Honus Wagner Card Case Plea Deal Rejected Again by U.S. Judge

[Bugsy]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...u-s-judge.html

[calvindog]

Maybe Bill needs to get his priest involved. Or steal less?

PS kudos to the federal prosecutor who is now in the laughable position of twice being accused by a federal judge of being too soft on fraud.

[wonkaticket]

Dang beat me to the Priest comment.

[whitehse]

So from a novice point of view, this obviously means the judge doesnt agree with this plea agreement and they have to go back and re-negotiate? Is this what I am reading?

I just wonder what the quote from the judge “I’m not sure what I’m getting into, so I’m not getting into it,” really means.

[Leon]

Probably should have tried for 31 months this time. I am surprised the defense and prosecutor didn't have the judge's thinking more in tune.

[g_vezina_c55]

I am not familiar with US justice... according to your Law rules... how many time of jail Bill mastro is admisible with all these charges ?

Many years of jail ?

The Bill Mastro history is a verry sad history. I will try to explain my idea. This guy had all the potential, the knowledge,the expertise, for do a great positive and honnest career in this hobby .... but he choose at some time in his life to take the wrong way . I don t know this guy personnally but with all the read i made about Mastro i think this guy is a verry smart guy... but he decided to use his mind to criminal thing...
verry sad.

[calvindog]

If you were victimized by Bill Mastro and want the judge to know the truth about what he's done -- or perhaps you disagree with his lawyer's contention that you weren't defrauded in his auctions because everyone knew Mastro auctions were crooked -- please let the judge know via letter. The judge's address is:

Judge Ronald A. Guzman
219 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604

Make sure you note the name of the case and case number: United States v. William Mastro, No. 12 CR 567-1 (N.D. Ill.)

[Peter_Spaeth]

I was not defrauded because the item I won subsequently went up in value.

[g_vezina_c55]

I never bid or buy on any item he has for sale. I don't know this guy.
I only read on the internet about it.

[Jewish-collector]

I don't understand the legal stuff, either. What's the short version on what exactly will happen to Bill Mastro ?

[g_vezina_c55]

Originally Posted by jewish-collector

i don't understand the legal stuff, either. What's the short version on what exactly will happen to bill mastro ?

x 2 ?

[tschock]

Originally Posted by whitehse

I just wonder what the quote from the judge “I’m not sure what I’m getting into, so I’m not getting into it,” really means.

Andrew,

I was scratching my head on the judge's quote too. Doesn't the fact that he REJECTED the plea indicate he at least sort-of knows what he's getting into (by not thinking the plea was "correct") and that he IS getting into it by making the decision to reject it? Unless it is something legalese that I don't get.

[atx840]

[wonkaticket]

Chris, priceless one of the best laughs this year!

[Ease]

Chris B. that is fantastic! Made my day.

[Exhibitman]

I read the brief the prosecution filed in support of its sentencing recommendation. For anyone interested, here it is:

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/ite...stro-plea-deal

The brief notes that in many instances Mastro 'won' the lot and returned it to inventory of either Mastro Auctions or himself [I assume for the items he owned personally]. What was not clear to me is how those results were analyzed. To me, as a reporter of auction outcomes in my boxing price guide, I see a completely fake sale as more damaging to the hobby as a whole than shilling up a real bidder since it sets a fake price point for an item.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by Jewish-collector

I don't understand the legal stuff, either. What's the short version on what exactly will happen to Bill Mastro ?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

I read the brief the prosecution filed in support of its sentencing recommendation. For anyone interested, here it is:

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/ite...stro-plea-deal

The brief notes that in many instances Mastro 'won' the lot and returned it to inventory of either Mastro Auctions or himself [I assume for the items he owned personally]. What was not clear to me is how those results were analyzed. To me, as a reporter of auction outcomes in my boxing price guide, I see a completely fake sale as more damaging to the hobby as a whole than shilling up a real bidder since it sets a fake price point for an item.

It seems as though The document says I, as a bidder, should have known there was shill bidding and fraud going on so it's partially my fault. What a bunch of BULLSH!@. How about I reach into their pockets and just take money from them.....I consider that to be stealing.

[drc]

I've often said eBay and other auction realized prices are't entirely reliable for valuation purposes in part because you can't be sure there was an actual sale. Sometimes the winner doesn't pay, sometimes there is no winner. Then there is shilled auctions.

Auction results should always be taken with a grain of salt and a skeptical eye. It boggles my mind that there are collectors who accept them at face value.

[whitehse]

The Chicago Tribune did a front page blurb on their internet site regarding the Mastro issue:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...,4379827.story

I didnt know there was an issue with Elvis' hair as well!! Who would have thought that would be an issue?

[shelly]

I can tell you one thing. If it goes to trial and they find him guilty. He will be going away for a very long time.

[calvindog]

Bill Mastro isn't going to trial. Rare is the case when on the very first day of a case a defendant's lawyer screams to any news outlet who will listen to him that his client "is cooperating with the government."

Bill is just going to have to eat more jail time. 30 months is too little. I'm sure they'll next try for perhaps 42 months. If that fails -- 54 months. If that fails -- 60 months.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Bill Mastro isn't going to trial. Rare is the case when on the very first day of a case a defendant's lawyer screams to any news outlet who will listen to him that his client "is cooperating with the government."

Bill is just going to have to eat more jail time. 30 months is too little. I'm sure they'll next try for perhaps 42 months. If that fails -- 54 months. If that fails -- 60 months.

And cooperation (testifying against Doug), will we see that? Isn't that the judge's issue?

[ctownboy]

Correct me if I am wrong but didn't Bill Mastro or Doug Allen come on this board (or the older board) and say that there was no shill bidding or fraud going on in their auctions when this was a hot topic a few years ago?

I might be, in the famous words of Andy Pettitte, misremembering but I thought this was the case.

I thought there were some board members asking questions about the legitimacy of bids on items in some of their auctions (some were flat out asserting there was shilling going on) and I thought one of the main characters at Mastro Auctions came on to assure people nothing fishy was happening.

If that is the case, then couldn't the prosecution use those responses from those threads as evidence that bidders absolutely shouldn't have had an idea that shilling was going on and that the people involves SHOULD get a harsher penalty for their actions?

I might be totally off base here but I thought I remembered somebody from Mastro answering questions...

David

[base_ball]

Chris, I love Father Wagner! Reminds me of my T-206 mashup, which caused great consternation when it was posted on this board years ago. Now that the Rev. Mastro has confessed his sin, I proudly (except for the pathetic Photoshop job) post again.

[HRBAKER]

Maybe he will get a little trimmed off for good behavior.

[martindl]

Originally Posted by calvindog

If you were victimized by Bill Mastro and want the judge to know the truth about what he's done -- or perhaps you disagree with his lawyer's contention that you weren't defrauded in his auctions because everyone knew Mastro auctions were crooked -- please let the judge know via letter. The judge's address is:

Judge Ronald A. Guzman
219 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604

Make sure you note the name of the case and case number: United States v. William Mastro, No. 12 CR 567-1 (N.D. Ill.)

Thanks for posting this Jeff. I am absolutely going to let the judge know my thoughts. Whether I was victimized I'll never know (I am assuming all records of shilling are long gone) but I bought more than a few things that ended at my max bid.
Question. This is for mastronet.com purchases only correct? What wre they called before mastronet, my memory is failing me.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Back in the day I believe they were Mastro Fine Auctions and Mastro&Steinbach before that?

[Shoele$$]

Awww......Billy Boy.....he can't say he wasn't warned. Many times by connected colleagues

Oh what I wish I could say to him now! I'll leave that for another time.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

And cooperation (testifying against Doug), will we see that? Isn't that the judge's issue?

No, the prosecutors ultimately determine whether someone testifies against another in a case.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by ctownboy

Correct me if I am wrong but didn't Bill Mastro or Doug Allen come on this board (or the older board) and say that there was no shill bidding or fraud going on in their auctions when this was a hot topic a few years ago?

I might be, in the famous words of Andy Pettitte, misremembering but I thought this was the case.

I thought there were some board members asking questions about the legitimacy of bids on items in some of their auctions (some were flat out asserting there was shilling going on) and I thought one of the main characters at Mastro Auctions came on to assure people nothing fishy was happening.

If that is the case, then couldn't the prosecution use those responses from those threads as evidence that bidders absolutely shouldn't have had an idea that shilling was going on and that the people involves SHOULD get a harsher penalty for their actions?

I might be totally off base here but I thought I remembered somebody from Mastro answering questions...

David

David, you're 100% right. Yes, the prosecutors should be using this exact argument to refute Mastro's claim that bidders should have known there was fraud going on in his auction. Doug Allen conducted a massive campaign to convince us all that their auctions were clean. And this was during the period Bill Mastro was engaging in fraud with Allen in their auctions.

But keep in mind that making such an argument against Mastro would require a prosecutor to be more concerned with cleaning up fraud and punishing criminals than simply cleaning up her desk by getting rid of a pesky case that taxpayers paid millions of dollars to have investigated. The issue you raised should be included in letters to the judge about the true character of Mastro. Not only did they steal from their friends but when confronted they assured us all that no such fraud was transpiring. All of this helped Mastro and Allen steal more from their 'friends.'

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by calvindog

No, the prosecutors ultimately determine whether someone testifies against another in a case.

So do they simply not need his testimony?

[WhenItWasAHobby]

Another issue that seems to have been forgotten is that the original indictment alleged that Mastro and Allen were involved in a scheme to sell altered and restored items including cards. I haven't seen anything mentioned about this in later hearings or news articles. This is far from trivial and in my opinion it warrants a lot of explaining such as were these cards professionally graded, what was done to the cards and which cards were altered? When someone doctors a card and the card gets assigned a grade and if you happen to own the same card in the same grade, then you've been defrauded in my opinion because your card has been devalued by an artificially higher supply. The other problem is that these doctored cards will likely at some point and time be resold and someone will be defrauded directly in those sales. So in short, even if you never bid in a Mastro auction, you could still have been or will be a victim from these actions.

Here's the excerpt from the indictment:

False Representations Regarding Authenticity and Condition of Items
10. It was further part of the scheme that:
a. The Code of Conduct promulgated by in 2007 made the following representations, among others, regarding Mastro Auctions’ practices concerning disclosure of information that items sold at its auctions had been altered or restored:

i. If Mastro Auctions believed or had knowledge that an item
has been altered in any way, that information would be fully disclosed in the auction catalog.
ii. When, on occasion, Mastro Auctions had items restored in order to improve their presentation, the extent and nature of any restoration would be fully disclosed.
iii.
Under no circumstances would Mastro Auctions have restoration work done on trading cards.
b. After the Code of Conduct was published:
i.
Defendants MASTRO, ALLEN, and others knowingly did not disclose to bidders material information about alterations of items sold by Mastro Auctions.
ii. Defendants MASTRO, ALLEN and others knowingly did not disclose to bidders the extent and nature of restoration work performed on items sold by Mastro Auctions.
iii. Defendants MASTRO and ALLEN, along with others associated with Mastro Auctions, caused restoration work to be done on trading cards sold by Mastro Auctions, and knowingly failed to disclose that work to bidders.

11.
It was further part of the scheme that in marketing materials distributed on behalf of Mastro Auctions, which were intended to portray Mastro Auctions to potential bidders and consignors as a premier seller of valuable items for which a strong market existed, defendant MASTRO represented that Mastro Auctions had sold the most expensive baseball card in the world, a Honus Wagner T-206 card. In making this representation, however, defendant MASTRO knowingly omitted the material fact that defendant MASTRO had altered the baseball card by cutting the sides of the card in a manner that, if disclosed, would have significantly reduced the value of the card.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Dan it sometimes is easier to focus on the mouse in the room and not the elephant, especially if we like the elephant.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

So do they simply not need his testimony?

A third grader could convict Doug Allen in this case, the evidence is so overwhelming. As for Mastro, perhaps he's just too worthless of a liar to use in a case. Perhaps if he washes the feet of more lepers his credibility will improve.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by calvindog

A third grader could convict Doug Allen in this case, the evidence is so overwhelming. As for Mastro, perhaps he's just too worthless of a liar to use in a case. Perhaps if he washes the feet of more lepers his credibility will improve.

Do you believe his admission that he trimmed the Wagner?

[WhenItWasAHobby]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Dan it sometimes is easier to focus on the mouse in the room and not the elephant, especially if we like the elephant.

How true!

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Do you believe his admission that he trimmed the Wagner?

Any time Bill Mastro admits to a crime I believe it.

[Peter_Spaeth]

In my opinion the Wagner part of the case is weak. Mastro is not charged with trimming the card, as most people probably assume. Rather he is accused of committing fraud when he said, in advertising his experience, that he had sold the most expensive baseball card. As a historical fact that was indisputably true whether or not the card was trimmed.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

In my opinion the Wagner part of the case is weak. Mastro is not charged with trimming the card, as most people probably assume. Rather he is accused of committing fraud when he said, in advertising his experience, that he had sold the most expensive baseball card. As a historical fact that was indisputably true whether or not the card was trimmed.

Agree 100% and of course it's true. There is no law that says you can't trim a baseball card. It's when you lie about it that it becomes fraudulent.

[calvindog]

The Wagner card part of the case is of no moment other than for garnering some publicity for the case; the years of Mastro defrauding the public through his auctions is all that matters here.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Leon

Agree 100% and of course it's true. There is no law that says you can't trim a baseball card. It's when you lie about it that it becomes fraudulent.

Right and i dont think he lied about it at least in the statement at issue where he was just stating his experience as a seller. He had in fact sold the most expensive card.