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

[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.

[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.'

[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.

[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.

[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

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?

[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.