[Archive]

Posted By: Peter Spaeth

The claim that the return guaranty was not in place at the time of the auction was proven incorrect by publicly available facts -- i.e. the web archive. However, it seems to me unless the consignor reveals himself and tells his story or SGC identifies the person who submitted the Ruth (which I would not expect them to do as such relationships are confidential), we can only speculate about the sequence of events here.

That said, I will now indulge in some speculation myself. Here is what I have wondered about since this matter first came to light. Given how much value it would have added, if you were auctioning this item off, wouldn't you have tried to grade/authenticate it? And is it a permissible negative inference from the fact it was not graded/authenticated that someone tried to do so?