Updates to our Terms of Use

We are updating our Terms of Use. Please carefully review the updated Terms before proceeding to our website.

Tuesday, April 16, 2024 | Back issues
Courthouse News Service Courthouse News Service

Bogus! SEC Says of ‘Nuclear Reactor’

BOISE (CN) - A 67-year-old man and his 36-year-old sweetie bilked investors of millions of dollars for a bogus "multibillion-dollar nuclear reactor," that never existed and never will, the SEC says. It sued Donald Gillispie and Jennifer Ransom, top dogs at so-called Alternate Energy Holdings, in Federal Court.

Gillispie and Ransom raked in the bucks through "misleading statements about the viability of AEHI, which has no realistic possibility of building a multibillion-dollar nuclear reactor," the SEC says in its complaint. "AEHI has never had any revenue or product." (AEHI is Alternate Energy Holdings Inc.)

Gillispie, 67, is CEO of AEHI, and Ransom, 36, is its senior VP and "also has a personal relationship with Donald Gillispie and is the beneficiary of his IRA account," according to the complaint.

The SEC says the two drove up the price of AEHI stock through bogus and frequent press releases - more than 87 this year along.

The defendants "made multiple misrepresentations, including claims that its executives had such confidence in AEHI that they had not sold a single share of company stock," the SEC said in a statements. "Records obtained by the SEC show that Gillispie and Ransom have instead secretly unloaded extensive stock holdings and funneled the money back to Gillispie."

AEHI reported to the SEC and to investor that Gillispie was paid $133,000 a year, but the SEC says that "Gillispie has actually reaped approximately six times that amount in 2010."

Ransom and Gillispie each sold more than 1 million shares of their AEHI stock, and hid it from the SEC and from investors, the SEC says. "Proceeds of those sales went to Gillispie, who spent the money on lavish personal expenses such as his Maserati sports car."

The SEC also sued Bosco Financial and Energy Executive Consulting as relief defendants. It seeks disgorgement, penalties, and an order telling both of them never to do such a thing again.

Categories / Uncategorized

Subscribe to Closing Arguments

Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.

Loading...