What I see here is very interesting. It shows that Jeff bought the property from Kelly Funk not quite 2 months before he sold it to SLI for ~ $120,000.

What is really interesting to me, is that I think SLI had its own permit to aquire properties directly from prospectors and to also stake properties on their own, relinquishing the need for any middle man in any property transactions. To further, it is known that Jeff has a nons arm length relationship with SLI that may suggest he is employed or receives compensation in some form from SLI for his services. Usually, an IR guy like Jeff, is compensated through a form of company options and/or monetary compensation, which suggests that he is working for the company. There needed to be full disclosure on this aquisition and it needed to be at least filed on SEDAR to comply with TSX-V policy as well as applicable securities laws. If this non arms length transaction has not been properly disclosed on at least SEDAR, it is a violation in that manner, not to mention the questions arising around why SLI did not buy the property directly from Kelly Funk.

So, if Jeff is/was working for SLI, why is he selling a property to SLI in which there appears no need for a middle man and at such a high price? The best interests of a company, in which the Directors are obligated to maintain, would have been SLI buying the property directly from Kelly Funk avoiding any additional charges/fees that a middle man, Jeff may have charged the company. There is the aspect of exercised prudence on any such transactions by management/Directors and accountability does fall on Directors in any like situation and is attributable to "fudiciary duty".

There is no excuse for this/these transactions in saying that "its the Venture Exchange", there are rules to follow which are in place to protect the investors/public interests, and no, its not the "Wild West", SLI is part of a regulated Exchange which exempts the "Wild" aspect.

I believe the faces of authorities are becoming redder by the day.

It is very clear that regulators, Administrators and upholders of Law/justice have a lot of explaining to do to the public in this case, whereas Molson, you are able to find very questionable things with perhaps a limited resource and the sophisticated units of enforcement have found nothing wrong. It is further blatant that the authorities have placed the SLI investors at considerable risk by taking no proactive or early enforcement measures. I will comment here that the State Side Regulator, SEC, is coming under fire presently with their non actions on certain public traded companies and market participants and that corruption within the SEC in favour of big players, seems evident. It appears to me that the probability of Big Money having accomplices within the regulatory regime to help cover up the behind the scenes pillages of small investors, may be high......