FAQ from Kevin West

[Franko10 ™]

FAQ Session #1: August 10, 2007

Q) What were the specific reasons for relocating CMKM's corporate registration from Nevada to Texas?

CMKM Diamonds, Inc. was moved from a Nevada domiciled corporation to Texas for the following initial reasons:

1. It was going to cost in excess of $11,000 for the annual filing due at the end of April, 2007 and the Company was left with no funds to pay such fees.
2. The Company headquarters is now based in Texas and it makes no sense to leave its domicile in Nevada.



Q) Why hasn't Urban been criminally charged?

This question can only be answered by the law enforcement agencies that are currently investigating this matter. The Company stands ready, willing and able to assist any law enforcement agency with the results of new management’s ongoing investigation.



Q) What is the total number of shares held by Urban and his family?

Although the Company may have not identified all of the Casavant family members as of this date, our current records show that the Casavant family as a whole own less than 10 Billion shares of CMKM Diamonds, Inc. stock. Urban Casavant appears to own 1.2 billion of those shares.



Q) Post the Wells Notice for all shareholders to review.

New Management and legal counsel is currently working with the SEC. Additional time is being allowed for a full response because new management is still acquiring the information needed for such response.



Q) What is the current O/S, and the float? The O/S less the total amount of restricted shares equal the float for the basis of this question.

Since all shares that were issued by the Company, whether they were legally issued or not, are more than 2 years old and the Company is no longer trading…. The total outstanding share count and float count are the same and that figure currently stands at 703,518,875,000.



Q) Can you post Urban’s paperwork showing Urban resigned and transferred power to Kevin?

Not at this time. These documents will be produced in due course through litigation.

1. The date that the documents were signed was 3-29-07
2. The time of day was mid-morning during breakfast
3. Present was Urban Casavant, Ron Casavant and Kevin West
4. The place was the Carson Street Café at the Gold Nugget Las Vegas Hotel
5. Right after papers were signed, travel arrangements were made (at the breakfast table) for both Ron Casavant and Kevin West to fly together to Saskatoon to view core samples
6. Urban Casavant left to head to the airport directly after this meeting to fly home to Saskatoon.



Q) Is there any money to recover from any source whatsoever and what would be the timeframe on recovery?

The current lawsuits explain the Company’s efforts in recovering assets. There are too many variables to give any time frame on recovery.



Q) How many shares are actually NSS?

The Company shareholder audit is ongoing. This question cannot be answered at this time.



Q) Has Bill or Kevin worked with the FBI, IRS, or DOJ regarding criminal activity?

The Company cannot comment about the information that it may be sharing with any law enforcement agencies. Any information or documentation possessed by the Company is available to regulators and law enforcement upon their request.



Q) What is the relationship between Star Uranium and CMKM Diamonds today?

There is absolutely no relationship between CMKM Diamonds, Inc. and Star Uranium or any other company. The former Chairman of this Company signed away any and all rights to claims, JV partnerships and any other possible joint ventures or assets as documented on October 20, 2005 in documents available on this web site.



Q) When the 7 boxes of information appeared who provided this information? Was it one of Urban's original attorneys?

The attorney that provided the 7 boxes of documents was a personal attorney of Urban Casavant.



Q) Does the company plan on requisitioning Roger Glenn's firm to provide an audit on the services provided for $250,000.00?

No. New management has reviewed an itemized bill provided by Mr. Glenn.



Q) When did Kevin West suspect that this company's previous management squandered $200 million of shareholders money?

Mr. West had no documentation of the previous management’s conversion of corporate funds and assets until the boxes of information were received from a personal attorney for Mr. Casavant in April of 2007. This is still an ongoing investigation.

[Franko10 ™]

Session #2: August 23, 2007

Q) Obviously, CMKM Diamonds Inc. is not financing all this legal activity from “just” the $500+ dollars in the company’s checking account. Please answer in detail: Where is the money from that is financing all salaries, rents, leases, lawyer fees, court costs and any other cost CMKM has had to pay at this time?

All litigation costs and expenses are being handled by Bill Frizzell with an agreement that all costs and expenses will be repaid by the Company when the Company is able to do so. Kevin West is being paid by CMKM a minimal salary from funds being loaned to the Company from various sources. All office administrative costs are being paid from these same funds.

The Company will not disclose its specific fee arrangements with the attorneys it has hired. Such information is highly confidential and could be used in many ways to harm the legal efforts of the Company. Contractual arrangements between corporations and their attorneys are not proper matters for general public knowledge. It is fair to say that some attorneys are working on an hourly basis, some are working on a contingency basis and some are working on a combination of hourly fees and some contingent fees.

This company has received substantial contributions from shareholders since the financial plight of the Company and Mr. West has been made public. There are shareholders who have substantial investments in CMKM. Several of these shareholders have agreed to fund any and all legal efforts if needed.



Q) Is Robert Maheu is still involved in any form with CMKM Diamonds Inc and is current management still in contact with Mr. Maheu, Urban Casavant and/or Donald Stoecklein?

Mr. Maheu is no longer involved with CMKM Diamonds, Inc. in any way. Kevin West and Bill Frizzell have requested cooperation from prior management seeking both financial assistance and company records. Prior management and previous company attorneys refuse to produce records or offer assistance in any way to Mr. West.



Q) What tangible assets does CMKM have on hand at this time and what are the results of the core samples viewed by Mr. West?

The Company presently owns a certificate for 45 million shares of Entourage Mining. This certificate remains whole and is the only tangible asset belonging to the company at this time. When the core samples were viewed by Mr. West, there was not a geologist present as promised to give any opinions of the sample. Emerson Koch explained to Mr. West that no testing had been done on the core samples. The Company has no knowledge of what value, if any, can be placed on the claims that are currently held by Mr. Koch and contracted to Entourage Mining.



Q) Is it possible to give a rough timeline for the company to return to trading?

There are too many variables to give any timelines for the Company to return to trading status. We are diligently working on several litigation matters, reconciling of books from the past 4+ years and other matters that pertain to bringing value back into the Company.



Q) Can you please try to address the rumors being sent around by people on talk shows and chat rooms regarding some big deal of selling part of the company way back that will now result in some sort of payout to stock holders? Someone using the name "acca" has been on the air and talk shows and chat rooms claiming to be an employee of either Casavant or his attorney and is reporting such payouts are virtually in the mail. If these rumors are nothing but cruel rumors and have no basis in fact, please say so in no uncertain terms so as to try to eliminate the false hopes being dashed over and over again. Once again, thank you for all you do, but to address these rumors once and for all would do wonders for us suffering endlessly.

The Company sincerely hopes that all shareholders will soon realize there are no distributions pending for the shareholders or anyone else. The Company regrets the lies and promises coming from several individuals about such distributions. The Company believes that it will return to trading status.



Q) Can you advise at this point whether or not our CIM dividend stock will have/does have any value at this point or in the future when CMKX begins to trade again?

Casavant International Mining Corporation (CIM) was revoked on 2-01-07 and the last known officers were Ron Casavant and Michael Williams. Mr. Williams is presently a defendant in a lawsuit initiated by CMKM. The zinc claims that purportedly belonged to CIM were sold through a series of transactions in January of this year to Golden Arch Resources.

These claims are mentioned in several press releases by Golden Arch Resources beginning in January of 2007 with a more recent one on June 18, 2007. CMKM never received any monies or other compensation from this transaction even though these claims were contracted as part of the Entourage Mining deal. No records have been provided to new management regarding CIM or the lost investments of CMKM in the zinc claims.



Q) Could you advise if Entourage shares will be issued to current stockholders in the future or has the plan been abandoned? Also, what happened to the Interpleader for these Entourage shares which was being worked on for so long?

The Company is concerned about all aspects of the contracts with Entourage Mining. Former Company attorney, Don Stoecklein, described this distribution as a wind up distribution. If the Entourage distribution was a “wind up” distribution, such a transaction requires a shareholder vote according to Nevada statutes. CMKM was a Nevada Corporation at that time. There was no shareholder vote. Thus, the legality of such distribution is in question.

The legal fees for the filing of the interpleader were paid to John T. Moran III according to prior management. Mr. Moran’s last advice to the Company was to file bankruptcy and he did not file the interpleader. No explanation has been given to Mr. West as to why the interpleader was not filed.



Q) What is the status of Susanne Trimbath's evaluation of the Naked Short Position of the Company thus far?

Susanne Trimbath continues her work on our shareholder audit. The naked short situation and the delivery failures are not a primary concern of management at this time. Keeping the Company alive and returning to trading status is the focus of our work.




Q) Was there ever any real effort made to explore for diamonds or was CMKX a scam from the beginning?

We learn more and more about the Company (prior to new management) each time we receive documents from our subpoenas. Money has been paid to Double K Excavating for drilling and obtaining core samples. Aerial surveys were undertaken by the Company. The latter part of the question is still under investigation.



Q) Are the company's current activities delaying or hindering ANY payment to shareholders from any other source?

There is no trust fund or any money set aside for shareholders. There have been rumors of payouts and distributions to shareholders since 2003. After a thorough examination of bank records of all Company accounts and with the assistance of a forensic accountant, there is no evidence of any funds available for the distribution to the shareholders. Our investigation confirms that there has never been a fund set aside for the shareholders.

If there is any factual evidence of any assets belonging to the Company or any evidence of any funds earmarked for the shareholders, you are encouraged to contact Mr. West and the Company will conduct a full investigation.

The lawsuits filed by the Company against former management are based on facts and documents. These lawsuits explain the loss of millions of dollars invested by shareholders into this company.



Q) How do you let the company know of a change of address?

Any change of address for your CMKM stock certificates can be called into 1st Global Stock Transfer @ 702-656-4919. No other notification is needed.

[Franko10 ™]

FAQ Session #3: September 6, 2007

Q) Does the company still own any mineral/diamonds rights to the Saskatchewan region?

The records possessed and reviewed by present management suggest the company does not currently own any mineral or diamond rights in Saskatchewan. The company may have some equitable rights to certain claims due to past investment by the company.

Q) Is this whole mess as bad as it sounds?

There are a lot of legal problems facing the company. We will continue our efforts to return the company to trading.

Q) Does the company have the results of the aerial surveys which were undertaken some time ago?

On February 20, 2003, the Company PR’d that a contract was signed with Fugro Airborne Surveys, Corp. for approximately US $630,000. After flying 1862 line kilometers without receiving any monies due on the contract, Fugro stopped survey work in early March 2003. On September 19, 2003, Fugro filed suit for US $320,440.90 against Casavant Mining Kimberlite International, Inc. for non-payment.
We do have the results of this aerial survey and the company plans to hire appropriate experts to interpret the data.
On March 2, 2004, Goldak Airborne Surveys contacted the Company and requested up front payment for the additional surveys in light of the Fugro problems. We have reviewed a letter which indicates that Double K Excavating (Emerson Koch) actually contracted with Fugro to do the surveys. CMKM paid the funds to Double K for the Goldak surveys. We understand that Double K has forwarded the funds to Goldak. The company has not received the results of this survey.


Q) Will current owners of certificates held by the Nevada corporation have to do anything or send copies of anything in to get their certificates converted to the Texas corporation?

No action is needed in this regard.

Q) Can you provide any information on the core samples which were mentioned during the first question and answer session?

Kevin West was shown the core samples but no geologist or geophysicist was present to explain why such samples might have value.


Q) Are there any payouts for stock holders, or do we lose the money we invested? I hear rumors of payouts, but have no reason to believe them.

This question and several just like it have been answered many times in the past months. The Company knows of no funds that have ever been set aside for payment to shareholders. For more information, please read the documents found on the Company website including the questions already asked and answered in this FAQ section.

Q) If the company needs operating capital and/or money to “go after the big fish” why not sell the Entourage Cert?

There are significant legal issues surrounding the Entourage deal.

Q) May we as shareholders possibly benefit from the elimination of the Grandfather clause? Since the company has not GONE AWAY, is this something we can look forward to?

The company does not believe there will be any immediate benefit. CMKM is not a trading security at this time.
Any law, rule or regulation that requires delivery of real stock following a purchase will benefit shareholders of all stocks with a “failure to deliver” problem if there is real enforcement action taken by regulators and law enforcement.


Q) Are others holding claims for CMKM shareholders?

We have never seen an agreement that suggests that others are holding claims for the Company.

Q) Who paid for the cert pull?

Urban paid most of the administrative expenses once they were incurred by the Frizzell Law Firm. This would include input personnel costs, phone bills, paper, technical costs, and other expenses. The Task Force members were not paid for their services.

Q) Will there be a reverse split if we trade again?

Anytime a company has 700 billion plus shares, the idea of a reverse split is a topic of discussion for obvious reasons. There are many problems that must be resolved before the company trades again. When the company returns to trading, this issue will be decided based on the best interest of the company and its shareholders.

Q) I am being charged for a holding fee for this certificate, should I just pay it?

The company does not give such advice. We are concerned that some shareholders have had their CMKM stock wiped from their account due to “maintenance fees” being more than the book value of this non trading security.

Q) Why wait to run the publication on the law suit? When will there be any new Roes/Does?

Because of certain shareholders, individuals and entities who want the company lawsuits to fail, the company will not reveal any strategies of litigation through this forum.

Q) If the claims to the core samples are currently a) held by Mr. Koch and b) contracted to Entourage Mining, is our concern with these core samples only for how they would effect the valuation of Entourage Mining and our 45 million shares of Entourage Mining?

If the legality of the distribution of Entourage Mining is in question, which in my simple language means we are not entitled, thus may never get the distribution, are you currently doing anything to remedy the situation? If so, what?

These issues will be resolved in litigation.

[Franko10 ™]

FAQ Session #4: September 20, 2007

Q) What’s really going on? This is weird. Lots of stuff doesn't make sense. When will we be paid?

You are being given the facts and the whole truths in the filings made in the State court of Nevada. After receiving literally tens of thousands of new documents in the past few months, the Company cannot find any proof that there was ever a legitimate effort made by former management to increase shareholder value. While shareholders were being dazzled with optimistic press releases, insiders were converting corporate funds into private investments, real estate, automobiles, motor homes, fancy dinners, gambling and too many other acts of corporate waste and embezzlement to name in this forum.

Once again, our very in depth research concludes that absolutely NO FUNDS have ever been set aside for payment to shareholders.



Q) Why does the substitution of attorney paper work filed in Nevada have CMKM as a Nevada corp.? I thought that this was changed to a Texas corp.

Both court cases were filed when CMKM was a Nevada Corporation. The lawsuits will be guided by Nevada law because the wrongdoings occurred while the Company was a Nevada Corporation. The Plan of Conversion states that the same CMKM Diamonds, Inc as a Nevada corporation is wholly converted to CMKM Diamonds, Inc. as a Texas corporation.



Q) Does the TOGI have anything to do with CMKX and will the TOGI benefit if anything is recovered for CMKX?

TOGI or The Owners Group, Inc., is a completely separate company and has nothing to do with CMKM Diamonds, Inc.

TOGI will not benefit in any way from any possible recoveries by CMKM Diamonds, Inc.



Q) Do some or all the lawsuits have to be finished first before we can start trading?

No. The lawsuits do not affect the process that the Company must go through to return to trading. The Company has been forced to use the lawsuits to acquire financial records and other documents that pertain to the dealings of the Company for the last four years.



Q) With the information available to you, are you hopeful that current shareholders will ever get a return on their investment?

If so, do you expect that we are more likely to get a return through litigation or through returning to trading?

The Company will not comment on the possibilities of any potential returns on CMKM stock. The Company is focused on using every means possible to rebuild the company and return it to trading status.



Q) Is the company not concerned about all the 1087 claims lapsing?

The Company is concerned with the status of these claims and is making appropriate inquiries into the matter. The Company does not appear to own any claims at this point.


Q) Is it necessary to return to trading status in order to deal with the failure to deliver issue?

Yes.



Q) Is the company aware of the alleged trading of CMKX shares through Euroclear Belgium?

Yes, the Company is investigating the Euroclear trading.



Q) Can you provide a timeline for the completion of the shareholder audit?

Too many variables are involved in all phases of the Company shareholder audit to be able to offer any timelines.



Q) What can we, the CMKM shareholders, do to help the company in it's fight to move forward and to become a trading company again? Writing emails and letters to our government officials doesn't seem to have had any effect on the situation for the most part, so what can we do to help? Thank you.

Unfortunately, former officers and insiders of the Company continue to elude our process servers. This Company needs all records of the many investments and expenditures so an audit of the Company can be completed. We will eventually obtain all books and records through the legal process. However, the refusal of prior management and insiders to help the Company in this regard will needlessly delay the return to trading status. If you can be of any help in this regard, please do so.



Q) Why are we worried about core samples and airborne surveys if we have no mineral claims?

The claims may not be in the Company’s name, but the Company believes that it has legal right to those claims. The Company intends to protect its rights in this regard.



Q) Is there a possibility that we may have mineral claims in the future?

Yes, there is a possibility.



Q) Can you clarify why we need to defend our 45 million shares of entourage against returning this asset to the company from which we exchanged for a valued mining claim? Is the mining claim that we exchanged for the 45 million shares of entourage of any value to CMKM?

These matters will most likely be issues which will be resolved in the Entourage suit.

[Franko10 ™]

FAQ Session #5: October 15, 2007

Q) I'm hearing from a source that I can’t disclose that the DaVinci-Franklin Fund 1 has money from the CMKX stocks that were sold. I researched it and the chairman is Robert Maheu and lawyer’s group is Stoecklein. Is there any truth to this?

Our investigation suggests you are correct that Bob Maheu and Don Stoecklein are associated with the DaVinci-Franklin Fund 1. There is no evidence that this fund has ever been involved in CMKM Diamonds, Inc. As answered many times in CEO updates and FAQ responses, neither Mr. Maheu nor Mr. Stoecklein are presently involved in any way with CMKM Diamonds, Inc. After extensive research and discovery of bank records, stock records and other documents, there is absolutely not one single shred of evidence to support the suggestion that any funds were ever set aside in any manner or form for CMKM shareholders. The greater portion of all funds that we have identified as money derived from the sale of company issued stock was converted to personal use by past insiders of this Company and not used for the business of the Company. There is no evidence of any profits or revenues from any business activity of the company.



Q) Hope all is well. I've heard rumors for years that CMKX did a share swap with PCBM/SRCI. You've seen the records....are you able to share whether or not shares were exchanged?

After extensive research into Company records and the 25,000+ pages of information from the NASD investigation of Nev West, we have found no evidence to support any possible share swap of CMKM Diamonds, Inc. stock with that of either PCBM, SRCI or any other entities. There are clearly individuals who were involved in the promotion of both companies and many of the same trading accounts were used to sell the stock of CMKM and PCBM but there is no evidence of any exchange between the companies.



Q) I was reading the Eagletech RICO lawsuit and noticed the term "Operation Uptick". Apparently it was a huge FBI investigation into illegal security transactions. It states that Eagletech was not unique and this same activity happed to dozens of other companies. The investigation as I understand it is over so should be free to be discussed. Was CMKM involved in "Operation Uptick"?

The Company’s attorney has had many discussions with Eagle Tech’s CEO Rod Young. We have followed Eagle Tech’s case with great interest. There is nothing in any of the records we have examined that indicates CMKM was a part of Operation Uptick. It would not surprise us to learn that some of the individuals responsible for promoting CMKM were involved in Operation Uptick without their knowledge. It is clear to us from the trading records that we find the same people pumping and dumping other stocks as well as CMKM.



Q) After pulling my certs and faxing in a copy to the former CMKM Task Force, I returned my cert to my Roth IRA account. My shares are now showing in my account. Many of us did the same thing for tax reasons. My question is; Am I considered a bona fide shareholder?

Many have asked if they are bona fide shareholders because they hold a certificate. This question cannot be answered completely until our shareholder audit is completed. We believe there may some certificates that are illegal, forged or otherwise invalid. As a general rule, if First Global Stock Transfer issued you a certificate and that certificate is not the result of forgeries or other illegal acts, then you will be a bona fide shareholder.



Q) I would like to know how I can change or add a name to my share certificate. Can you tell me how I would do this?

Any changes in ownership of CMKM Diamonds, Inc. stock must be approved by the President of the Company, Kevin West. If you need to make any such changes, you can call the Frizzell Law Firm at 903-595-1921 with your request and your call will be returned as soon as possible. If your request is deemed valid, confirmation of non-objection to the request will be sent to the Company’s transfer agent and you will then need to call the transfer agent at 702-656-4919 to find out what documentation and fees you will need to forward to them to complete the transaction.



Q) How do I make an address change for my certificated holdings of CMKM Diamonds stock?

All address changes must be made through the Company’s transfer agent which is 1st Global Stock Transfer in Las Vegas. Their phone number is 702-656-4919, or you can mail the request to them using the following address:

1st Global Stock Transfer, LLC
7361 Prairie Falcon Rd Suite 110
Las Vegas, NV 89128

[Franko10 ™]

FAQ Session #6: October 30, 2007

Q) OK, I know this question might have been asked and answered more than once, but I own 4 million shares of this stock. I am under the impression that lawsuits have been filed to recoup shareholder monies, and won by CMKX. I heard there will be payouts to shareholders, 3 payouts to be exact. One payout being around .37 cents per share. Is any of this fact or are the numbers skewed a bit? The question really is are the lawsuits over, did CMKX recover the shareholders money, am I going to be rich?

Lawsuits were filed against former insiders of CMKM in an attempt to recover assets that should have belonged to the Company. There is absolutely no evidence that any monies were ever set aside for some type of distribution to the shareholders. The facts set out in the exhibits to these lawsuits are based on documents the company has obtained since Urban Casavant resigned as CEO of the company. The evidence obtained by the company since March of this year shows millions of dollars that have gone to family members and other insiders and were not spent on the business of the company.

Any projections about payouts from the company at this point are not based on facts. Rumors such as the payouts you are inquiring about have persisted since this company began. They are not based on any true facts. Any suggestions that there are billions or even millions of dollars awaiting distribution are simply false and unfounded. It is a crying shame that those individuals who insist on spreading such rumors cannot be held liable for the anxieties they have cause to the good shareholders of this company. The lawsuits are in their preliminary stages and there have been no recoveries of any monies at this time. Other parties will be added to our lawsuits as we develop more evidence. The Company will keep you updated as to the status of each lawsuit as events unfold.



Q) In regards to finding out who is or who is not a bona fide shareholder, any idea when the Shareholder Audit will be completed?

There are many tasks involved in completing an accurate shareholder audit. It is an ongoing project and is still moving forward. The company is not at this time prepared to speculate on the finishing date of this task.



Q) What was Urban's motivation for a cert pull? Why would Urban have funded this? It just makes no sense, if he was planning to ditch us. From the picture you give us, he never had any money set aside for us, and must have known for a while that eventually he would have to close shop. He obviously thought there was some advantage either to us or to him of a cert pull, and I cannot fathom what it would have been.

The company will not try to guess at the motives of prior management. The evidence suggests additional time was needed to convert Company funds to personal use. It appears there were plans to put the company into bankruptcy by certain legal advisers and insiders. As for Urban funding the cert pull, the Company can tell you that “out of pocket expenses only” were paid and it was a difficult task recovering those expenses from Urban.



Q) Kevin, I understand that Casavant owns 51% or more of the CMKM Diamonds. This gives the power to Casavant to hire or fire you. Why would you file a law suit against Casavant?

Your assumption that Mr. Casavant owned more than 51% or more of CMKM Diamonds, Inc. is contrary to the facts. Mr. Casavant has never owned any significant amount of shares in this Company. As the sole officer and Director of the Company, Mr. Casavant had the right to appoint any person to replace him as Chairman of the Board and to hold various officers’ positions.

When Mr. West accepted the appointment and was told by Mr. Casavant there were no more funds to operate the company, Mr. West began demanding records from attorneys that had represented the company prior to his appointment. Once documents were received by Mr. West which proved without question the conversion of corporate funds to personal use by Mr. Casavant and other former insiders of the Company, it was Mr. West’s fiduciary duty to the Company and its shareholders to file the lawsuits against Mr. Casavant and others.

Q) So far what have you accomplished in trying to get the company to start trading again? I’m not talking about the things you want to do or things you are trying to do. I’m talking about the things you have actually accomplished.

The company has avoided filing for bankruptcy. Assets belonging to the company have been identified. Lawsuits have been filed against numerous parties. We have hired legal counsel in Canada to try to defend the company and protect our claims. Demands are being made to return assets to the company. Company attorneys are preparing new lawsuits against various third parties. We have hired accountants that have assisted us in compiling the records needed to begin a book keeping system that will result in audited financials. As a result of the subpoena process, we have acquired evidence that will be crucial to bringing those individuals and companies accountable for their acts in diluting the stock and draining the company of its assets.

Q) Will Carolyn Casavant, Ron, Wesley and the other family members involved be included in the TRO / investigation.

There will be other individuals and companies named in various legal proceedings as we continue our investigation. The Company has been advised not to be specific in naming such individuals and companies as our investigation continues on many fronts.


Q) I read the posting on your FAQ page about the submitter who returned his certificates to his IRA. Do we NEED to return our certificates to the accounts we acquired them from? If we received our certificates from a place like TD Waterhouse, Ameritrade, or any other brokerage firm like these can we be fairly certain they are legitimate?

We cannot advise you on what you choose to do regarding your share certificates. The acts you take with your certificate are between you and your broker. We continue our concern for those that do not have valid certificates issued by First Global.

Q) Do you have any info on the SGGM transaction...the 10 million for 5% interest and 200 billion shares of SGGM? Can you subpoena SGGM records--find the 10 million dollar check (if it ever was issued) and track the deposit #/bank/party involved? Have you spoken to Mr. Haseltine direct regarding this issue?

We have hundreds of pages of documents concerning the Saint George Metals transaction.

We are continuing our investigation into the matter. We have identified the funds that were deposited into CMKM accounts from St. George Metals. We are tracing the diversion of those funds from corporate bank accounts. We were somewhat surprised to learn that John Edwards was signing the checks for St. George Metals.

Although we cannot comment on who we have or have not talked to while we are in the midst of litigation, we can say that we have most of the documents surrounding the proposed deal and our investigation leads to the conclusion the entire SGGM transaction was set up to be advantageous to only a few insiders and was just another pump to sell more CMKM stock that was being held by insiders, their trust accounts and other private shell companies.



Q) Can you give us a list of people/entities who have been subpoenaed to date?

Although this question was most likely asked by a well intentioned Shareholder, the Company will not be disclosing any information that might be beneficial to those that would love to see the company fail.



Q) Since the company has no assets at the current time and is currently doing a shareholder audit, would it be safe to assume that once the shareholder audit is complete the financials should be rather simple to complete and have audited? Also since the management of the past was irresponsible in keeping financial records, will the SEC work with the company in only requiring current financials?

There are many shell corporations that were set up to open trading accounts and banks accounts that were used to dump CMKM stock and funnel money from the sale of those stocks into other accounts. These accounts were then used to convert those funds to personal use by former insiders of CMKM. Because of the measures that were used to perpetuate this massive stock fraud and money laundering scheme, the rebuilding of CMKM financials is an extremely cumbersome and time consuming task. We are continuing the work that will eventually lead to an auditable set of financials. It appears there will be substantial losses which the company may be allowed to carry over. Thus we are burdened with the responsibility of documenting the transactions of the past. So, no, it will not be a simple matter to complete the audit. We will continue to work with the SEC in all phases of their investigation. The SEC will not give any special treatment to this company as far as reporting requirements go even in spite of what has happened. We are working to rebuild some credibility with the SEC as we seek to become compliant.

Q) Do we have undeniable proof that NSS has taken place and what is the count at this point in time?

The Company does have proof that there are failures to deliver in CMKM stock. Until our shareholder audit is complete, we will not have a count as to how many shares or brokerage houses are involved.


Q) There is one event of the past that still strikes me as intriguing, so forgive my ignorance in asking this question: In May of 2005, Etrade sent a representative with box(s) of CMKM stock certificates to Tyler, Texas in an effort to meet the Task Force established deadline of May 15th, 2005. This strikes me as an unprecedented act by a major brokerage firm. Why did Etrade feel compelled to fly a company representative to Texas with box(s) of CMKM stock certificates to meet this arbitrary deadline? Why was it so important?

The Company does not know why E-trade decided to handle these transactions in this manner. The Company declines to guess or give an opinion on why such acts occurred. There were other brokerage firms that sought special considerations for delivering some certificates in bulk.


Q) There has been ample time to respond to the Wells notice from the SEC. Could you post this notice and the company response?

The Company has not responded to the Wells notice from the SEC at this time. However, we are working with the SEC to give them complete copies of the product of our investigation. Our company attorney has discussed our past due response to our Wells notice with the SEC. Until the company completes its investigation, it is not able to fully and adequately respond to the Wells notice. We will post the Wells notice on the document page of the Company website with the posting of this FAQ. We will post the response at the time it is filed with the SEC if such response does not interfere with any ongoing litigation matters.


Q) There is continual talk of a return to trading status. Could you explain in detail the requirements placed upon the company for this to take place and how CMKM intends to make this happen? No revoked stock in the history of the stock market has ever returned to trading. What will CMKX do that would be significant enough for the SEC to allow it to return to trading?

The Company will not address this issue at this time in a public forum. The company is aware of certain individuals and companies that do not want this company to return to trading. To divulge company strategies or tactics would not be in the best interest of the company.


Q) Why haven't the depositions of the Task Force members been made public? It seems as if anything implicating Urban has been put out there but the task force members were all deposed and those have never been made public. Why?

The SEC does not release depositions of the parties it deposes. The company does not have copies of depositions of the task force members. Urban Casavant took the Fifth Amendment at the hearing and at his deposition by the SEC.


Q) How can I confirm that the certificate that I hold is not a fake, forgery, or otherwise not valid?

If you bought and paid for your shares through a legitimate brokerage house, and you have since ordered and received your certificate from the Company transfer agent, your certificate is most likely a valid one. Before a final shareholder list is compiled, the company will reconcile the findings of its investigation with the records of First Global Stock Transfer.

[Franko10 ™]

FAQ Session #7: November 14, 2007

Q) What has been done in addressing the ETGMF lawsuit? Has an attorney been hired to protect shareholder interest on that front?

The Company has hired the law firm of Getz Prince Wells LLP of Vancouver, BC. There is a filed copy of this firm’s initial appearance on the Company website. CMKM Diamonds, Inc. will file their initial answer to this lawsuit through this firm within a few days.



Q) It is my understanding that the Hurd case was settled. All 14 individuals were fortunate enough to be well paid off. I want to know why, since you were kept in the loop about this lawsuit, that the rest of the shareholders weren't rallied to do the same as those in the Hurd lawsuit?

There was never one penny paid by the company to Mr. Hurd or anyone associated with Mr. Hurd. The Company is not aware of any funds being paid to Hurd or anyone associated with Hurd from any other sources. Anyone that suggests this company paid any money to settle the Hurd lawsuit is not dealing with reality. Such rumors are simply fantasy of the type that has plagued this company and its shareholders for years now. The Company does not have one shred of evidence that would support what you are suggesting. If any shareholder has documented proof that there were any funds paid to Mr. Hurd or anyone claiming to be associated with him, please feel free to send your documents to the Company and we will fully investigate the matter.

Our company attorney spoke to someone who claimed to be associated with Mr. Hurd a few days before Mr. Hurd dismissed his case. We were not surprised the case was dismissed. There were never any discussions of paying money to anyone in that suit. The problems expressed to our attorney by a person claiming to be associated with the plaintiff were personal in nature to the plaintiff.

As the CEO of this company I am duty bound to defend every lawsuit brought against this company and I will continue to do so. Federal and state securities laws severely limit the rights of shareholders to bring suits against a corporation. It is the company’s obligation to go after parties that committed wrongs against the company. The company is suing many parties that are responsible for the problems of the company and the company plans to file more suits in short order. It is hoped that recoveries of assets and damages from third parties will provide funding for the company to continue to exist for the benefit of all shareholders not just a select few.


Q) If Casavant family members, friends and insiders have taken funds from the company, will the IRS be notified?

The Company cannot comment on ongoing investigations. However, the Company believes the IRS is currently investigating many previous actions of former Company insiders.


Q) Do I need to send you a copy of my stock certificate or let you know my position in CMKX? I have 6,000,000 shares of CMKX and the certificate is in my possession. Someone suggested that all stockholders should let you know their positions.

If you have received a physical stock certificate from First Global Stock Transfer for CMKM Diamonds, Inc. stock, the Company already has a record of your holdings. No further action is required at this time. The Company will keep all shareholders informed through the official Company website if there is ever a time when you will need to take any action.


Q) I've been a shareholder in CMKM since 2003.I was wondering if I can sell any of my private stock right now to another individual? I have a cert for one million shares of CMKM and a cert of 250,000 CIM (2003 issue version) and I want to find a buyer for the same. Just wondering if you could let me know if a private sell can be done and the transfer made.

The Company cannot give legal advice concerning this issue. Stock transfers through the Company transfer agent are evaluated on a case by case basis. If you have a transfer request, you can fax the entire details of your request to the Frizzell Law Firm @ 903-595-4383 and someone will get back to you when a decision has been made concerning your request.

[Franko10 ™]

FAQ Session #8: November 30, 2007

Q) Why is Urban Casavant’s name still being used on certificates, why isn’t Kevin West signing the certs?

When Mr. Casavant resigned from the Company on March 29, 2007 there was a supply of stock certificates being held by the transfer agent to issue to shareholders. Mr. West discussed this with the transfer agent. It is standard practice to continue to use these certificates until the current supply of printed certificates runs out.



Q) I am told by my broker that only CMKM can declare and issue a "worthless stock" statement so that I can claim the loss on my income tax return. What do I have to do to get this statement?

Current management is working diligently to bring value back into the Company and does not feel that its stock is worthless and will not issue any statement to that effect. The Company cannot give any legal and/or tax advice to anyone concerning their holdings. Please consult your personal legal and accounting professional for advice on these matters.



Q) Do you know approximately how many shareholders have still not received their certificates for CMKM? Do you know approximately how many shares these certificates represent?

The shareholder audit has not been completed. Until this audit is complete, there is no way to identify the total number of shareholders that have not received their CMKM stock certificates or the number of shares represented.


Q) What was the CMKM Task Force subpoenaed for?

Many former Company officers, insiders, attorneys and others have been subpoenaed in the past for a deposition by the SEC. The Company has not been privileged to the content of these depositions with the exception of depositions that were offered as evidence for the Administrative Hearing in May of 2005 and one other recent deposition that was an individual not related to the former CMKM Task Force.



Q) Do you have any info on the $1 million paid to CIM/CMI for the 10% lifetime royalty?

The one million dollar amount you refer to was a ledger entry in a stock recap dated August of 2003 referring to a “buy down of royalties in zinc claims equivalent to $1,000,000”. Prior management has left Mr. West with no records concerning the CIM transactions. Shares worth millions of dollars were given to family members and numbered companies referencing zinc mine acquisitions and zinc claims. No records can be found by the company which suggest that Casavant International Mining Corporation (CIM) is connected in any way with CMKM Diamonds, Inc. A Nevada Secretary of State search for this entity will show that CIM was revoked on February 1, 2007 and that the most recent officers of that company were Michael D. Williams and Ron Casavant. It appears the zinc claim buy-down of $1 million was only for the benefit of a few insiders. We are continuing our investigation into the insider dealings and the issuance of stock related thereto. There is no evidence that there were ever any funds or other assets set aside for the benefit of CMKM shareholders.



Q) Do Company records show that the Vatican is a major CMKM shareholder?

Shareholder records do not indicate that any one shareholder has more than a 1% (one percent) ownership in CMKM stock except for the shares issued in the name of one brokerage house. There are no shares issued in the name of the Vatican or anything similar to that organization.



Q) Did we win the cases that are in default?

Obtaining a default is the first step in collecting damages from a party that does not respond to a lawsuit. The company will be required to prove damages and formalize a damage award by obtaining a judgment from the Court based on such award. The company must then collect damages from the defaulting party.


Q) Gentlemen, I bought X amount of shares from Delidog back in Nov 06, Received my cert from 1st Global. Are these shares considered bona fide, or are they some of the shares sold in question?

There are many questionable circumstances surrounding the buying and selling of certificates in the past. This question cannot be answered until the shareholder audit has been completed.

[Franko10 ™]

Frequently Asked Questions
FAQ Session #9: January 18, 2008


Q) Is CMKM to the point where we have audited financials, or financials that could be audited? All of the company updates refer to a "return to trading", obviously audited financials are key to trading again, thus the relevance of my question. Thanks.

Among the many other challenges, this Company has been in operation since November of 2002 and has never filed tax returns. We have demanded all company records from every attorney and individual associated with the company that might have any related records. We received only a small number of bank statements and a random collection of files, documents and agreements from one attorney that represented Urban personally. All other attorneys and individuals have either refused to respond or have responded by saying they have no records.

Because of the lack of records this company has been forced to subpoena records and documents in hopes of obtaining an auditable set of books. Due to a lack of cooperation with former management, we may be unable to obtain sufficient records for an auditable set of books for certain years past. You may recall that two SEC certified auditors were paid substantial sums in 2005 when management was in daily contact with them. In the end both auditors resigned from their task and were unable or unwilling to complete an audit. We work on this matter daily and will continue to do so.

There are many different avenues and scenarios that could arise which would cause CMKM to become a tradable security. We are continually evaluating all options as we work on recovering assets and obtaining the financial records to complete any required audits.



Q) Are the core samples that Kevin viewed the same samples that United Carina refers to on their website?

Our investigation suggests the filing of industry standard documentation and permits have not occurred with the regulatory agencies in the Province of Saskatchewan. The company does not know with certainty the location from which the core samples were obtained. Emerson Koch told Mr. West that no one knows where he drilled the holes except for himself and his drilling crew. This is an area that is receiving a lot of attention by the company at this point. Clearly the company has paid the costs of drilling the holes which produced the core samples. We are hopeful of obtaining this information amicably but we are prepared to use the Courts to assist us if necessary.



Q) In the latest Motion on the website, in the Desormeau / Edwards case, the term "acquired assets" is used. Have we acquired any assets, or does it refer to Entourage?

The latest filing was an amendment to the initial suit. The wording of the original suit was not changed except for the addition of the new entity as a defendant. At the time of the original complaint, the Company did own 45 million shares of Entourage Mining common stock. This asset is the subject of litigation currently filed by Entourage Mining, Ltd. against the company.



Q) How long is this share audit going to take to get the final numbers? It’s been a long time. Is there a light in sight for 2008?

The shareholder audit is one that has to provide the answer to many questions. Most of the outstanding shares were illegally issued to insiders and friends of the former management. Some of these insiders and others still own large amounts of shares that will have to be addressed in a lawsuit. The Company will seek to dissolve these shares on an individual basis if the shareholder cannot prove to the Company the payments rendered for the receipt of those shares.

This is just one facet of the ongoing audit that will take an untold amount of time to complete.



Q) What happened to the 75 billion shares that were returned to us from the failed JV deal? Where they returned to the treasury? Were they then retired?

The 75 billion shares in question were retired to the treasury on January 25, 2005. They have not been re-issued or otherwise pledged.



Q) How are people still able to get certs for their CIM shares when the company is revoked in the state of Nevada and no longer a legal entity? Who is authorizing the release of those certs and who is paying for them? Due to its revoked status, is it legal for CIM to issue certs?

CMKM has no business relationship with the revoked company by the name of Casavant International Mining, Inc. (CIM). CMKM Shareholders are advised to direct their questions to the people who are listed as officers on the Nevada SOS website. CMKM paid a lot of money and shares for claims that were transferred to CIM. CMKM is evaluating the merits of filing suit to recover any assets to which it may be entitled.



Q) What is the outstanding share count as well as the amount authorized to be issued? Are there any shares currently held in the treasury at this time and if so, how many?

The current number of issued and outstanding shares of CMKM stands at 703,518,875,000 shares. The authorized shares are still at 800 billion. All shares in excess of the 703,518,875,000 are retired. No shares are being held in any other form or are being pledged for any purpose.



Q) To your knowledge, are there any more shareholders who have requested certs and not received them? If so, how many shares do these outstanding requests represent?

This is another part of the ongoing shareholder audit. There are still many shareholders that have not been able to procure physical certificates through their brokerage house. We do continue to receive communication from shareholders regarding their inability to obtain certs. The total number of these shares is unknown at this time.



Q) In a recent FAQ you stated that the response to the Entourage suit was to be filed within days. Has it happened yet and/or do you have a new estimated time to do so?

The company has retained the firm of Getz, Prince and Wells, LLP in Vancouver, B.C. The company has entered an appearance in the suit. The company is prepared to file its Statement of Defence but has not done so at the time of this writing. There are ongoing communications between the parties. There are efforts being made to amicably resolve the issues raised in this lawsuit. If the matter cannot be resolved amicably, litigation could be rather lengthy. The Company will post immediately any filed documents on this website.



Q) What ever happened to the black SUVs?

We assume you are referring to the trucks that were paid for with a CMKM Diamonds, Inc. bank account wire for $371,100.86 made payable to Owens and Sweitzer on September 22, 2004. We are continuing our investigations into these vehicles as well as a couple of expensive RV’s. If anyone has any verifiable information concerning the present ownership and current whereabouts of these trucks, please contact the Company with your information.



Q) Without going into detail have any brokerages been cooperating with your efforts?

If you are asking if any brokerage houses have come forward with an offer to purchase shares from the Company to deliver to their clients for their failures to deliver, the answer is no. The company does communicate with brokerages when questions arise about stock issuances or delivery failures.



Q) At this time I would like to request the outcome of the cert pull performed by The Owners Group. This information has never been disclosed to the CMKM Diamonds Shareholders when it should have been upon its completion.

Neither the CMKX Owners Group nor The Owners Group, Inc. has ever performed a certificate pull. The CMKM Task Force was in charge of a certificate pull at the request of CMKM management (Urban Casavant). The Task Force consisted of Don Stoecklein, Bob Mahue and Bill Frizzell. The Frizzell Law Firm volunteered its office as a central place for the shareholders to send information requested by the Task Force. Don Stoecklein informed Bill Frizzell of the dissolution of the CMKM Task Force via a letter written on June 21, 2006 when the Task Force made a recommendation to the company to seek the help of the courts in an interpleader action.

The objective of the cert pull was to identify the shareholders of the Company. As a result of the cert pull, most CMKM shareholders hold a certificate issued by the company transfer agent.



Q) What is the status of the case filed in the Eastern Texas Federal Court on October 29, 2007 against CMKM Diamonds, Inc. and others? It was filed by JP Montagne. Will you publish the documents on the web site?

CMKM Diamonds, Inc. has not been served with any such lawsuit.



Q) Re. the Shane PR from September 19, 2003:
Shane Resources Ltd. (TSX.H: SEI) is pleased to announce that the Company has entered into an agreement with Casavant Mining Kimberlite International (U-CMKM) whereby the Company, will have an option to earn a 10% interest in 82 claims in the Fort à la Corne area of Saskatchewan. The interest will be earned by the Company providing $100,000 in 2003 and $200,000 in 2004, to be spent on exploring the claims for diamonds. In addition, the Company has agreed to grant CMKM a right of first refusal to earn up to a 49% interest in any diamond properties the Company may hold and seek to joint venture.
Is this still valid?

The Company has no evidence of this agreement or that it was ever consummated. Large amounts of Company funds were wired or otherwise transferred to several companies that are related to Rick Walker. However, the evidence that CMKM has obtained points to shares of Shane Resources being issued to Urban Casavant personally and sold in more than one of his personal trading accounts. We continue our investigations into all assets that might be recoverable by the company.



Q) I'm from Belgium and have one question. A lot of my friends and family bought into CMKX. They did not order physical certificates for their holdings. Suppose we'll go trading again. What will be the difference between cert holders and non-cert holders?

We cannot advise you on the steps you should take if your shares were taken from you by your broker. We cannot advise you on how your broker will handle your shares when the company resumes trading. It is reasonable to assume you may have difficulty trading your shares if you do not have your shares in cert form. There is no plan by the company to declare some official distinction between shares owned in cert form versus non cert form.



Q) Can you please explain how and when CMKX became a “Private Company”? As an example, De Beers bought out their shareholders to become a private company. Doesn't a company have to buy out their shareholders to go 'private'?

De Beers was a publically traded company when they bought out the holdings of their shareholders with a cash payment. Once De Beers bought out their stockholders, those stockholders no longer owned equity in the company. CMKM was delisted from the U.S. Markets by the SEC in October, 2005. CMKM is no longer a publicly traded company because of this delisting.

Back to Top

[Franko10 ™]

Frequently Asked Questions 02/15/2008


FAQ Session #10: February 15, 2008
Q) Why haven’t the dividends we received been unrestricted yet?

A) CMKM Diamonds has no control over the restrictions or the non-restricting of shares held by shareholders in the name of other companies. These questions should be directed to the companies of the shares that you own.




Q) Does this now mean that you will be filing notice in the newspaper and will you make this available on the company website as an update? How soon will you place the ad now?

Case 07-A-540161-B Status ACTIVE
…
It appearing that Plaintiff's Application for Order for Publication of Summons, and Plaintiff's Second Application for Return of Funds, having both previously been granted by Orders filed December 19, 2007, the Court ORDERS such Motions removed from its civil motion calendar of January 14, 2008.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

A) The company has no response to questions that, if answered fully, might disclose trial strategies, tactics or other matters to the opposing parties.



Q) In an effort to get a clear answer on the validity of those shares sold post revocation by Marco Glisson and Ines Saftic. I would like to know if those shares will be cancelled in part or in whole. If in part, which ones will be cancelled, and if all of them please address the any recourse one may have against Marco and or Ines, the transfer agent or any other individual or company involved. Thank you for your time.

A) The Company has reason to believe that there is currently an ongoing investigation into these matters by the SEC. Until that investigation has been completed and a determination has been made in this case, no further comment will be forthcoming from the Company.



Q) Does the UAJC trust hold the note on American Shaft?

A) The American Shaft is involved in the pending litigation against the Company from plaintiff Francisco Carrano.

The company has no response to questions that, if answered fully, might disclose trial strategies, tactics or other matters to the opposing parties.



Q) With all the facts of massive fraud that have been uncovered in the sale of illegal stock and theft of hundreds of millions of dollars of CMKM Diamonds, why has there not been any arrests? 2002 to 2007 is a long time with no arrests. IMO. Thanks.

A) This question can only be answered by the law enforcement agencies that are currently investigating this matter. The Company stands ready, willing and able to assist any law enforcement agency with the results of current management’s ongoing investigation.
The Company has reason to believe that there are still pending investigations from several government agencies and that indictments will be brought against many of the former insiders of CMKM in due time. The Company does not have any specific information on possible timeframes.



Q) Does the following press release affect us? Are we associated with them?

Press Release Source: United Uranium Corp., Star Uranium Corp.

United Uranium Corp. and Star Uranium Corp. Announce Results of Sampling of Carolyn Pipe
Tuesday January 22, 6:57 pm ET
…

A) CMKM Diamonds, Inc. is not in any way related to any of these companies except for the currently disputed agreement with Entourage Mining. This press release involves mineral claims in which CMKM paid for the costs of both the drilling and lab results of the core samples. For some unknown reason, it appears that former management let these claims lapse and they were re-staked by Rick Walker.



Q) Can you let the shareholders know if Gary D. Penkilo and William H. Bundy of Henry & Peters, P.C are still working on the company's behalf?

A) Mr. Penkilo and Mr. Bundy are still under retainer with the company.



Q) I don't recall it ever being "clearly" and "officially" stated that Ms Trimbath was actually hired. Was she hired or did you just "consult" with her?

A) Ms. Trimbath was contracted as a consultant to the Company. The Company very much appreciates Ms. Trimbath for the work she has previously done for the Company. She was paid a consulting fee and stands ready to assist the company as needed.



Q) Some time back, the Task Force asked for all share holders to submit the number of shares they had certs for. I did. Do you still have that information?

A) The Company has access to all of these records. The information gathered is still intact.



Q) What is being done with Urban? Why has he not been served in the civil suit? I find it hard to believe that so much money could have just disappeared with no accountability on his part. I don't believe anyone could have been that ignorant to not know that people were using him to their advantage.

A) We interpret these remarks as a comment rather than a question. We have filed suit against Urban Casavant. You are directed to the petitions and their attached declarations for further information in this regard.



Q) The Company has said that they were having trouble recovering records from former attorneys, if they were working on behalf of Urban and the shareholders what's the problem?

A) Many of the attorneys have not responded to our request for records. Several have said they have no records. Several indicate they did not represent the company. We are continuing our efforts to retrieve all records specifically from the attorneys paid by the company.



Q) Is there any news on Go Fast Nevada? Has an agreement been worked out or are we going to court? Can you divulge any further details?

A) No agreement has been reached with any of the Go Fast entities. We will not disclose publicly the plan the company has to resolve our claims against the Go Fast entities.



Q) Have we just lost the TRO because UC was not served within the time frame allotted... OR will the court allow time for the amended suit to be filed? What time from are we looking at for the amended suit to be filed.

A) The company has no response to questions that, if answered fully, might disclose trial strategies, tactics or other matters to the opposing parties.



Q) Is Robert Maheu still the active trustee for the distribution of said certificate?

A) As the Company has already stated in the past, Mr. Maheu is no longer involved in any capacity with CMKM Diamonds, Inc. and does not have any active function as a trustee of any assets belonging to the Company or its shareholders

[Franko10 ™]

Frequently Asked Questions
FAQ Session #12: April 16, 2008

Q) Is the naked short or fails to deliver in CMKX a dead issue?

A) The Company believes that a significant failure to deliver problem still exists in our stock. We are devoting enormous efforts to rebuilding and restructuring the company with the ultimate goal of being a traded security once again.



Q) Any comment on the Alberta Securities Commission (ASC) hearing to be held on April 9, 2008?

CALGARY, March 19 /CNW/ - The Alberta Securities Commission (ASC) has issued a Notice of Hearing to seek an order reciprocal to Saskatchewan and Manitoba orders against CMKM Diamonds, Inc. ASC staff alleges that CMKM sold shares to Alberta residents without registering with the ASC or filing the proper documents required for distribution of securities under the Alberta Securities Act. The ASC hearing is scheduled for Wednesday, April 9, 2008.

A) The Company signed the linked reciprocal order with the ASC. There are no further actions needed to be taken by the Company. The actions of the Alberta Securities Commission were taken because of acts committed by prior management. Our investigation revealed no evidence which would allow us to dispute the charges of the Alberta Securities Commission.



Q) Is Urban Casavant, either directly or indirectly via family members or other intermediaries, funding any of the current operations or legal proceedings being undertaken by the current CMKM Diamonds Inc?

A) Absolutely NOT! Urban Casavant personally promised but never followed through with any funding that was needed and requested by the company in the first few weeks after he signed the company over to Mr. West at the end of March, 2007. The company has had no communications with Urban Casavant, either directly or indirectly since that time.



Q) According to a CMKM press release, on November 18, 2004 95 Million shares of a company knows as “ Juina Mining “ at the time was transferred to CMKX, then on November 30, 2004 another additional 127 Million shares were transferred to CMKX. At that time Juina Mining had 49% ownership of a company currently known as Diagem. This would give CMKX 18% ownership of this property. Would you be able to elaborate to the CMKX shareholders what has transpired?

A) We have found two deposits of 25 million shares each of Juina Mining stock into one of the many personal trading accounts of Urban Casavant. Our records show that the first Juina Mining dividend was distributed to shareholders in late 2005. Our records do not show any ownership of the Diagem properties by CMKM Diamonds, Inc. The disposition of the 127+ million shares mentioned in the press release dated October 16, 2004 with a supposed distribution date to shareholders of November 30, 2004 is part of our ongoing investigation.



Q) What happened to the Casavant International Mining (CIM) zinc claims?

A) Our investigation shows that in 2005 these claims were transferred into a new company, owned and directed by Emerson Koch. Our evidence indicates that on January 22, 2007 these claims were mentioned in a press release as the principal properties being developed in a joint venture with Golden Arch Resources. The company is giving full consideration to its options regarding these claims.



Q) Do you have any updates with regards to the money that is owed to us and has there been a trial set to recover our assets for CIM?

A) CMKM Diamonds, Inc. has nothing to do with the currently revoked company going by the name of Casavant International Mining Corporation. Feel free to contact the registered agent for this company, Steve Oshins or either of the listed officers of the corporation, Ron Casavant and/or Michael Williams with any of your questions regarding CIM.

[Franko10 ™]

FAQ Session #13: May 12, 2008


Q) There has been a lot of speculation regarding the drilling that took place, but no one seem to know what commodities have been found on our original claims. Could you provide the shareholders if we did find Oil, Diamonds or Uranium and anything else that might be valuable. Are our original claims near the claims of Oilsands Quest? Are we in any form linked with this company?

A) The Company is not aware of any commercially producible natural resource that has ever been found on any claims once promoted to belong to CMKM Diamonds, Inc.

CMKM Diamonds, Inc. has never had a single claim held in the name of the Company. If our investigation reveals the Company purchased or otherwise acquired rights to claims that may contain value, the Company will give full consideration to its options regarding those claims.

There are numerous maps showing the physical location of all the claims which were promoted by prior management as belonging to the CMKM. The claims list was attached to the 14C which was publicly filed on January 15, 2003. You should be able to make your own determinations of whether any of those claims are near the Oilsands Quest by looking at any of the maps available on the boards or on other web sites. CMKM has no association with Oilsands Quest.



Q) Marco Glisson a.k.a. Delidog was involved in the selling of CMKM certificates for a long period of time. As far as I know, he is not a broker, and not legally entitled to do so. I was surprised he was not one of persons named in the current SEC indictment. Can you shed any light on this?

A) Unfortunately, the company cannot shed any light on your concerns. This is a question that can only be answered by the SEC. The Company has no intimate knowledge of the SEC investigation or to any official questions surrounding the persons that were named (or not named) in the SEC lawsuit. It is our understanding the SEC continues to investigate the present and past selling of unregistered shares by a number of former shareholders.

The Company wants to caution anyone who may be contemplating the purchase of CMKM Diamonds, Inc. stock that it is likely being solicited with promises of unsubstantiated potential future profit. Please see the new High Risk Stock Transaction Waiver that is required to be signed by all parties wishing to be involved in any future transactions requesting changes in ownership of CMKM stock. This waiver was created by CMKM when it was brought to our attention that certain shareholders were continuing the pumping of this stock like prior management engaged in for several years.



Q) When these SEC hearing/trials are set, will you be able to advise the shareholders of the time and place? Can the shareholders attend these proceedings or are they closed to the public?

A) All proceedings before any federal court are open to the public. There should be ample to notice of any scheduled hearings or trials.



Q) Hi I am a shareholder in CMKX. I wanted to know the timing of what is next in terms of court hearings etc? How long will it take to deal with the fails to deliver issue?

A) There are currently no scheduled court dates for any hearings in either Nevada or Canada. It is customary for sometimes lengthy pretrial discovery to occur before there are any scheduled public hearings or trials. Lawyers may be exchanging discovery documents, engaging in depositions, and other matters that will not appear on any court docket sheet. This is customary when matters go to litigation. Shareholders can keep abreast of the current court settings and cases filed in Nevada by going to courtgate.coca.co.clark.nv.us/ and looking up current CMKM Diamonds, Inc. cases.

There is no timeframe available for the issues dealing with fails to deliver.



Q) When all the dust settles down, what type of business will CMKM be involved in? Are some avenues being explored at this time for the business of CMKM post legal wrangling?

A) The company continues its investigations into the disappearance or transfer of all claims that were promoted to the shareholders as being owned or controlled by CMKM. When it is determined what assets belong to the company and what assets can be recovered, the company will proceed to exploit those assets for the benefit of the shareholders. It is current management’s intent to appoint an advisory / nominating committee to recommend candidates for the Board of Directors. The addition of new Board Members will most likely occur before any significant shift in the direction of the company takes place. Yes, current management gives daily consideration to other types of businesses that might be beneficial to the company and its shareholders.



Q) I currently have 1,000,000 shares of CMKM Stock. I would like to know once & for all, is this stock worth more than the paper it is written on?

A) Unfortunately, prior management of the company, insiders and other individuals profited significantly from the sale of illegally issued company stock. This is evidenced by the lawsuits which have been filed by the company and the SEC. It is the company’s policy not to comment on the value of CMKM stock. It should be obvious that the results of the present litigation will be important to the success of the company.


Back to Top

[Franko10 ™]

FAQ Session #14: June 1, 2008

1. Kevin you tell us CMKX has no claims, no money no nothing, yet in Feb 2008 you claim CMKX has acquired assets to allow it to trade.... what assets were you speaking about and what is the status of these assets?

A) I can only assume that you are quoting the statement made in the DeSormeau case amendment filed on February 20, 2008 on page 4 and under #14 that reads “Although great damage has been caused to CMKM by the Defendants and others, CMKM acquired assets that will allow it to return to trading status”.

If this is your question, then you will note the exact same wording was used on the initial lawsuit filing on March 30, 2007 on page 6 under #13. Because the initial lawsuit was only amended to add Eton Properties as a defendant, the wording of the lawsuit in general was not changed or we would have had to start the service process all over again on all defendants. At the time the original lawsuit was filed, CMKM had full control of 45 million shares of Entourage Mining that had substantial value at that time. This was the reason for the statement in the petition that was filed. Entourage has filed suit in a Canadian Court to cancel that certificate. We have hired very competent counsel to represent us in Canada and the case in the early discovery stage.

2. Why is the ETGMF master cert (for the shareholders) NOT in your possession and what are you doing about it? Do you plan to take legal action against Donald Stoecklein for possession of the cert?

A) The ETGMF certificate is being held by Donald Stoecklein because he was initially entrusted with its care by CMKM and Entourage Mining. Mr. Stoecklein has made known to current management that he will release the certificate to the Company with a court order to do so. The certificate cannot be negotiated in any way because it is restricted and it is also involved in a legal dispute. The certificate is in the name of CMKM Diamonds, Inc. No one, except CMKM Diamonds, Inc. can negotiate this certificate. Securities Law Institute is simply named as the custodian. Securities Law Institute has no ownership interest in the certificate or the shares it purports to represent. At this time, there is no need to ask any court for an order to take physical possession of this certificate.

3. I, as well as many others purchased the bulk of our CMKX shares due to the company announcements of D Roger Glenn and Maheu coming on-board, and also due to the PRs and statements from both gentlemen in regards to their intentions to bring the company into full compliance and fully reporting. Why have you brought suit against other former insiders and attorneys of the company but not these two men?

A) As we have stated many times in the past, there will be new defendants added to our lawsuits in the future. This is the reason for the many does and roes you see in both lawsuits. As CEO of this Company, I have a fiduciary duty to the Company and its shareholders to do what is in the best interest of the Company. These lawsuits had to be brought in the best interest of the Company and it would be negligent for a company officer involved in litigation to give out any information that may be detrimental to the case. Because of this reason and under strict advice of counsel, the Company will not go into detail about who will or will not be added to lawsuits in the future. As parties are added, the Company will update the website with copies of filed amendments.

I believe that most shareholders have some idea of how big of a task this has been to not only compile the evidence but to be able to put everything together in a way that legitimate lawsuits can be filed with merit. However, some of our shareholders have not yet realized that because of the enormous size of the CMKM case, what would seemingly be normal litigation to a non attorney takes a tremendous amount of time and effort to compile, organize and fully prepare to take before a judge or jury.

As CEO of CMKM, I am under constant fire and pressure from our shareholders to make decisions on matters that could affect the very fate of this Company. My fiduciary duty to this Company is to make the best possible decisions that can be made within all extenuating circumstances at the time.

I am explaining in the only way I know how that I cannot in a public forum start explaining the company’s strategies or the thought processes for taking or not taking certain legal actions. You will continue to see this answer if your questions demand that I divulge legally strategic matters. I would encourage you that are troubled with this explanation to call an attorney that handles litigation and ask your attorney to explain to you the legal obligations of a CEO when it comes to litigation matters.

Many of you have made demands on our company attorney to explain certain matters. If you were CEO and you hired an attorney in a very sensitive complex legal matter you would expect the attorney to handle company legal matters confidentially. The attorney is duty bound not to discuss company business in a public forum especially matters involving company litigation. He has a duty of confidentiality to the corporation and is not at liberty to discuss matters with shareholders or make statements that will be publicized on the internet or elsewhere.

4. Have you been in contact with Urban Casavant, Donald Stoecklein, or Robert Maheu, in the past year and if so, did you discuss CMKM business, the ETGMF cert, and assets of the company?

A) I have not talked to Urban Casavant since April of 2007. I have briefly talked to Don Stoecklein on a few occasions to discuss matters concerning past representation of the Company and dealings with others associated with the Company. I have not personally talked to Mr. Maheu since April of 2006. I have written to Mr. Maheu and have been acknowledged by his attorney this year about a subject not tied to any litigation in any way.

5. Why won't you let the shareholders in on exactly what you think can be expected for a ROI since you have locked all of us into this situation by not deeming the company worthless so we can take the tax write off? Do you realistically believe that you can bring a ROI to the shareholders that would be more than we could recoup from a tax loss write-off?

A) All shareholders are free to contact their tax advisors and get information from them on how to write-off an investment on their taxes. The Company cannot and will not offer any kind of legal or tax advice to shareholders.

No company officer or director in their right mind would declare a company worthless when they are doing all they can to try to turn a company around. It would not make sense in any scenario to do such a thing. As I have stated many times in the past, the “ONLY” way that this Company can have a chance to one day produce any kind of possible return on shareholder investments is to be able to recover enough assets to build a business. Current management did not have anything to do with taking your investment dollars and converting them for personal benefit. The very last legal advice given to the Company by previous Corporate Attorney JT Moran lll during the last week of March, 2007 was to put this Company into bankruptcy. I declined to do so. I am very confident that our lawsuits are valuable assets to this company and will provide the resources to bring this company back.

6. Since the company and shareholders will have to pay back any moneys that have been lent to the company or paid to you, Frizzell, Hodges, Trimbath, other legal counsel, the TA, and whomever else is on the payroll to include the future BOD you wish to appoint, should you not reveal who is footing the bill and how much in the hole we are already? Are you keeping financials that we can view?

A) Shareholders are not responsible for any debts of the Company. As has been stated many times in the past, Bill Frizzell has personally guaranteed and received all monies used for the litigation of this Company. Out of this money, Mr. Frizzell has made small loans to the Company to enable me to take a partial salary. To date, there have been no revenues or settlements generated or received by the Company. I also view this information as material that should be kept confidential by the company. I am duty bound not to divulge company financial information that could be used by our opponents in any way.

7. Can you post the Company Policies on the Website?

A) If and when assets are recovered that would give this Company the financial means to move ahead with building a business, a board of directors will be appointed to run the Company and do such things as draw up a list of Company policies that may be posted for public viewing.

8. Why haven't you pursued criminal charges against those that have defrauded the shareholders?

A) Criminal charges are usually brought by state and federal government in cases such as this. Since I took office I have cooperated with every regulatory agency and law enforcement agency that is investigating the activities of former management and their associates. The company has no ability to influence the investigatory process or in any way expedite the process that results in criminal charges. While I fully understand the demand many of you have for criminal charges being brought by law enforcement, my job is to take actions which will result in bringing resources to the company. I cannot spend my time on matters that do not have some possibility of recovering assets or acquiring assets for the company.

9. Why are you asking for so little in your suit against John Edwards since it's apparent he stole much, much, more?

A) The question of damages is a legal matter entrusted to our attorneys. I cannot comment on the thought processes, strategies and legal reasons for decisions that are being made. You should call your own personal attorney and ask him or her to explain the realities involved in lawsuits against those that commit and engage in securities violations. I can tell you there is a litigation plan which was designed to maximize the recoveries from all parties that might be liable to the company.

10. When can we expect to read an official PR from you and or the company? Other then FAQ’s printed on the website.

A) When the Company has any significant news that would be required to be disseminated in a press release it will do so. All CEO updates and questions answered on the FAQ pages of the Company website should be considered as official company news.

11. Rumor is that one or more very large CMKM shareholders may be paying your salary and expenses. Is there any truth to these rumors? If so, how can the rest of the shareholders trust that you have their best interests in mind and not that of just those paying you?

A) The wording of the letter leading up to these answered questions that was sent to the Company in many various forms actually states “With Recent FAQ postings surrounding more content debunking rumors then any facts that would actually appease the masses”. It does not surprise me that questions that are then asked by the same letter would ask me to debunk even more rumors.

As explained in question #6 above and in the first question on the FAQ for August 23, 2007, the Company has received small loans from Bill Frizzell that allow me to draw a limited salary. Although some shareholders have helped by providing loans to Mr. Frizzell for litigation expenses, no shareholders are paying my salary or any expenses of the Company. I have not accepted any personal loans or any other type of gifts or compensation for anything remotely related to my position with CMKM. Some shareholders choose to trust me, some do not. I have accepted this as going with the territory and will continue to do my job to the best of my abilities for the Company and the entire group of shareholders as a whole.

12. When can the shareholders realistically expect to see a ROI for all they have done and according to past and current company instructions?

A) The company has no basis for providing any time frame in answer to this question.

13. Have you received the requested documents from Entourage and what is the status of their suit against CMKM Diamonds?

A) The Entourage suit is still in the discovery stage and we have not yet received documents from the other parties. There is no change in status on this lawsuit as there are still communications going back and forth between the attorneys from all named parties. If and when there is anything of significance to report, the Company will notify shareholders of such events.

14. Isn't there supposed to be a shareholders' meeting each year? Since we've never been asked to vote on anything the company has ever done, is there someone other than the shareholders who holds the majority of the shares?

A) No shareholder, group of shareholders or any other person or entity owns the majority of shares in this Company. The company is not able to identify all of its shareholders at this time. It is clear to the company that many shareholders exist whose names are not on the official list of the transfer agent. The company does not have the financial resources due to the fraudulent acts of prior management to call an annual meeting. The cost of sending notice of a shareholders meeting to this large number of shareholders in the customary manner is prohibitive at this time. As resources allow me to do so, I look forward to a general shareholders meeting. I continue our efforts to complete a shareholder audit so all shareholders can be properly notified of our first meeting.

15. What does Kevin make of John Edwards Plea? Or, Urban's Plea?

A) I will not use this forum to make comments that rely fully on personal opinions to such questions. I have looked at a document that was provided in the SEC lawsuit as being an answer from John Edwards but have not yet been shown any documents that were produced as an answer from Urban Casavant. As far as I know, Mr. Casavant has only produced a waiver of summons. These documents are what they are and the Company has no intimate knowledge of the reasons for such.

16. Why is Helen Begley still being paid by CMKX to serve as our Transfer Agent since she was one of the people indicted in the SEC's law suit?

A) 1st Global Stock Transfer was retained on a contract due for renewal in October, 2008 and has been paid in full per this agreement.

17. I would love to know the real deal on the interpleader filing. Yes or No. Somehow, this important agenda item disappeared off the radar.

A) The Interpleader was supposed to be worked on, completed and filed by former CMKM Corporate Attorney, JT Moran lll in late 2006 and into early 2007 before Mr. Casavant signed the Company over to me. Mr. Moran refused to turn over company files to me. I filed a grievance with the State Bar of Nevada on May 11, 2007 and included 150 pages of exhibits complaining of Mr. Moran’s refusal to render an accounting of his fees and to return to the company a copy of our records. This would have included any work that he did (or did not do) on the Interpleader matter. To date, the Company has not been able to obtain its file from Mr. Moran. On January 31, 2008, nearly 8 months after filing my grievance, I received a three paragraph letter from the State Bar of Nevada that simply said “there is no substantial evidence of professional misconduct by the attorney”. I have linked one of the last few email correspondences with Mr. Moran over this subject for your perusal, here.

At this time, there is nothing to Interplead. The Entourage certificate is held up in a court action as described in question # 1 above. I will continue my efforts to obtain our file from Mr. Moran so I can give you more information regarding the interpleader.

18. Should Mr. Frizzell be sued for statements during Phase I and Phase II regarding NSS that attracted more investors hoping to capitalize on the reported broker's alleged illegal activities? Or is there in fact proof of the NSS that we shareholders can still hold in our poker hands?

A) Should Mr. Frizzell be sued you ask? The man that has gone to bat for this Company lock, stock and barrel? Do you realize that without Bill Frizzell and a few shareholders that stepped up to the plate as early as March, 2007 that this Company would have gone into bankruptcy as per the legal advice of then Corporate attorney JT Moran lll? When Urban Casavant asked me to take over this Company on March 28, 2007 I turned to Mr. Frizzell and told him that I would not do it unless he would commit to help me. Had Bill not committed, The Company would have been left in the hands of Mr. Casavant and his legal advisors.

Mr. Frizzell has gone way beyond the call of duty to try and keep the hope of this Company alive. He has not only pledged basically everything he owns to personally guarantee loans but he is in his office working from early in the morning until late in the evenings…. During the work week and on the weekends too! There are many armchair quarterbacks sitting behind their computers trying to find every fault they can with how they believe things should be done. However, there has only been a handful of shareholders come forward with genuine offers to help…. some with both time and money and they are deeply appreciated.

I am sometimes puzzled when I read questions from shareholders like this. You may remember that Bill intervened in the SEC hearing for John Martin as a representative shareholder. You should remember the fax in campaign when the shareholders faxed in broker statements to Bill’s office. Bill devoted his entire staff and even hired some temporary help for several months in an effort to develop our first real evidence of the potential deliver failures in this stock. Bill then goes to bat as best he can for us at the SEC hearing. Shareholders have never in the history of the SEC been represented at a 12J proceeding until Bill convinced Judge Murray to let the shareholders have a seat at counsel table. Bill then goes to the SEC offices the day after the hearing with Bob Maheu, Don Stoecklein and Mike Williams and attempts to hand deliver a copy on a CD of every broker statement that had been faxed to his office. He was also carrying the NOBO list. His office had received broker statements from 5,020 shareholders representing 320 billion shares. I remember how tedious a task it was for his staff trying to verify the faxed in broker statements against the NOBO list so the numbers would be accurate. The NOBO list showed there were approximately 60,000 “accounts” in the brokerage houses that reported to the DTCC. The trillion number figure given was a simple math extrapolation but it was based on hard facts. Those same faxed in statements have recently been delivered to my office. Three years have now passed since those numbers were talked about. A suggestion that Bill should be sued because he reported exactly what came in to his office is outrageous in my mind.

As for the failure to deliver issue, we do have proof of fails to deliver stock in this security that exist at this time. We do not know the totals that exist in the brokerage houses. It may take a long time and more litigation to find out who all of our shareholders are. You should understand that most of our efforts are devoted to rebuilding the company. When this company can stand on its own, then the issue of delivery failures will be attended to.

19. Are the certificates that we received legitimate proof of ownership for CMKM Diamonds Inc.? And does that make us “Bonified” ?

A) If you received a certificate from 1st Global Stock Transfer for shares that you bought through your brokerage house, then most likely you are a bona fide shareholder of CMKM stock. If you have purchased stock that was legally obtained and you paid real consideration for that stock, then you are most likely a bona fide shareholder.

20. What are the results of the share audit? We want a complete count of the total shares sold since you told a judge in a court of law that there are trillions.

A) The shareholder audit is ongoing and unfortunately may be ongoing for quite some time. Please reread answer to question # 18.

21. How can you return to trading if Brokerage firms and jurisdictions have sanctions against CMKM Diamonds trading again ( e.g. AB, et al )?

A) As stated many times in the past, there are numerous ways to put tradable securities into the hands of shareholders when that time comes. As CEO I will not share with the general public any plans the company has or any ideas that are being considered in this regard. These are not matters that can or should be discussed in general at this time. I am presently, and will continue to do so, discussing with some very savvy securities professionals several ways to return this stock to trading status. This Company must first recover assets that will allow it to build a business with forseeable revenues at the very least, before it would ever be a candidate to become public. Sanctions against this company have been levied because of illegal acts of former management. There are procedures for companies to obtain relief from sanctions. These matters will be addressed in due course.

22. Back when Bill Frizzell went to Washington and stayed with Optimisstic... is it true that Bill attended a meeting with those interested in forcing the company into receivership or taking over the company? What role do those people play now?

A) Bill made a trip to Washington D.C. when he met first met Judge Murray as he was preparing for the SEC hearing. He has no idea what this question refers to. He does not recall meeting anyone that intended to put this company into a receivership or taking over the company.

23a) Being that Bill Frizzell could NOT have possibly researched, written, and had Kevin West sign the notarized lawsuit, CMKM Diamonds, Inc. vs. Dave Desormeau; John Edwards, Case No. A538649, District Court, Clark County, Nevada, in one day, 3-30-07, who wrote said lawsuit?

23b) Being that the lawsuit, CMKM Diamonds, Inc. vs. Dave Desormeau; John Edwards, Case No. A538649, District Court, Clark County, Nevada, could NOT have possibly been written in one day, 3-30-07, when was said lawsuit written?

23c) If Bill Frizzell did in fact research and write the lawsuit, CMKM Diamonds, Inc. vs. Dave Desormeau; John Edwards, Case No. A538649, District Court, Clark County, Nevada, when did he begin researching and writing said lawsuit?

23d) If Bill Frizzell did in fact research and write the lawsuit, CMKM Diamonds, Inc. vs. Dave Desormeau; John Edwards, Case No. A538649, District Court, Clark County, Nevada, before 3-30-07, how did Bill Frizzell know that Kevin West was going to be appointed CMKM Chairman of the Board and in turn hire him to represent CMKM?

A) Bill Frizzell, on behalf of John Martin and other shareholders, made numerous demands on the company to sue John Edwards, Dave DeSormeau and others. It was clear that Urban was not going to take this action. Bill spoke to me about this while I was interim CEO. Bill made it very clear to Urban Casavant during the week before he resigned that he had prepared a shareholder derivative suit and that he had hired local counsel to file suit against John Edwards and others. The first suit was going to be filed with or without the consent of CMKM. A lot of things occurred during the week Bill was in Vegas to file the Edwards suit as a shareholder derivative suit. Urban resigned and I took office. I was in full agreement with the filing of this suit and asked Bill if he would file this lawsuit on behalf of the company and not as a derivative suit. From a paperwork standpoint, it was a simple matter to change the name of Plaintiff. We (CMKM) are very fortunate to have been able to acquire Bill’s help and his quick aggressive action in obtaining injunctive relief from the Courts at least as to the initial defendants. I was left with no funds nor any means to begin trying to protect the interests of the company. These are comments that are frankly not appropriate for me to make as a public statement, because they involve matters that may some day be an issue in this case. I am doing so because such matters need to be put to rest.

24a) In no more than two days (from 4-17-07 to 4-19-07), how could Bill Frizzell possibly have had the time to review the contents of "several boxes of Company documents" and then write and have Kevin West sign the notarized said 19-page lawsuit?

24b) In no more than two days (from 4-17-07 to 4-19-07), how could Bill Frizzell possibly have had the time to review the contents of "several boxes of Company documents" and then write and have Kevin West sign the notarized said 18-page Application for TRO?

A) On April 04, 2007 Bill Frizzell received seven boxes containing CMKM corporate documents that I requested from one of Urban Casavant’s personal attorneys. Upon the arrival of these materials and after having had a full day to go through them with Bill, it was obvious that the Company had some significant claims against Mr. Casavant and other insiders. I had absolutely no intentions of suing Urban Casavant when I initially took office. I was a believer and follower of Urban Casavant when I was being told by others that I was ignoring the facts. After reviewing the materials and learning from Urban that there were no funds to run the company, it was clear that I had no choice but to seek help from the Courts.