John Rogers Home and Business Searched by the FBI

teetwoohsix · #1 01-29-2014, 01:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by I Only Smoke 4 the Cards

This is pretty common practice. Nothing odd about it to me.

That's scary.

Amendment Four:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

So, no Law and Order episodes made me question this, just the Constitution. To be specific, the "particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized" part. If it is sealed, are they only describing the "things to be seized" to the judge and themselves? I always thought that was the whole purpose of arriving at a place to do the search, with warrant in hand, was to not only search, but to provide the specific reason why you are searching and what exactly you are looking for. Wouldn't you expect that, if someone showed up to search your home and business?

Sincerely, Clayton

P.S. Not defending or condemning this guy, I've never heard of him- just trying to understand how this "sealed" warrant is common practice?

drcy · #2 01-29-2014, 01:30 PM

..

nolemmings · #3 01-29-2014, 02:00 PM

Ah yes Clayton, Amendment Four. I remember reading something about that in law school, or maybe it was history class. Truly a beacon for the entire world. However, it became inconvenient and was gutted or "re-interpreted" in light of the Patriot Act. Now what red-blooded American can't get behind such a noble sounding piece of legislation? National security, "We're at War", "Can't let the Bastards win" and all that. Somebody lend me their fife and drum.

teetwoohsix · #4 01-29-2014, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nolemmings

Ah yes Clayton, Amendment Four. I remember reading something about that in law school, or maybe it was history class. Truly a beacon for the entire world. However, it became inconvenient and was gutted or "re-interpreted" in light of the Patriot Act. Now what red-blooded American can't get behind such a noble sounding piece of legislation? National security, "We're at War", "Can't let the Bastards win" and all that. Somebody lend me their fife and drum.

LOL

Ah yes, the deceptive ol' Patriot Act. NOW it makes sense.

Fife and drum on the way....

Sincerely, Clayton

Peter_Spaeth · #5 01-29-2014, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nolemmings

Ah yes Clayton, Amendment Four. I remember reading something about that in law school, or maybe it was history class. Truly a beacon for the entire world. However, it became inconvenient and was gutted or "re-interpreted" in light of the Patriot Act. Now what red-blooded American can't get behind such a noble sounding piece of legislation? National security, "We're at War", "Can't let the Bastards win" and all that. Somebody lend me their fife and drum.

Those wonderful words like "unreasonable" have to be consistently reinterpreted in light of the times, no?

WhenItWasAHobby · #6 01-29-2014, 02:17 PM

This news article seems to add a little bit more information of what was seized.

"Agents could be seen taking long cardboard boxes labeled "slugger" with contents sounding like wooden baseball bats jostling inside".

http://www.fox16.com/story/d/story/f...bkaynUTfVrtA2g

Peter_Spaeth · #7 01-29-2014, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhenItWasAHobby

This news article seems to add a little bit more information of what was seized.

"Agents could be seen taking long cardboard boxes labeled "slugger" with contents sounding like wooden baseball bats jostling inside".

http://www.fox16.com/story/d/story/f...bkaynUTfVrtA2g

Perhaps the definition of WMD is expanding.

forazzurri2axz · #8 02-16-2014, 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nolemmings

ah yes clayton, amendment four. I remember reading something about that in law school, or maybe it was history class. Truly a beacon for the entire world. However, it became inconvenient and was gutted or "re-interpreted" in light of the patriot act. Now what red-blooded american can't get behind such a noble sounding piece of legislation? National security, "we're at war", "can't let the bastards win" and all that. Somebody lend me their fife and drum.

++++++1,000,000

I Only Smoke 4 the Cards · #9 01-29-2014, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by teetwoohsix

That's scary.

Amendment Four:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

So, no Law and Order episodes made me question this, just the Constitution. To be specific, the "particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized" part. If it is sealed, are they only describing the "things to be seized" to the judge and themselves? I always thought that was the whole purpose of arriving at a place to do the search, with warrant in hand, was to not only search, but to provide the specific reason why you are searching and what exactly you are looking for. Wouldn't you expect that, if someone showed up to search your home and business?

Sincerely, Clayton

P.S. Not defending or condemning this guy, I've never heard of him- just trying to understand how this "sealed" warrant is common practice?

"Sealed" pertains to the public. Most court files are public record, you could go to the clerk's office and look at the file. However, some cases, such as juvenile cases, are sealed. This means that they are not available to the public.

As it relates to the particularity of a warrant. There is usually an affidavit explaining the officer's rationale for seeking the warrant and an address to be searched.

Ex: Home at 123 Street, New York City.

wonkaticket · #10 01-29-2014, 06:34 PM

I wonder if Peter Nash will be reporting on this...his buddy...and all....

slidekellyslide · #11 01-29-2014, 08:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wonkaticket

I wonder if Peter Nash will be reporting on this...his buddy...and all....

I gotta admit...I did pull up his website and his twitter today to see if he had mentioned it.

Nope.

Sunny · #12 01-30-2014, 12:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wonkaticket

I wonder if Peter Nash will be reporting on this...his buddy...and all....

Quote:

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

I gotta admit...I did pull up his website and his twitter today to see if he had mentioned it.

Nope.

It's true that Peter Nash is friendly with John Rogers. Nash said in court filed papers that John Rogers had agreed to contribute $10,000 for Nash's legal fees... The NY Daily News wrote an article about it, see link below.

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/ite...morabilia-exec

When I tried to contact John Rogers to ask him why he was giving money to Peter Nash to defend his lawsuit, John Rogers had his attorney send me a cease and desist letter not to contact him.

I have a copy of an signed affidavit from John Rogers dated July 26, 2012 that he loaned approximately $166,200 to Peter Nash. The third sentence of the affidavit states:

"During the years of 2009 and 2010 I loaned approximately $166,200 to Mr. Nash. These wire transfers were unsecured loans for which no formal loan agreements or documents were executed between Mr. Nash, myself or my companies."

My wife and I have a Judgment against Peter Nash and Roxanne Nash. As of today the Judgment including the 8.5% interest amounts to approximately $500,000. I have a bunch of collateral from Peter Nash which would help pay down the Judgment but does Peter Nash give me any provenance or try to help me sell it, no. For example I have an Ed Delahanty Trophy bat that Peter Nash gave to me as collateral on the bat it says "Presented To Edward Delahanty Four Home Runs July 13, 1896". But Peter Nash has refused to help me sell it. Nash writes volumes about baseball memorabilia and goes into extreme details on his Hauls of Shame website but refuses to write anything about the rare memorabilia that he gave me as collateral.

wonkaticket · #13 01-30-2014, 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sunny

It's true that Peter Nash is friendly with John Rogers. Nash said in court filed papers that John Rogers had agreed to contribute $10,000 for Nash's legal fees... The NY Daily News wrote an article about it, see link below.

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/ite...morabilia-exec

When I tried to contact John Rogers to ask him why he was giving money to Peter Nash to defend his lawsuit, John Rogers had his attorney send me a cease and desist letter not to contact him.

I have a copy of an signed affidavit from John Rogers dated July 26, 2012 that he loaned approximately $166,200 to Peter Nash. The third sentence of the affidavit states:

"During the years of 2009 and 2010 I loaned approximately $166,200 to Mr. Nash. These wire transfers were unsecured loans for which no formal loan agreements or documents were executed between Mr. Nash, myself or my companies."

My wife and I have a Judgment against Peter Nash and Roxanne Nash. As of today the Judgment including the 8.5% interest amounts to approximately $500,000. I have a bunch of collateral from Peter Nash which would help pay down the Judgment but does Peter Nash give me any provenance or try to help me sell it, no. For example I have an Ed Delahanty Trophy bat that Peter Nash gave to me as collateral on the bat it says "Presented To Edward Delahanty Four Home Runs July 13, 1896". But Peter Nash has refused to help me sell it. Nash writes volumes about baseball memorabilia and goes into extreme details on his Hauls of Shame website but refuses to write anything about the rare memorabilia that he gave me as collateral.

Well in poor Peter�s defense he�s very busy dragging dead people like Halper thru the mud for their fake items. So I�m not sure how much time he has left these days to address his own creations and questionable items. Then you have to add in the man crush on Lifson, the other bills, the warrants and legal letters�.there�s only so many hours in the day Robert come on!

Peter Nash keeping the hobby safe as long as there�s no mirror around.

wonkaticket · #14 01-30-2014, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sunny

My wife and I have a Judgment against Peter Nash and Roxanne Nash. As of today the Judgment including the 8.5% interest amounts to approximately $500,000. I have a bunch of collateral from Peter Nash which would help pay down the Judgment but does Peter Nash give me any provenance or try to help me sell it, no. For example I have an Ed Delahanty Trophy bat that Peter Nash gave to me as collateral on the bat it says "Presented To Edward Delahanty Four Home Runs July 13, 1896". But Peter Nash has refused to help me sell it. Nash writes volumes about baseball memorabilia and goes into extreme details on his Hauls of Shame website but refuses to write anything about the rare memorabilia that he gave me as collateral.

Just so Peter's fans see this...hmmmm...wonder why that would be?

tbob · #15 01-30-2014, 02:19 PM

There was a huge article in the Arkansas Times a while back about the incredible photo archive Rogers has compiled. Basically what he does is go to big city newspapers and offer to take their archived photographs and make digital copies for them and in return he takes possession of the originals and they make their way in to the hobby. I bought some original pictures at the National in Chicago and they were stunning.
The comment above about the FBI suddenly dropping in on his business and snooping around shortly after former employees entered guilty pleas in federal court is hardly surprising. Deals for shorter sentences based on cooperation are the norm these days...

I Only Smoke 4 the Cards · #16 01-30-2014, 07:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sunny

It's true that Peter Nash is friendly with John Rogers. Nash said in court filed papers that John Rogers had agreed to contribute $10,000 for Nash's legal fees... The NY Daily News wrote an article about it, see link below.

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/ite...morabilia-exec

When I tried to contact John Rogers to ask him why he was giving money to Peter Nash to defend his lawsuit, John Rogers had his attorney send me a cease and desist letter not to contact him.

I have a copy of an signed affidavit from John Rogers dated July 26, 2012 that he loaned approximately $166,200 to Peter Nash. The third sentence of the affidavit states:

"During the years of 2009 and 2010 I loaned approximately $166,200 to Mr. Nash. These wire transfers were unsecured loans for which no formal loan agreements or documents were executed between Mr. Nash, myself or my companies."

My wife and I have a Judgment against Peter Nash and Roxanne Nash. As of today the Judgment including the 8.5% interest amounts to approximately $500,000. I have a bunch of collateral from Peter Nash which would help pay down the Judgment but does Peter Nash give me any provenance or try to help me sell it, no. For example I have an Ed Delahanty Trophy bat that Peter Nash gave to me as collateral on the bat it says "Presented To Edward Delahanty Four Home Runs July 13, 1896". But Peter Nash has refused to help me sell it. Nash writes volumes about baseball memorabilia and goes into extreme details on his Hauls of Shame website but refuses to write anything about the rare memorabilia that he gave me as collateral.

You may want to contact a lawyer about Nash's refusal to help you sell the collateral. My thoughts, and I have never practiced in this area, are that there may be an action related to his interfering with your ability to satisfy the debt.

Again - I have not practiced law in this area.

Sunny · #17 01-30-2014, 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by I Only Smoke 4 the Cards

You may want to contact a lawyer about Nash's refusal to help you sell the collateral. My thoughts, and I have never practiced in this area, are that there may be an action related to his interfering with your ability to satisfy the debt.

Again - I have not practiced law in this area.

Thanks for your thoughts I just may do that. During the lawsuit Peter Nash alleged that I destroyed Nash's present and future business dealings with John Rogers. What is that business relationship? It's a fact that Legendary Auctions sent Peter Nash's landlord money so he would not be evicted, but did you know that John Rogers is one of the owner of Legendary Auctions. I asked Doug Allen what percentage of ownership does John Rogers have in Legendary Auctions, Doug wouldn't tell me but he did confirm that John Rogers is part owner of Legendary Auctions. Doug told me if it wasn't for John Rogers helping out financially Legendary Auctions wouldn't exist. Doug Allen told me he's good friends with John Rogers and stays over Rogers house when he visits.

Sunny · #18 01-31-2014, 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sunny

It's true that Peter Nash is friendly with John Rogers. Nash said in court filed papers that John Rogers had agreed to contribute $10,000 for Nash's legal fees... The NY Daily News wrote an article about it, see link below.

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/ite...morabilia-exec

When I tried to contact John Rogers to ask him why he was giving money to Peter Nash to defend his lawsuit, John Rogers had his attorney send me a cease and desist letter not to contact him.

I have a copy of an signed affidavit from John Rogers dated July 26, 2012 that he loaned approximately $166,200 to Peter Nash. The third sentence of the affidavit states:

"During the years of 2009 and 2010 I loaned approximately $166,200 to Mr. Nash. These wire transfers were unsecured loans for which no formal loan agreements or documents were executed between Mr. Nash, myself or my companies."

My wife and I have a Judgment against Peter Nash and Roxanne Nash. As of today the Judgment including the 8.5% interest amounts to approximately $500,000. I have a bunch of collateral from Peter Nash which would help pay down the Judgment but does Peter Nash give me any provenance or try to help me sell it, no. For example I have an Ed Delahanty Trophy bat that Peter Nash gave to me as collateral on the bat it says "Presented To Edward Delahanty Four Home Runs July 13, 1896". But Peter Nash has refused to help me sell it. Nash writes volumes about baseball memorabilia and goes into extreme details on his Hauls of Shame website but refuses to write anything about the rare memorabilia that he gave me as collateral.

Hey John Rogers I have a great deal for you. I’ll sell you all of Peter Nash’s memorabilia that I have as collateral. You can call your buddy up Peter Nash and I’m sure he will give you the provenance of the memorabilia, after all you did loan him unsecured loans of $166,200, so it makes no sense that he wouldn’t give you provenance on this material. It would be a great deal for you and just think you would be helping your buddy out by paying down some of his debt. Remember my Judgment against Nash gets paid off first before you can get any of your money back from Nash.

Taking off a few items I have sold theirs approximately 60 items of Nash’s collateral I have for sale. Peter Nash puts a value of approximately $125,000 on this stuff. This deal would not include the Ed Delahanty bat that would have to be a separate deal. Make me an offer!

Runscott · #19 01-31-2014, 12:34 PM

15 posts and every last one of them relates to Peter Nash.

Seems like he owns you.

wonkaticket · #20 01-31-2014, 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sunny

Hey John Rogers I have a great deal for you. I�ll sell you all of Peter Nash�s memorabilia that I have as collateral. You can call your buddy up Peter Nash and I�m sure he will give you the provenance of the memorabilia, after all you did loan him unsecured loans of $166,200, so it make no sense that he wouldn�t give you provenance on this material. It would be a great deal for you and just think you would be helping your buddy out by paying down some of his debt. Remember my Judgment against Nash gets paid off first before you can get any of your money back from Nash.

Taking off a few items I have sold theirs approximately 60 items of Nash�s collateral I have for sale. Peter Nash puts a value of approximately $125,000 on this stuff. This deal would not include the Ed Delahanty bat that would have to be a separate deal. Make me an offer!

Robert I'll take the Delehanty bat can I get an LOA from John Rogers?

calvindog · #21 01-29-2014, 07:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by I Only Smoke 4 the Cards

"Sealed" pertains to the public.

"Sealed" in this case pertains to everyone but the government, not just the public.

I Only Smoke 4 the Cards · #22 01-29-2014, 10:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by calvindog

"Sealed" in this case pertains to everyone but the government, not just the public.

Not sure what you mean. Law enforcement and the defendant would both have access to the warrant.

calvindog · #23 01-29-2014, 10:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by I Only Smoke 4 the Cards

Not sure what you mean. Law enforcement and the defendant would both have access to the warrant.

If you read the article, the affidavits supporting the search were sealed. That means that until they are unsealed the defendant does not have access to them, just the government does.

teetwoohsix · #24 01-30-2014, 04:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by calvindog

If you read the article, the affidavits supporting the search were sealed. That means that until they are unsealed the defendant does not have access to them, just the government does.

Thanks, that's how I read it and why I questioned it. I guess the Patriot Act is turning inward now.

Sincerely, Clayton

calvindog · #25 01-30-2014, 06:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by teetwoohsix

Thanks, that's how I read it and why I questioned it. I guess the Patriot Act is turning inward now.

Sincerely, Clayton

The sealing of affidavits in this case has nothing to do with the Patriot Act.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
John Rogers - Slightly OT	bobfreedman	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	8	10-28-2012 07:55 PM
John Rogers article	Hot Springs Bathers	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	4	08-21-2011 08:27 PM
John Rogers Archive Makes Amazing Discovery about Lou Gehrig Jersey in REA	ChrisGalbreath	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	0	05-07-2011 02:33 PM
John Heydler business card..........	Archive	Baseball Memorabilia B/S/T	0	08-21-2007 11:05 AM
John Heydler business card.........	Archive	Baseball Memorabilia B/S/T	0	07-19-2007 02:19 PM