconvenient
11
can be so large.
12
MR. KIDD:
13
THE COURT:
Of course.
Attorneys usually realize that there
14
are certain things you have to move, if necessary, to
15
make a trial date happen.
16
MR. KIDD:
17
THE COURT:
18
19
Very quickly.
What do you want to say, sir?
Go
ahead.
MR. KIDD:
We have a request to grant an order for
20
the Motion of an Appointment of a Commissioner to Take
21
a Deposition in Connecticut.
22
23
THE COURT:
All right.
Is there any objection to
that?
24
MR. HUFFMAN:
25
THE COURT:
No objection.
Yeah.
That will be granted.
(866)240-9500

Page 59
1
MR. KIDD:
THE COURT:
Okay.
Well sure.
electronic form.
I have a pen ...

MR. KIDD:
MR. HUFFMAN:
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
We usually do these by
But since you got one right here and
Shall we get you to sign it?
Can you take the copy?

Actually, you can properly keep that
copy and let it be conformed.

THE COURT:
I'm going to give this to my
assistant, and she will stamp conformed copies for

you folks.
MR. KIDD:
Okay.
So I can just hold on to this
copy then?
THE COURT:
Well you're going to take it to her
right now.
15
MR. KIDD:
16
THE COURT:
Okay.
We have a new procedure, though.
17
lot of the judges will just hand the lawyer back a
18
copy, and I don't do that anymore.
19
going to have to stop doing that.
20
MR. KIDD:
The whole state's
I have motion for the appointment of
21
Commissioner as well, but I was told to just leave that
22
in your box as well.
23
THE COURT:
24
25
No.
Correct?
Have you electronically filed it
with the -MR. KIDD:
I gave it to the clerk this morning.
(866)240-9500

Page 60
1
2
She told me to put it in your mail box.

THE COURT:
Really?
You have to electronically
file it through the portal.
something that there's no objection to, you can contact
opposing counsel.
6
7
8
9
10
And then, if it's
I realize -- you don't know about our local

computer system because you're from Pinellas.
MR.KIDD:
year.
I've been all around the state this
Hillsborough's been my most recent stop.
THE COURT:
Well we have -- everybody's got a
11
different computer system.
12
that you can upload the orders to.
13
MR. KIDD:
14
THE COURT:
We have computer system
Okay.
And if you upload the order and it
15
says, you know, we filed a motion and there's no
16
objection, please go ahead and sign the order.
17
sign it right away electronically, you know.
18
MR. KIDD:
19
THE COURT:
Okay.
We usually get them out every day.
20
It's the JAWS system.
21
don't have access to it.
22
access to lawyers.
23
MR. KIDD:
24
THE COURT:
25
We just
Okay.
See, if people are pro se, they

Right now it only gives
That's something I can handle.
All right.
I'll get this order filed
and see you gentlemen -- I see you again again in this
(866)240-9500

Page 61
1
case or another one.
MR. KIDD:
Thank you very much.
THE COURT:
MR. HUFFMAN:
THE COURT:
(Hearing adjourned at 12:20 a. m.)
You're very welcome.

You take care.
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
(866)240-9500

Page 62
REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE WITH ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
1
2
STATE OF FLORIDA)
COUNTY OF HILLSBOROUGH)
I, ELIZABETH GOTCH, RPR, Certified Shorthand
5
6
Reporter, certify that I was authorized to and did
stenographically report the forgoing proceedings; and
that the transcript is a true record of the proceeding
held.
10
11
I FURTHER CERTIFY that I am not a relative,
12
employee, attorney or counsel of any of the parties, nor am
13
I a relative or employee of the parties' attorney or counsel
14
connected with the action, nor am I financially interested
15
in the action.
16
17
18
Dated this 15th day of April, 2016.
19
20
21
22
23
______________________________
24
ELIZABETH GOTCH, RPR
25
(866)240-9500

4-7-16 SFRX Vs Volentine Hearing

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

4-7-16 SFRX Vs Volentine Hearing

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BAY AREA COURT REPORTING, INC.

Hillsborough County Courthouse

ELIZABETH GOTCH, RPR

BAY AREA COURT REPORTING, INC.

EVAN KIDD, ESQUIRE

Attorney for Defendant

BAY AREA COURT REPORTING, INC.

Well you got here on time

and everything's good.

I can't really get the spelling

of your name off of your signature here.

that for the reporter, please.

We're on the record now so go ahead.

Attorney Evan Kidd, E-V-A-N,

last name K-I-D-D.

And let's get appearances

from the others.

Your Honor, Craig Huffman on behalf

Kyle Kennedy, Chief Executive Officer of

Seafarer Exploration Corporation.

What all do we have on the

agenda for today from your standpoint?

Just asking counsel:

Mr. Volentine appearing by phone or ...

I think we told him last time that he

can't appear by phone.

BAY AREA COURT REPORTING, INC.

We don't have phone appearances, in

general, in here unless we have to make special

arrangements for people who are, you know, in the

hospital or something like.

I'm assuming counsel has the correct

But I'm still waiting

for you to tell me what we have on the agenda for

The first matter that we have is:

Our matter has been pending on a Motion for an

Order to Show Cause.

This was previously filed before

So there has not been any show cause

order issued yet.

You're just asking to get one

However, in between he was recused, and we are

rebringing this motion just to --

Was there a motion to ask Judge Foster

to disqualify or what happened?

Yeah, there was a recusal by the

BAY AREA COURT REPORTING, INC.

He filed a motion asking him to step

And that's when the case --

And he granted that.

Well, see, that's important because

when -- when there's been a predecessor judge granting

a Motion to Disqualify, it changes the standard by

which subsequent motions or successful motions would be

what's on the agenda today because -MR. HUFFMAN:

Well I just want you to tell me

-- I'm going to ask the other side

what they think is on the agenda today also.

Then the other side -- this

is the defendant's motion -- is -THE COURT:

Well he'll tell us.

can speak for himself.

What is it that you would have in mind