Open letter to STAT and Christopher Morales

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Bill Panagopulos</b><p>Just finished reading all of the postings above re: Mr. Morales, Coach's Corner, Stat Authetics etc. after having gotten the head's up from the webmaster at theyneeedglasses.com. I see he was asked to step forward and ID himself but I can understand his reluctance in light of the content of his website. I'm glad to see he's not alone in his dismay over the current state of affairs in what's become the autograph authentication disaster.<br /><br />For those who don't know me, I'm the owner of Alexander Autographs, Inc., an auction house devoted to the sale of historic autographs and manuscripts (only). We sell about 2,000 lots per auction, about three time a year. We've been at it for about 12+ years, we don't use any outside authenticators whatsoever (and never have), we're members of PADA, UACC, the Manuscript Society, Ephemera Society, etc. and guarantee our material for life.<br /><br />I'll open by saying that it's my firm belief that any autograph auction house that will not guarantee its material, preferably for life, is simply not worth its salt. What (other than a little thing like ethics) would stop me from hiring Joe Blow down the block to authenticate my material, and then keep me from telling my bidders that, essentially, "I'm not qualified to authenticate this material - you have to rely on my "pro" or "forensics" person?" What would happen if Christie's or Sotheby's said: "Well, we think it's Picasso, but we have this certificate from someone who said they have this qualification and that degree, so you have to rely on them" before you plunked down twenty million on an oil painting? I believe that's an easy way to pass the buck and absolve ourself from any responsibility for selling anything...and it's especially helpful should the item be condemned as being unauthentic by anyone else, somewhere down the road. <br /><br />We're pretty liberal with returns - we take an honest approach and if, say, two legitimate dealers with extensive experience in the material questioned say the piece isn't authentic, we'll discuss the item with them, openly, and we'll certainly offer a full refund if it's not "right". We err on the side of caution. We're dealing with consignors, amny unknown to us, and we risk OUR money guaranteeing THEIR goods. <br /><br />Admittedly, we don't do a lot with baseball, rock, and modern Hollywood. Why? Because, frankly, they are the most pervasively forged fields in the business. But again, if we sell an item in ANY field that turns out to be "bad", the refund check goes out. And believe me, after selling 45,000+ lots over the years, it's inevitable. All of you dealers and auctioneers out there know that.<br /><br />Getting back to the subject at hand, a few weeks ago I viewed the items for sale at Coaches Corner in my field, including Marilyn Monroe items, John F. Kennedy letters, a Washington signature, and a number of other historic items. Can I tell you with ONE HUNDRED PERCENT CERTAINTY that they aren't authentic? Of course not - I wasn't there when the pen hit the paper. But would I take them on consignment, certificate or not? No chance, no way. But that's an decision I make as a businessman. And if a fellow dealer, auctioneer or customer approached me and asked me what I thought of them, I'd tell them. <br /><br />But there seems, somehow, to be a pattern here. There's a huge number of items in internet auctions, including Coaches Corner, that I would never, ever take on consignment. And I'm no baseball or rock expert, either. Am I too picky? Are you guys too picky? If not, perhaps "Glasses" as you call him, was right, and strong action might be called for. After all, $500 Washington signatures don't do me, or owners of other $5,000 Washington signatures, a lot of good.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>shelly jaffe</b><p>Well it is getting close to "Count down Morales". I am waiting with baited breath for his response. I know all are waiting as well. I know what it is to travel from Mongolia back to the United States. So i will be very benevolent as to give an extra 24 hours to "special agent in training "Morales. I am still waiting for CC and STAT as well. I will state this one more time. I will look forward to any and all law suits. I will also state for a fact that none of you have to set up a defense fund for me. This one is on me.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>J. McMurry</b><p>Hey guys,<br /><br /> I have posted here in the past and just "rediscovered" this forum. I think this is great, and badly needed. Everyone has made great points(except for the unheard subjects). The main point I stress is the same ol cliche, DO YOUR HOMEWORK, I've been collecting for 18 years now and still would not consider myself an expert, even though I spend HOURS reading, researching and asking questions of those I respect in the hobby. SCD can still provide interesting info when read,such as the following: CC ad touting Donald F. as the "best in the business", Ted T. listed as an employee of CC auctions, Ted T. writing letters to the editor defending CC against the HBO piece. The facts are there for everyone to see and make their own judgements. I would like to thank Shelly for faxing me a sample sheet of Marino autographs a while back, and his "fighting the good fight",but I also agree that it probably wouldnt be a good idea for him to get back into the hobby as a dealer. I would also like to thank Rich Simon, who I have purchased items from and who has also passed on some good info. Ron Keurajuan(sic?) has also been agreat help in the past,as has Keating and Spence. We need more guys like them to help out the little guy who loves the hobby ,but cant afford to drop $1,000 on a Ruth 3x5,etc. thanks guys.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>john</b><p>"I'll open by saying that it's my firm belief that any autograph auction house that will not guarantee its material, preferably for life, is simply not worth its salt"<br /><br />Bill,<br /><br />The following return policy applies to the most respected auction houses (listed below) in the sports memorabilia and autograph industry:<br /><br />ALL SALES FINAL<br /><br />Mastro<br />Lelands<br />Hunt Auctions<br />Sothebys<br /><br /><br />They will not listen to a differing opinion and all sales are final. I don't blame them myself. I think the named companies are worth their salt.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Corey R. Shanus</b><p>I strongly suspect that with those four named auction houses if you gave them CONCLUSIVE (e.g., scientific testing of the paper or ink) PROOF that the signature is not genuine and that you didn't wait an unreasonably long time to present your claim to them, that they would work something out with you.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Matt</b><p>Bill - if you don't mind the question - how many returns have you processed? It seems to me your return policy is entirely in your control since they have to be 2 "well qualified" experts (which you get to define) and even if they both say it's questionable, you still require your company to agree that it is "bad" before you process a refund. On paper you have a refund policy, but I question if it really is one.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>john</b><p>Corey,<br /><br /> I purchase a signed item from one of the above "ALL SALES FINAL" companies and I receive the JSA and PSA letter with the item. I take it to a big show where Richard Simon, Kevin Keating, Jim Stinson and Mike Guttierrez all say "no good". You will not receive a return. It is rare to ever have "conclusive" evidence that you speak of.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Richard S. Simon</b><p>John - This is from Lelands Auctions catalog, I believe that they do have a return policy. And you would not get a JSA or PSA letter from Lelands, except on a rare occasion when the consignor might have had one.<br /><br />-<br />Lelands stands by the authenticity of everything it sells for a period of three years from the date of the auction. It is up to the client to verify authenticity within that period of time. However, Lelands and its agents will be the final determinant of the authenticity of each and every piece it sells. We are not bound by the opinion of grading services, outside authenticators, or so-called experts. Letters of authenticity are only available for those pieces where "LOA" is listed in the catalogue copy. Otherwise, your invoice and that alone will serve as your letter of authenticity. <br />--<br /><br />I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.<br />Unknown author <br />--<br />We made a promise. We swore we'd always remember.<br />No retreat baby, no surrender.<br />The Boss

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Corey R. Shanus</b><p>"I purchase a signed item from one of the above "ALL SALES FINAL" companies and I receive the JSA and PSA letter with the item. I take it to a big show where Richard Simon, Kevin Keating, Jim Stinson and Mike Guttierrez all say "no good". You will not receive a return. It is rare to ever have "conclusive" evidence that you speak of."<br /><br />In the instance you describe I agree. Returns will not be forthcoming by merely substituting one opinion for another. However, in those rare instances you are basing your claim on hard facts (e.g. scientific testing or the confession of a forger that he forged your document), then I think to maintain customer goodwill the auction house will in good faith try to work something out with you. <br /><br />Some of this is not far-fetched. I remember reading of on-going investigations of people who are alleged to have forged documents from famous Americans. It is conceivable that as part of some plea bargain there will be admissions as to specific documents forged, at which point I would expect current owners to press claims.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>DJ</b><p>First off, I think Mr. Jaffe should be commended for starting this thread and having the balls to be so outspoken. I'm hoping that this thread just doesn't die and we all treat it like a family gathering and simply leave the get together to perhaps promise in five years, to get together again. I think we are all anxiously awaiting Mr. Morales' entrance back into the country and I'm pretty sure the STAT team won't be entering the hostile arena, which is this Forum. <br /><br />Especially since "glasses" updated his/her site to add a NASA piece which STAT Authenticated. They seem to have a A LOT of complete NASA pieces each month and the NASA pieces usually sell for "NADA" of what it should. SpaceCollect site (or is it Nasa Collect) had a thread running about this time last year on an Armstrong ball that the Coach's team claimed they (actually a consignor) got directly from walking up to Neil's house. You know Neil, he LOVES to sign. <br /><br />No he doesn't. He's borderline impossible. <br /><br />It was mentioned above about great sellers guaranteeing "for life" an item and EVERY seller should stand behind their opinion with an open mind that if a more respected person believes something to be false, they should gather their ego and pride, offer a refund and junk the piece. Too many times there is a heated debate, an argument, stubborness and eventually a respected friendship has gone South. In saying that, Lelands rocks. <br /><br />Also a mention of Ron K. Ron K. has an AMAZING piece up on Autographalert.com on the rather difficult signature of Mordecai Brown. He was a great writer for SCD, but SCD let him go...because his honest articles about baseball subjects (analyzing autographs) were upsetting the advertisers. Yet another reason for the public to turn their back on this once prominent hobby periodical.<br /><br />DJ <br /><br /><br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>J. McMurry</b><p>Yep,<br />The Ron K. articles are the only things I've ever cut out and saved from past issues of SCD.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Bill Panagopulos</b><p>Still love this string...<br /><br />John, I see that Mastro accepts no returns on autographs at all, Hunt will with a dissenting opinion within 60 days, Lelands declares it is the final arbiter of any dispute, and Sotheby's, contrary to your post, will refund your purchase price against good evidence that an items is a forgery (I know - I've tested the system). It's vitally important that bidders READ and UNDERSTAND the terms of sale and any implied warrantees PRIOR to bidding. Of course, how these houses guarantee their material has absolutely nothing to do with how I guarantee my material. I didn't mean to say these companies are not trustworthy, not legitimate, or anything else negative. Perhaps you misunderstood what I was trying to say. What I meant to say was that an auctioneer that guarantees his material for the life of the buyer obviously has a lot more on the table, money-wise and reputation-wise, than one who is free and clear once the hammer come down. But everyone is free to run their business any way they choose...<br /><br />Matt - to answer your question, in all honesty, I think I've processed perhaps two hundred or so returns in all of the lots I've sold. The majority of those were returned because of differences in how we described the item's condition. Now, our stated policy of "two well qualified" should have been stated as "mutually acceptable", though to skeptics the effect is the same. But, believe it or not, we make our money on repeat customers, not the one or two we could, if we were so disposed, cheat out of a lousy couple hundred dollars. A good reputation travels at a snail's pace, a bad reputation travels at the speed of light. In actuality, if there is a good, reasonable, supportable doubt that an item is bad, it's out and the refund check gets put in the mail. Who wants an argument? Frankly, we don't need the money THAT badly. But of course, if an item IS real, and three or four PADA members or an equal number of qualified experts stand by it (NOT forensic experts, STAT, et al), then we have to defend the interests of our consignors. Ethically that's our obligation. <br /><br />Also, bear in mind I deal with historic Americana, not baseball. Baseball "cuts" and signed balls don't use parchment or fancy metal type or watermarked paper. Baseball forgers only have to go to eBay, buy old baseballs (and think about tracking some of those buyers, fellas!), and slap black ink on a dirty old baseball. Easy!<br /><br />And DK - the site is collectspace.com. A great watchdog over space forgeries.<br /><br />This string is getting tons of publicity. Don't delude yourselves thinking you'll ever hear from Chris Morales. Doubt he ever set foot in Mongolia...maybe the Vince Lombardi Rest Area on the Jersey Turnpike...<br /><br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>shelly jaffe</b><p>I would like to thank DJ for the nice things he said about me. <br />Now is the time for Mr. Morales to show up and make his case. I will be posting some interesting new things about Mr. Morales in the next few days. I really hope that someone on here makes sure he gets all the info. The same goes for the two geniuses at STAT. Come on boys show us just how smart you are.<br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>J. McMurry</b><p>Question for you Auction guys.<br /><br /> Have you ever had a return come back that was damaged or tampered with by the buyer? <br /><br />If so, what did / would you do?<br /><br />Thanks

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>shelly jaffe</b><p>As I said to you last night there would be more about Mr. Morales. Well here it is.<br />Sir<br /> <br />This is to confirm the telephone conversation held on Wednesday February 13, 2008 at approximately 12 Noon regrading employment of Christopher Morales. We have no record of Christopher Morales ever being employed by the Department of Forensic Science at George Washington University. Further, part time faculty, currently referred to as Professorial Lecturers do not serve as advisor's to students. It is our understanding that Mr. Morales was a student here. Though we offer in course in questioned document examination, it does not qualify an attendee to become a document examiner. Question document examination is a field that requires on the job training, of approximately two years in a specialized laboratory before an individual is qualified to become a certified document examiner.<br /> <br />Professionals in the field belong to the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, in the Question Document Section and many are diplomats of the American Board of Forensic Document Examination. Checking the 2007 membership directory of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences indicates that Christopher Morales is a member of the General Section. According to the AAFS web site document examination is not within that concentration, before the creation of the digital evidence section this year, computer crime investigators, image enhancement specialists and forensic computer specialists were in that section. Professor Vincze our Director of the High Technology Crime Investigation was in that section. She has since been moved to Digital Evidence. Thus, there is no indication from membership in the AAFS that Mr. Morales has specialized credentials what would justify his identification as a document examiner.<br /> <br />This is the information that I can provide you at this time. Please feel free to contact me should you have further questions.<br /> <br />M. Schanfield, Ph.D.<br />Professor and Chair<br />Department of Forensic Science-GWU<br /><br />Perhaps now we will hear from the silent Mr. Morales<br /> <br />This is directly from his own web site.<br /><br />Faculty Advisor and Adjunct Faculty Member, Forensic Science Department, George Washington University (GWU) I served as an adjunct professor in both the graduate Forensic Science and Security Management programs. I also served a term as advisor for the security management graduate degree students.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Gene Palmer</b><p>The plot thickens. This would make a good Seinfeld episode.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Richard S. Simon</b><p>To quote an old line from the TV show Laugh In:<br /><br />"verrrrrrry interesting"<br /><br />--<br /><br />I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.<br />Unknown author <br />--<br />We made a promise. We swore we'd always remember.<br />No retreat baby, no surrender.<br />The Boss

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Al Simeone</b><p>Shelly,<br />Keep digging! It looks to me that no one is throwing the dirt over the top of you now! You have made so great points. And hit some nerves along the way. And Jodi wanted this thread deleted! Shame Jodi Shame!!

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>john</b><p>The letter from the GWU prof. is interesting. What's so strange is that I did exactly what Shelly did, a few months back, called GWU to confirm Morales credentials. I was given completely different information. I spoke to the dean of the department's secretary who indeed confirmed his previous employment with GWU. They even told me exactly when he taught there. If my memory is correct, they said he was there as an adjunct faculty member between 92 thru 97 or 98. She said he advised in 1997 (I may be off one year). Strange indeed. The woman was helpful and even offered to send me an old faculty book with him listed in it. I declined. If I were in his shoes, I'd be on the phone with this guy.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>shelly jaffe</b><p>This is the kind of emails I get everyday from people that can't stand the truth.<br />Jailbird,<br />Quick this is an emergency!!! Make a post! Our thread is dying! Spread more lies like the last one about Morales background.<br />Fellow ******* Simple Simon<br />I guess the head of Forensic Science at GWU has to lie for me. By the way his email is Paxcalm@aol.com <br /> <br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Al Simeone</b><p>Looks to me that another phone call is in order to GWU. Sounds like the right hand didnt know what the left hand was doing!!!

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>shelly jaffe</b><p>That is not true. The head of both departments have said that Mr Morales did not teach there. The right hand has proof the left hand has a secretary.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>shelly jaffe</b><p>There comes a time to throw up your hands and say enough. I have done more to find out the truth about these guys than anyone on this site. Know I am called out by some one who talked to a secretary. You can believe the head of a Department or John.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>shelly jaffe</b><p>John - The letter I posted on this thread came from the Chairman of the Department of Forensic Science at GWU, Dr. M. Schanfield.. Don't you think he would know if Mr Morales had been on the faculty?<br />In addition I spoke to Dr. Eva Vincze who was the head of the department at the time Mr Morales was supposed to be there. She has no knowledge of him.<br />I sent Mr Morales' resume, by e mail, to Dr Vincze and Dr. Schanfield.<br />I also spoke to Barbara and Shondra in the registrars office. I also spoke to people in Human Resources and payroll. They confirmed the information, pertaining to Mr Morales' employment, that is in the letter from Dr. Schanfield.<br />I am very curious, John, why you were investigating Mr Morales. Were you suspicious of Mr Morales? If so, what specifically made you suspicious? Serious autograph collectors don't buy items with his COA. You are a serious autograph collector/dealer. Would you buy items with his COA? If you would not, then why were you investigating him, instead of just ignoring him?<br />Why did you settle for talking to a secretary? Why didn't you pursue this further if you were so interested in Mr. Morales? Why didn't you post this information in this thread earlier?<br />Did that secretary tell you that "there is no indication from membership in the AAFS that Mr. Morales has specialized credentials what would justify his identification as a document examiner." Well, the head of the department wrote that to me in the letter I posted earlier.<br />I talked to two department heads and several others in the school. Is that the way you conduct an investigation, by talking to a secretary, when department heads are available to talk to? Are you saying that two department heads gave me false information?<br />Perhaps you can check with people in the school again. They were all very helpful to me. <br />Check again, with the school, and post your findings here.<br />John, I consider what I did to be very thorough and complete. Do you really think that you did the same? Do you think for one second that the heads of two departments at GWU would lie?<br />Do you think that you used due diligence in your investigation?<br />Perhaps you should just allow Mr Morales to defend himself here. After all, that is why I started this thread. I will say this again don't you think if this is a lie that Morales can come on this site and defend himself?<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /><br /><br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Al Simeone</b><p>I believe you Shelly and the head of the Dept.Thats why I think another call might be in order.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Bill Panagopulos</b><p>Shelly,<br /><br />I have to assume that the message you posted is one that you received either via email or snail mailand is transcribed verbatim, versus something you heard over a telephone line. If that's correct, and the source of the email/letter can was verified, you pretty much have a bulletproof piece of evidence. And If I had to choose between your (written) account and a recollection of a telephone conversation a year ago with a secretary of a dean..well, there's no question which one holds more sway.<br /><br />In my eyes, looks like misrepresentation. But I'm no lawyer. Maybe a real tort lawyer could fill us in.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>john</b><p>Shelly-I don't think anyone is lying to you, just misinformed. The woman I spoke with was very detailed. She supplied those years of employment to me in a matter of two calls. I initially contacted them because I was told that his website and resume was not accurate. I contacted Krause. They did not care. Once they confirmed that he was there in the 90's, I dropped the ball and didn't pursue it any further. Krause told me to get back with them if I had factual info. At hat point, i had nothing to give them. I wouldn't call my two phone calls an investigation by any means but I believe what I was told...she had to much exact information. Has anyone called him or emailed him the letter you have?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>shelly jaffe</b><p>Called who?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>shelly jaffe</b><p><br />John, I would think that a man of Morales stature would be able to defend himself. I do appreciate your concern that two heads of the department that he worked for don't remember him or that Human Recourses and the Payroll department have no record of him. I think that they are really open for a law suit if what they are e mailing me is not true. At this point I have to trust what they have told and e mailed me. If Morales worked for GW he should have proof. If he has such proof let him post it on his own website. I notice that he post some of his credentials on site so adding a few more is no problem. I will trust the head of two departments before I trust a person you talked to.<br />More important whether worked he there or not is the fact he is not a qualified hand writing expert. That was stated by the current department head. <br />Now it is your turn. Show me proof that all these people are wrong.<br /> <br />What is most important in all of this is the following statement.<br /> <br /> there is no indication from membership in the AAFS that Mr. Morales has specialized credentials what would justify his identification as a document examiner. I feel that this is where the truth comes out. Is he qualified to be an expert. If so why is he not rated so by the AAFS.<br /> <br /><br /><br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>shelly jaffe</b><p>If anyone on here has Morales email site I would love to have it I can’t find it on his web site. I want to make sure that this thread reaches him. <br /><br />I also want to bring out a strange coincidence. When I fist started this tread it was interrupted by Micah telling all of you how bad a person I am. . It turns out that Micah’s employer was John. Now that I have evidence against Morales it is strange to see that Mr. Morales has another defender. I don’t want to say that this is strange but I will. It is no other but John. I think it is time for John to step down and let Morales state his case. I am tired of Three Card Monte. <br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>shelly jaffe</b><p>John, you did not mention in your first post that you talked to the person a least two times. You also did not mention the persons name. I know when I called the first thing I did is ask who I am talking to. I am sure that tomorrow you will be able to give us her name telephone number and who she works for.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>stefan</b><p>i would like to stand by jodi birkholm as he the most knowledgeable autograph expert i know. anything he says as far a im concerned is legitate he is by far the most expireneced person i know when it comes to weird autos and the best part is he knows half the people personally great guy and i agree with him 100% percent. no dis on anyone else in the game but he knows his stuff

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Sean C</b><p>If you are looking for his email, it appears to be here:<br /><br /><a href="http://www.moralesforensics.com/" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.moralesforensics.com/</a><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />========================<br />Re: Open letter to STAT and Christopher Morales February 13 2008, 11:30 PM <br /><br /><br />If anyone on here has Morales email site I would love to have it I can’t find it on his web site. I want to make sure that this thread reaches him. <br /><br />I also want to bring out a strange coincidence. When I fist started this tread it was interrupted by Micah telling all of you how bad a person I am. . It turns out that Micah’s employer was John. Now that I have evidence against Morales it is strange to see that Mr. Morales has another defender. I don’t want to say that this is strange but I will. It is no other but John. I think it is time for John to step down and let Morales state his case. I am tired of Three Card Monte. <br />============================ <br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>J. McMurry</b><p>The following is from Morale's web site:<br /><br />An Open Challenge <br />"As noted herein, I will meet anyone in a public forum to review and assess my work efforts. Since private communications are often cherry picked to bolster a point of view, at times misdirecting the facts, it is my position that any meetings and communications be conduct in the open. If anyone desires to contact me concerning an open forum, please do not hesitate to call, email or otherwise contact me at anytime." <br /><br /><br /> Good opportunity here Mr. Morales, to come in and discuss the above.<br /><br /><br /><br />Note to Chris,<br /> Forensic examiners had nothing to do with the down fall of Shelly, everyone who read the book knows it was Wayne Bray turning informer.<br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>john</b><p>Shelly,<br /><br />I woke up this morning and was surprised at the tone of your posts. I am not a defender of Morales. I do not know him. I would love as much as you do see him come on this site and answer questions that have been asked. This is what gets me:<br /><br />"I also want to bring out a strange coincidence. When I fist started this tread it was interrupted by Micah telling all of you how bad a person I am. . It turns out that Micah’s employer was John. Now that I have evidence against Morales it is strange to see that Mr. Morales has another defender. I don’t want to say that this is strange but I will. It is no other but John."<br /><br />If you go back and read my first post, I started by saying I was the former employeer of Micah. You have a hightened sense of paranoia it seems. If you read Micah's posts, he is not a defender of Morales. He had a personal problem with you that I felt was amicably resolved by me stepping in. <br /><br />In life, you attract a lot more bees with honey. I would love to see Morales and STAT come here and have open, educated dialogue as much as anyone. I just don't think that will happen if there is false information posted. It gives them ammo to not come on here. <br /><br />I emailed Morales this morning and left a phone message. I copied and pasted the letter from the prof. at GWU so, let's see what happens.<br /><br />I don't have a name and number of who I spoke with. It was a simple call. I introduced myself, said I was calling to verify employment for a poential employee. I gave the woman Morales' name. She called me back a day or two later and gave me the information I posted earlier. I do not keep phone logs of names or numbers. It was a simple phone call and I thought nothing more of it until I read the post. I can't imagine that someone would have had such detailed information and offered to send me an old alumni directory with his name in it. <br /><br />I didn't mean to rain on your parade and was only posting what I found in my own call. My initial call was made because I was told by another major authenticator that Morales never worked for the Secret Service. I called Krause and spoke my concerns about CC and Morales. They were not interested to hear rumors and asked to call back with any factual information. After my call to GWU, I lost interest in the matter. <br /><br />Shelly, you and I had this conversation on the phone about my client not being able to get funds back from CC. I told you how I got involved. This call between us was two weeks ago. Remember????

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>john</b><p>Shelly-<br />I received an immediate response from Morales. This is his response.<br /><br /><br /><br />"Mr. Rogers -<br /><br />Thank you for bringing the matter to my attention. <br /><br />I understand your concerns, and concur with you statements. I have, indeed, worked at GWU, and have made contact with the University to correct the matter.<br /><br />The individual who wrote the letter was not at the University while I was there, and up until his note, I had never heard of him.<br /><br />I will forward you any response I get from the University once I receive it. For now, I am attaching my GWU faculty id card and a copy of my 1997 1099 from GWU. For security purposes, I have not included my ssn or salary."<br /><br /><br /><a href="http://s217.photobucket.com/albums/cc179/Jrscards/?action=view¤t=Agwu-1.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc179/Jrscards/Agwu-1.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a><br /><br /><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1203168232.JPG"> <br /><br />edited scan size

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>shelly jaffe</b><p>I stand by the letter that was sent to me by the head of the department where he said he worked. I would be interested in just where he preformed his duties. <br />I wrote on this thread exactly what was told to me by GWU. If they where wrong in what they told me I will retract my statements. I will wait to hear from Mr Morales. I will say this again, John this thread was for Morales and STAT. I answered his questions that he had on his site. He personally has yet to come forward. I think it is his time to come on here and present his case and not have some one else do it for him.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>john</b><p>Shelly,<br /><br />I would love to see STAT, CC, and Morales all come on here. I made that clear in my email to him.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>J. McMurry</b><p>Dang! It would take me a month to dig up an 11yr old 1099, if I had one at all.<br /><br /> Should Mr. Morales be judged more on his Resume, or his overall body of work as related to autograph authenication?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>shelly jaffe</b><p>J McMurry, I must tell you that you are wrong about the Forensic experts. They where the cause for my being arrested. Let me tell you why. When all of this started we had no idea how important it would be to get things authenticated. After we found Prouty(forensic document service), Fragaipani,AAU and others to authenticate our garbage it became easy to sell them. When the market became flooded with these items Wayne heard that the FBI was about to make a bust on the operation. He decided that it was time to go to the FBI and protect himself. So it was the forensic experts that caused me to be arrested.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>shelly jaffe</b><p>I hope to have a chart showing when Morales and STAT authenticate an item for CC versus what a similar item goes for in Hunt's, Mastro's and other major auction houses. <br />This thread was started because Mr. Morales challenged people to dispute his claims. I did that at the start. I do hope he comes on this site so he can reply to my statements at the top of this thread and not have someone do it for him.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Ed Hans</b><p>The 1099 explains the discrepancy between the Prof's information and the Secretary's. 1099s are issued to subcontractors-that is non-employees who perform services, for which they receive compensation, for an organization. Bona fide employees, as defined by federal statute, received W-2s annually to report their income. The prof undoubtedly had access only to employment records, while the secretary probably remembered Morales as an independent contractor and was able to find the records outside of the standard employment reports.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>J Levine</b><p>Just to be a pain...it would take me five minutes to create and send that same card with my name and picture on it as well.<br /><br />As to the 1099...it is not a salary. With nothing listed on it saying salary, it could have been for anything including payment for tending the university garden. I have a 1099 from my university in 1995 for the $162 I was paid in helping fix a water heater in the physics department!<br /><br />Proves nothing...<br /><br />I would be far more impressed if Mr. Morales stopped going through a third person and just defended himself.<br /><br />Joshua

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>I only have one question for Mr. Morales - Why don't you buy everything in the Coach's Corner auctions and consign them to Mastro/Rea/Leland's et cetera?<br /><br />And for the record I will also echo the thoughts on Jodi Birkholm....I do not know why he wanted the thread deleted, but I can tell you he is one of the more helpful members of this forum. A lot of people don't see it though because I think he prefers to email people with his info rather than post it to the forum. He knows more about obscure major leaguers than anyone I've ever encountered on the net.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>shelly jaffe</b><p>The auction will feature investment grade, museum quality artifacts, writings and autographs of The Beatles besides George Harrison’s sister, Louise’s, personal copy of the LP “Meet The Beatles” album hand signed at the time by all four Beatles and given to her on the train to their first US concert in Washington D.C. It is expected to fetch in excess of $100,000. It is one of fewer than ten US signed Beatles albums known to exist. It is the rarest and most desirable example of an autographed Beatles album ever offered for sale, with unparalleled authenticity from Louise Harrison.<br /><br /> "Beatles" hand signed/custom framed & "Stat" certified record album. $763 CC price. <br /><br /> "The Beatles" band signed/custom framed "STAT" LP album!!! $338<br /><br />Boy it pays to buy a STAT authentic piece. You can buy two autographed albums and save $99.000.00

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>shelly jaffe</b><p>Baseball; Walter Johnson; single-signed; slightly faded but clearly legible autograph in blue ink; $4,800. This is from auction report.<br /><br /> Walter Johnson Senators single-signed "Morales" baseball. 866 This is from CC.<br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>john</b><p>PSA DNA GRADED MINT 9 RUTH BALL. 150,000 PRIVATE SALE Memory Lane Inc.<br />Mint Ruth single 2380 CC auction<br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>J. McMurry</b><p>Shelly,<br /><br />In my last post I was referring to the following statement posted on CM's website:<br /><br />"Interestingly, the "star witness" has expressed disdain for "forensic experts," presumably because such people were instrumental in his conviction."<br /><br /> I could have misinterpreted it,I dunno. Felt like CM was trying to align Forensic Examiners with the "good guys" of law enforcement. <br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>shelly jaffe</b><p>J McMurry, I was being sarcastic. I hate those guys. If it was not for them we could never have sold what we did. They had nothing to do with my arrest. You are one hundred percent correct. Wayne turned in 36 people not the(forensic experts) that is what they call themselves.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>shelly jaffe</b><p>Home &gt; HISTORICAL BASEBALL &gt; LOU GEHRIG SIGNED BAT<br />LOU GEHRIG SIGNED BAT<br />LOU GEHRIG SIGNED BAT<br />Item# lou-gehrig-signed-bat<br />Regular price: $25,000.00<br />Sale price: $15,000.00<br />Product Description<br />THIS OLD BAT IS SIGNED BY LOU GEHRIG AND COMES WITH AN AUTHNETICTION FROM TWO DIFFERENT AUTHENTICATORS. AAU and Christopher Morales. <br /><br /><br />Palm Beach Man Sells Lou Gehrig Bat For $72,000<br />Bat Listing Creates Frenzy On eBay<br /><br />I just can't understand why this bat has not sold.