Bill Mastro's upcoming sentencing

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

I don't buy your premise Brendan. This is a property ownership issue. Leon didn't steal the card. He bought it from a public auction. Morally speaking he is innocent. So the issue is which innocent person gets hurt. That's why we resort to the law. It is our way of handling these otherwise intractable issues.

I'm curious, you're suggesting that Leon is prepared to litigate this issue? Are you representing him? Is that a Dorskindian 'we' or a traditional 'we'?

[Greg Sonk]

Whatever did or didn't happen with Leon's card, it is incredibly disheartening to see a thread about one of the alleged grandest perpetrators of fraud in the hobby degenerate into something so minor in comparison.

So many of the same people bickering in this thread about the most quibbling of differences profess to have an interest in cleaning up the hobby, yet when presented with the choice of spending 20 minutes writing a letter that may make an actual difference or wasting it away arguing here, there seems to be no shortage of those that choose the latter.

Now I certainly don't know Mr. Lichtman, but by all accounts he seems to be an excellent lawyer. I certainly also know absolutely nothing substantive about the law other than to find an excellent lawyer and then follow his or her instructions. For those of us that are vehemently against writing a letter, what could the potential drawbacks be? Please note this is not a hypothetical question. I intend to write one myself as a bidder in his auctions unless some unforeseen consequence is presented.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Greg Sonk

Whatever did or didn't happen with Leon's card, it is incredibly disheartening to see a thread about one of the alleged grandest perpetrators of fraud in the hobby degenerate into something so minor in comparison.

So many of the same people bickering in this thread about the most quibbling of differences profess to have an interest in cleaning up the hobby, yet when presented with the choice of spending 20 minutes writing a letter that may make an actual difference or wasting it away arguing here, there seems to be no shortage of those that choose the latter.

Now I certainly don't know Mr. Lichtman, but by all accounts he seems to be an excellent lawyer. I certainly also know absolutely nothing substantive about the law other than to find an excellent lawyer and then follow his or her instructions. For those of us that are vehemently against writing a letter, what could the potential drawbacks be? Please note this is not a hypothetical question. I intend to write one myself as a bidder in his auctions unless some unforeseen consequence is presented.

That is a false ""choice" you are presenting. Nobody has suggested they didn't have time to write a letter, and instead spent the time arguing here. Please. People may or may not have good reasons for writing a letter or not, and you are free to disagree, but to posit that they haven't because they spent their time posting here is baseless rhetoric.

[Greg Sonk]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

That is a false ""choice" you are presenting. Nobody has suggested they didn't have time to write a letter, and instead spent the time arguing here. Please. People may or may not have good reasons for writing a letter or not, and you are free to disagree, but to posit that they haven't because they spent their time posting here is baseless rhetoric.

I certainly disagree, but again, we are getting bogged down in the details that ultimately don't matter.

What are the legitimate reasons for not wanting to write one? I believe (and correct me if I am wrong, as I certainly could be) you stated earlier in the thread you did not feel yourself categorized as a victim, which is obviously an opinion as valid as any other. Are there negatives to writing one the layman may not see? I understand this is simply a discussion and not legal advice.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Greg Sonk

I certainly disagree, but again, we are getting bogged down in the details that ultimately don't matter.

What are the legitimate reasons for not wanting to write one? I believe (and correct me if I am wrong, as I certainly could be) you stated earlier in the thread you did not feel yourself categorized as a victim, which is obviously an opinion as valid as any other. Are there negatives to writing one the layman may not see? I understand this is simply a discussion and not legal advice.

I don't see any downside. You should feel free. As long as you are comfortable with the letter being a matter of public record.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Greg Sonk

Whatever did or didn't happen with Leon's card, it is incredibly disheartening to see a thread about one of the alleged grandest perpetrators of fraud in the hobby degenerate into something so minor in comparison.

So many of the same people bickering in this thread about the most quibbling of differences profess to have an interest in cleaning up the hobby, yet when presented with the choice of spending 20 minutes writing a letter that may make an actual difference or wasting it away arguing here, there seems to be no shortage of those that choose the latter.

Now I certainly don't know Mr. Lichtman, but by all accounts he seems to be an excellent lawyer. I certainly also know absolutely nothing substantive about the law other than to find an excellent lawyer and then follow his or her instructions. For those of us that are vehemently against writing a letter, what could the potential drawbacks be? Please note this is not a hypothetical question. I intend to write one myself as a bidder in his auctions unless some unforeseen consequence is presented.

Greg, thanks for the compliment Yes, there's lots of hot air on this thread about legal maneuvering to keep a stolen card from a public library which was the victim of a crime. However, as Peter points out certainly lack of time is not the reason why some people won't write to the judge about Mastro.

Personal choice is a reason: not everyone wants to 'get involved' in situations such as this although that makes little sense to me. Anyone who claims they are not a victim to Mastro's fraud is just providing a convenient excuse as I said earlier in this thread. If somehow you never bid in a shilled auction (and it's difficult to know for certain as bidding records were destroyed by Mastro or otherwise not revealed to the public) you certainly are impacted by the artificially inflated prices from Mastro auctions which will affect the market going forward. Plus you've also been victimized in another manner: the hobbyist's level of trust in auction houses has forever been lessened due to Mastro and his group of thieves.

The only downside to writing a letter that I can see is if that if the prospective letter writer ever committed fraud in a Mastro auction; Mastro's lawyers should rightly inform the judge that the writer is in no position to criticize Mastro to the court when the writer has unclean hands himself. Other than that I can't even imagine any drawbacks to writing such a letter.

[wonkaticket]

Jeff another reason may be that your out of paper in the printer...stamps have also become more expensive also. Just trying to play devils advocate.

[Kenny Cole]

It is interesting how this thread has devolved into two separate issues. I am not in Leon's camp on one and am more or less camping in his direction on the other.

I think Leon's refusal to write a letter on the Mastro situation is a mistake. I have told him that. He has chosen not to write the letter and that is the end of that. I don't see how any further harangue is going to make a difference or cause him to change his mind. In fact, I would suggest that it is having precisely the opposite effect.

With respect to the Peck and Snyder issue, I tend to believe that Leon has the right to further look into the situation before making any decision. I don't have a problem with that at all. It's easy to talk about a fast "morality" decision when you aren't the one out five figures, not so much if you are the one taking the hickey. If it were me, and I had done nothing wrong in the purchase of the card, I would be looking at every aspect of my previous transaction and carefully thinking about the situation before I made any decision whatsoever. I mean seriously, if the card was stolen from the library, it has now been missing for 30 some-odd years. Is another week or month going to make a difference? I don't think so.

I hope that whatever resolution ultimately occurs is fair and reasonable for all involved, but I certainly don't think that it has to be made today. That's my $.02.

[drcy]

...

[travrosty]

"I mean seriously, if the card was stolen from the library, it has now been missing for 30 some-odd years. Is another week or month going to make a difference? I don't think so."

---------------------------------------------------

That's assuming it gets returned, so no it wouldnt make a difference, but if its going to "not make a difference" by being returned to the library 1 month from now, then just ship it there now. and show good will. The only reason not to ship it there now is to find a way to keep it. It has a NYPL stamp on it, it's property of NYPL in my opinion. They put that lion stamp on it decades ago. They claimed ownership. You gonna make them prove a negative, that it wasn't deaccesioned?

If Mr. Luckey wants monetary compensation, he should cash in on the seemingly 2 grade difference from the SGC grade guarantee. The difference between the holder it is in now - A 50 (4) and what it would realistically grade, which looks like no more than a 30 (2). Then donate it (or return it, depending on the semantics you take) to the library. There is your compensation.

[Peter_Spaeth]

If the NYPL missing items list posted on Nash's website identifies only one missing 1869 Red Stockings card, but there are two known examples with the NYPL stamp, then why does everyone assume this one was stolen?

[Kenny Cole]

[QUOTE=travrosty;1431354]"I mean seriously, if the card was stolen from the library, it has now been missing for 30 some-odd years. Is another week or month going to make a difference? I don't think so."

---------------------------------------------------

That's assuming it gets returned, so no it wouldnt make a difference, but if its going to "not make a difference" by being returned to the library 1 month from now, then just ship it there now. and show good will. The only reason not to ship it there now is to find a way to keep it. It has a NYPL stamp on it, it's property of NYPL in my opinion. They put that lion stamp on it decades ago. They claimed ownership. You gonna make them prove a negative, that it wasn't deaccesioned?

You completely missed everything I said, but that's OK. Maybe English isn't your first language. It isn't a "good will" issue yet. Its an ownership issue. Why doesn't Leon get to investigate the matter a little bit more before he takes a 5 figure hickey? As I said before, its easy to pontificate when it isn't your money. Here's an idea -- since you are so clearly philanthropic, why don't you put your money where your mouth is? Kick in the $10K and I'm sure all will be good. Otherwise, STFU. Best,

Kenny

[travrosty]

in other words, there is no waiting another month unless he returns it, that's what i was saying. so if you say they waited 30 years, they can wait another month, that is predicting they will get it back a month from now, if that doesnt happen, then they will wait another 30 years or infinity or whatever, so the statement only works if he returns it, so 1 month or now, if he is going to return it, might as well return it now, otherwise no need to make the statement that the library can wait another month if they have already waited 30 years. the only other option is not to return it, so they will not be waiting another month to get it back, they wouldn't get it back. that's the point.


hypothetical conversation

nypl "you're right, we waited 30 years we can wait another month."

(month goes by)

nypl "are we getting it back"

answer "no"

????????????????????

[AddieJoss]

All I know for sure if that the card is not VGEX. I've seen near mint cards with a pen mark on them and they are a 1.5 or 2 via SGC. I've seen cards with eraser marks and they are in the same range or worse. How can a card that has both ink stains and eraser be in VGEX? The folks at SGC obviously knew this was a valuable card but the grade just seems very odd. Does anyone know when it was graded (just curious)?

Also, I mention this grading aspect as the other parts of the conversation have been close to exhausted for now.
Cory Weiser