John Rogers Home and Business Searched by the FBI

[calvindog]

Well, I just hope he didn't have any loose Wagners in the couch cushions. Those FBI agents can sometimes get sticky fingers.

http://www.arkansasbusiness.com/article/96816/fbi-searches-john-rogers-business-home

[WhenItWasAHobby]

It's odd that no reason was given for the search. The FBI probably wanted to quietly seize that big stash of those vintage J. Edgar Hoover cross-dressing photos.

[slidekellyslide]

It's odd that no reason was given for the search. The FBI probably wanted to quietly seize that big stash of those vintage J. Edgar Hoover cross-dressing photos.

I didn't know that two of his employees were busted for stealing from him...perhaps they told the FBI something that sent them in there?

[WhenItWasAHobby]

I didn't know that two of his employees were busted for stealing from him...perhaps they told the FBI something that sent them in there?

Reading between the lines of the article, you make a compelling hypothesis.

[teetwoohsix]

It's odd that no reason was given for the search. The FBI probably wanted to quietly seize that big stash of those vintage J. Edgar Hoover cross-dressing photos.

I have never heard of this guy, but on the point of not putting the reason you are searching someone's home or business on the search warrant.......is that legal? We can search your home or business, but you don't get to know why?

I'm not a lawyer, but something seems wrong about that.

Sincerely, Clayton

[calvindog]

It's fairly obvious they've searched these premises for evidence of a crime. At this point, putting a broad criminal statute on a search warrant will hardly provide any information of what the specific purpose of the search is. I'm sure his lawyer called the prosecutor and has learned all that needs to be known at this time.

It's a pretty horrible thing to happen but I have had times where the FBI has searched a premises for two straight days and no charges were ever brought. And I wouldn't wish this on anyone.

[slidekellyslide]

It's fairly obvious they've searched these premises for evidence of a crime.

I wonder what they took?

[teetwoohsix]

I understand. I just thought that in order to obtain a search warrant, the first step would be to go to a judge with your evidence that a crime has been committed, and you have reason to suspect that evidence is within the home or business. The judge signs off on it, and the search warrant is written up with the details of the evidence they are looking for.

In this fashion, it seems as though they can just be "looking for whatever", instead of "looking for something in particular".

I do know that this would be incredibly embarrassing- two days of searching with no charges brought- amazing.

Sincerely, Clayton

[calvindog]

Of course, the warrant specifies what can be taken. But the materials identified are often very broad: computers, correspondence, financial records, etc.

[teetwoohsix]

Thanks. I was confused on the "sealed" part.

I figured a "sealed" warrant would make sense in something like a murder case, where they had information obtained but not released to the public- that way if they didn't find it, the killer still wouldn't know they had this evidence. But, I thought that was usually the only time sealed warrants were used.....

Sounds like this guy must have some interesting photo's though :)

Sincerely, Clayton

[Exhibitman]

"I have had times where the FBI has searched a premises for two straight days"

Like an IRS audit without the glitz...

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

Thanks. I was confused on the "sealed" part.

I figured a "sealed" warrant would make sense in something like a murder case, where they had information obtained but not released to the public- that way if they didn't find it, the killer still wouldn't know they had this evidence. But, I thought that was usually the only time sealed warrants were used.....

Sounds like this guy must have some interesting photo's though :)

Sincerely, Clayton

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

[RichardSimon]

Seems like some here are watching too much Law & Order SVU :D:D.

[teetwoohsix]

Seems like some here are watching too much Law & Order SVU :D:D.

:D I've never watched one episode of that show in my life-seriously.

Sincerely, Clayton

[teetwoohsix]

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]

..

[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.

[Brian Van Horn]

Seems like some here are watching too much Law & Order SVU :D:D.

OK, I'll go for the cheap joke.

Richard,

Given it's both home and business, didn't you mean Law and Order SUV? :D

[teetwoohsix]

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 :D

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

Fife and drum on the way....

Sincerely, Clayton

[Peter_Spaeth]

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]

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/fbi-seize-items-from-rogers-photo-archive-in-nlr/36828/_wwNQYnebkaynUTfVrtA2g

[Peter_Spaeth]

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/fbi-seize-items-from-rogers-photo-archive-in-nlr/36828/_wwNQYnebkaynUTfVrtA2g

Perhaps the definition of WMD is expanding.

[shernan30]

Maybe he bought the bats from Gibson?!?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[oldjudge]

Wasn't the Wagner that Rogers bought the one that was auctioned off in Goldin Auctions last year?

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

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]

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

[calvindog]

"Sealed" pertains to the public.

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

[slidekellyslide]

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.

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

"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]

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]

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]

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.

[calvindog]

Btw, weren't John Rogers AND Doug Allen speakers at the Net 54 dinner at past Nationals? Who is speaking this year -- Bernie Madoff?

Full disclosure: I've never been asked to speak at the dinner.

[Leon]

Btw, weren't John Rogers AND Doug Allen speakers at the Net 54 dinner at past Nationals? Who is speaking this year -- Bernie Madoff?

Full disclosure: I've never been asked to speak at the dinner.

No, actually you are wrong. John has never spoken at a dinner.

Neither have you and I am sure it will stay that way.

[calvindog]

No, actually you are wrong. John has never spoken at a dinner.

Neither have you and I am sure it will stay that way.

Good, I don't want to go to prison!

[Leon]

Good, I don't want to go to prison!


Speaking at a dinner isn't against the law, just in case you don't know.

For the record Mike Okeefe, Mike Berkus, Peter Calderon, several Beckett employees and many others have been speakers before. I don't see any of them having legal issues. No Jeff, most in the hobby are good people. The others will get rooted out and all hobbyists should be appreciative of your efforts (seriously) on helping prevent fraud. I too, try my best to help.....

[calvindog]

Speaking at a dinner isn't against the law, just in case you don't know.

For the record Mike Okeefe, Mike Berkus, Peter Calderon, several Beckett employees and many others have been speakers before. I don't see any of them having legal issues. No Jeff, most in the hobby are good people. The others will get rooted out and all hobbyists should be appreciative of your efforts (seriously) on helping prevent fraud. I too, try my best to help.....

Of that group, you may want to check again.

And Rogers was asked to speak at a dinner but pulled out; I guess he didn't want to incriminate himself :)

[Sunny]

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.

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/iteam/2011/06/peter-nash-claims-hes-getting-help-from-sports-memorabilia-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]

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/iteam/2011/06/peter-nash-claims-hes-getting-help-from-sports-memorabilia-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! :D

Peter Nash keeping the hobby safe as long as there’s no mirror around. :)

[wonkaticket]

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]

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...

[tbob]

I remember Rogers coming to the Net 54 Board a while ago to comment on posts which detailed his flipping a T206 Honus Wagner he purchased. Maybe someone with better computer skills than I possess can pull up that old thread ;)

[4815162342]

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=90460

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=91558

[sylbry]

I wonder what they took?

"About a year ago, two of Rogers’ former employees pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit wire fraud for diverting funds from customers to their own Paypal accounts. Christopher Jackson and Steve Roby also stole thousands of photographs from Rogers and sold many on eBay, according to government prosecutors.

Jackson received a 33-month prison sentence and two years of supervised release. He was ordered to pay more than $138,000 in restitution. Roby was sentenced last July to a year and a half in prison, a year of supervised release and $138,000 in restitution."

http://www.sportscollectorsdaily.com/fbi-agents-search-rogers-photo-archive/

[WhenItWasAHobby]

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...

True, but in a similar way, it's a well attested fact that one can file a criminal complaint with the FBI at the very least out of brazen stupidity for lack of knowledge of the law or more likely out of malicious retaliation.

Case in point. In August 2004 a sportscard collector gave an Ebay seller negative feedback because the seller didn't disclose problems with the cards. After Ebay dispute resolution and Square Trade failed, the seller asked buyer, "What would it take to remove the negative feedback". The buyer replied, "How about $500?". A short time later, the collector, who works out of his house, gets a surprise visit from two FBI agents who were responding to a criminal extortion complaint. The collector chose not to answer any questions and lawyered-up. Supposedly once the collector's lawyer showed the agents the e-mail exchanges, according to the collector, the agents immediately dropped the investigation and supposedly shook their heads in disgust. Allegedly according to the seller, the FBI contacted the collector and warned him that his actions "were dangerously close to extortion and mail fraud". Go figure which side is to believed.

[benjulmag]

True, but in a similar way, it's a well attested fact that one can file a criminal complaint with the FBI at the very least out of brazen stupidity for lack of knowledge of the law or more likely out of malicious retaliation.

I am not a criminal lawyer so I know little about this. Are you saying that if a person feels another person has committed a crime, by filing a criminal complaint with the FBI he can compel the FBI to open a criminal investigation and, as part of the process, obtain a search warrant? That sets off a lot of bells to my common sense meter.

[RichardSimon]

True, but in a similar way, it's a well attested fact that one can file a criminal complaint with the FBI at the very least out of brazen stupidity for lack of knowledge of the law or more likely out of malicious retaliation.

Case in point. In August 2004 a sportscard collector gave an Ebay seller negative feedback because the seller didn't disclose problems with the cards. After Ebay dispute resolution and Square Trade failed, the seller asked buyer, "What would it take to remove the negative feedback". The buyer replied, "How about $500?". A short time later, the collector, who works out of his house, gets a surprise visit from two FBI agents who were responding to a criminal extortion complaint. The collector chose not to answer any questions and lawyered-up. Supposedly once the collector's lawyer showed the agents the e-mail exchanges, according to the collector, the agents immediately dropped the investigation and supposedly shook their heads in disgust. Allegedly according to the seller, the FBI contacted the collector and warned him that his actions "were dangerously close to extortion and mail fraud". Go figure which side is to believed.


Sounds pretty amazing that the FBI would be involved in a case involving $500, they usually do not act until there are lots of zeroes in the number.

[wonkaticket]

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=114597

Maybe they were just searching for his less fun Wagner? It’s so hard to keep track of things these days who knows. :D

[Peter_Spaeth]

Doesn't seem likely John will give us his perspective.

nyyanksghr nyyanksghr is offline
member

Send Message User Lists Last Activity: 04-11-2010 02:32 PM

[WhenItWasAHobby]

I am not a criminal lawyer so I know little about this. Are you saying that if a person feels another person has committed a crime, by filing a criminal complaint with the FBI he can compel the FBI to open a criminal investigation and, as part of the process, obtain a search warrant? That sets off a lot of bells to my common sense meter.

Sounds pretty amazing that the FBI would be involved in a case involving $500, they usually do not act until there are lots of zeroes in the number.

I'm not a criminal nor civil lawyer myself and I agree with you Richard from my own personal experience that the amount shouldn't have triggered an investigation. The big problem with this incident is that it is not known what was written or said in the complaint to the FBI but it's rather safe to say that some of the salient issues were either greatly "trumped up" or omitted.

[wonkaticket]

I am not a criminal lawyer so I know little about this. Are you saying that if a person feels another person has committed a crime, by filing a criminal complaint with the FBI he can compel the FBI to open a criminal investigation and, as part of the process, obtain a search warrant? That sets off a lot of bells to my common sense meter.

I agree Corey seems a little to easy to send the FBI on wild goose....you know :confused:

[calvindog]

Well, I wish John: 1) all the luck in the world with this investigation; and 2) that when he lies as badly as he did in the thread Wonka posted above that he's not under oath, subject to the penalties of perjury.


http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5489/12228857306_b8eb4791b0_c.jpg (http://flic.kr/p/jCC6em)

[wonkaticket]

Well, I wish John: 1) all the luck in the world with this investigation; and 2) that when he lies as badly as he did in the thread Wonka posted above that he's not under oath, subject to the penalties of perjury.


http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5489/12228857306_b8eb4791b0_c.jpg (http://flic.kr/p/jCC6em)

Come on Jeff sometimes things just slip our minds lighten up. :D

Drives me crazy when I forget that I sell million dollar baseball cards....ughhh I promised myself I would stop doing that in 2014 I hope I can keep this resolution this time fingers crossed. :rolleyes:

[slidekellyslide]

"About a year ago, two of Rogers’ former employees pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit wire fraud for diverting funds from customers to their own Paypal accounts. Christopher Jackson and Steve Roby also stole thousands of photographs from Rogers and sold many on eBay, according to government prosecutors.

Jackson received a 33-month prison sentence and two years of supervised release. He was ordered to pay more than $138,000 in restitution. Roby was sentenced last July to a year and a half in prison, a year of supervised release and $138,000 in restitution."

http://www.sportscollectorsdaily.com/fbi-agents-search-rogers-photo-archive/

I should have been clearer..I was wondering what the FBI took with them the other day...another article stated that it appeared to be baseball bats inside boxes.

[wonkaticket]

I should have been clearer..I was wondering what the FBI took with them the other day...another article stated that it appeared to be baseball bats inside boxes.

Oh no I hope it wasn't those Ruth and Gehrig bats that he came out of the woodwork from his eBay listing. :D

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

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/iteam/2011/06/peter-nash-claims-hes-getting-help-from-sports-memorabilia-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.

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

I am not a criminal lawyer so I know little about this. Are you saying that if a person feels another person has committed a crime, by filing a criminal complaint with the FBI he can compel the FBI to open a criminal investigation and, as part of the process, obtain a search warrant? That sets off a lot of bells to my common sense meter.

I have practiced as a prosecutor. By filing a criminal complaint you are putting law enforcement on notice of the allegations. They will likely look into the allegations but cannot be compelled to pursue a search warrant.

[WhenItWasAHobby]

I have practiced as a prosecutor. By filing a criminal complaint you are putting law enforcement on notice of the allegations. They will likely look into the allegations but cannot be compelled to pursue a search warrant.

Best to my knowledge there was no search warrant when the FBI arrived to question the person.

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

Best to my knowledge there was no search warrant when the FBI arrived to question the person.

You don't need a warrant to talk to a person.

[edjs]

Sounds pretty amazing that the FBI would be involved in a case involving $500, they usually do not act until there are lots of zeroes in the number.

I don't know a lot about the law, but I believe it is not the dollar amount that involves the FBI, rather the type of crime involved. When someone robbed the title and loan company by my house, all they got was petty cash. It was considered a bank robbery, and the FBI had to do the investigation over something like $50.

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

I don't know a lot about the law, but I believe it is not the dollar amount that involves the FBI, rather the type of crime involved. When someone robbed the title and loan company by my house, all they got was petty cash. It was considered a bank robbery, and the FBI had to do the investigation over something like $50.

That is correct. The FBI is charged with investigating federal offenses. The dollar amount would relate to the possible crime and not the jurisdiction of the FBI.

[Sunny]

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.

[calvindog]

The Big House?

[slidekellyslide]

Hmmm...Day 2 since this story broke and still nothing on Haulsofshame.

[wonkaticket]

I guess they could still arrange sleep overs...

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/net54shared/Jails_3_.jpg

[wonkaticket]

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/net54shared/huge/John%20Rogers%20article%20in%20Coaches%20Corner.jp g

Hmmm…Coaches Corner….memorabilia….connected to a person known and accused for bogus memorabilia….loans money to said person…part owner of a major auction house…auction house pays rent of said person…auction house under investigation/trial for fraud….FBI warrants at your place of work…ehhh I’m sure it’s all just a big misunderstanding.

[slidekellyslide]

There's only one reason someone consigns something to CC...they know it's a fake.

[Sunny]

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/net54shared/huge/John%20Rogers%20article%20in%20Coaches%20Corner.jp g

Hmmm…Coaches Corner….memorabilia….connected to a person known and accused for bogus memorabilia….loans money to said person…part owner of a major auction house…auction house pays rent of said person…auction house under investigation/trial for fraud….FBI warrants at your place of work…ehhh I’m sure it’s all just a big misunderstanding.

Very interesting, John Rogers consigned a Babe Ruth and Lou Gehrig signed baseball to Coach's Corner. Now that says it all!

[wonkaticket]

There's only one reason someone consigns something to CC...they know it's a fake.

Dan if that’s the case where would a guy like Rogers obtain such questionable merchandise to consign to Coaches Corner? It’s not like he’s connected or knows of anyone that could provide such merchandise, has business dealings with a person who could supply such items. Or even has been accused of supplying such merchandise to the market.I can’t seem piece this one together. :confused:

Hopefully the hard hitting investigative journalism of The Hauls of Shame headed up by hobby white knight Peter Nash can add this to “Operation Bambino” and his other deep investigative reports.

[slidekellyslide]

Dan if that’s the case where would a guy like Rogers obtain such questionable merchandise to consign to Coaches Corner? It’s not like he’s connected or knows of anyone that could provide such merchandise, has business dealings with a person who could supply such items. Or even has been accused of supplying such merchandise to the market.I can’t seem piece this one together. :confused:

Hopefully the hard hitting investigative journalism of The Hauls of Shame headed up by hobby white knight Peter Nash can add this to “Operation Bambino” and his other deep investigative reports.

I know, right? I'm biting my nails waiting for that hard hitting piece of journalism to come forth.

PS where did Travis Roste go? Anyone seen him around?

[oldjudge]

Coaches Corner? This is hilarious!
Question: when Rogers bought the PSA5 MC Wagner, if I am not mistaken, Doug was handling his phone bid at the live auction. Was that one Legendary owner dealing with another?

[Exhibitman]

Jay that is a good question.

What a mess. Is there no limit to the sleaze in collecting? At long last have they no decency?

[Sunny]

Coaches Corner? This is hilarious!
Question: when Rogers bought the PSA5 MC Wagner, if I am not mistaken, Doug was handling his phone bid at the live auction. Was that one Legendary owner dealing with another?

What’s this all about? Coach’s Corner praising John Rogers for a letter he wrote about a signed Babe Ruth bat they were selling. More shocking is that the signed Babe Ruth bat is made out to the actor Gary Cooper. “It is a one of a kind, also has a letter from famous John Rogers of Arkansas, and value is truly "priceless" on this HOF worthy item.”

Famous for what? Yeah right give me a break! See link below:

http://www.myccsa.com/Lot/235/babe-ruth-yankees-hand-signed-global-gary-cooper-personal-bb-bat.aspx

[slidekellyslide]

What’s this all about? Coach’s Corner praising John Rogers for a letter he wrote about a signed Babe Ruth bat they were selling. More shocking is that the signed Babe Ruth bat is made out to the actor Gary Cooper. “It is a one of a kind, also has a letter from famous John Rogers of Arkansas, and value is truly "priceless" on this HOF worthy item.”

Famous for what? Yeah right give me a break! See link below:

http://www.myccsa.com/Lot/235/babe-ruth-yankees-hand-signed-global-gary-cooper-personal-bb-bat.aspx

Didn't realize he was in the business of authenticating signatures...this is really getting interesting.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Didn't realize he was in the business of authenticating signatures...this is really getting interesting.

He is probably as good as the people who purport to be in that business. :D

[slidekellyslide]

He is probably as good as the people who purport to be in that business. :D

No arguments from me on that, just surprised to see...really had no idea that John Rogers was mixed up with CC, and even more surprised to find out he's a partner in Legendary auctions.

[Exhibitman]

Maybe he is the criminal mastermind behind everything. Mastro shmastro, it was Mr Rogers' neighborhood.

[prestigecollectibles]

How are these crooks still in business?

[slidekellyslide]

How are these crooks still in business?

Because everything they sell comes with an opinion. How is Morales still in business?

[Leon]

Because everything they sell comes with an opinion. How is Morales still in business?

Precisely, because it is an "opinion" it's very difficult to prosecute, I believe.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Precisely, because it is an "opinion" it's very difficult to prosecute, I believe.

If it's a fraudulent opinion it's still fraud. If I know an item is not genuine, it makes no difference if I say "it's genuine" or "in my opinion, it's genuine."

[Leon]

If it's a fraudulent opinion it's still fraud. If I know an item is not genuine, it makes no difference if I say "it's genuine" or "in my opinion, it's genuine."

Sure, all you have to do is prove it's a fraudulent opinion, no problem.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Sure, all you have to do is prove it's a fraudulent opinion, no problem.

And how is that any harder or easier than proving a statement of fact was made with knowledge it was false?

[Leon]

And how is that any harder or easier than proving a statement of fact was made with knowledge it was false?

You're the one saying how easy it is, not me. And I am telling you that I have been told by the people actually doing the work that it's not easy. If it was then CC would be in hot water....(and maybe they are, I don't know)

[Peter_Spaeth]

You're the one saying how easy it is, not me. And I am telling you that I have been told by the people actually doing the work that it's not easy. If it was then CC would be in hot water....

I never said it was easy. I am saying that the language they use is not the reason it's hard, but rather that it's hard to prove a fraudulent state of mind.

[steve B]

If it's a fraudulent opinion it's still fraud. If I know an item is not genuine, it makes no difference if I say "it's genuine" or "in my opinion, it's genuine."

As a serious question, rather than an argument type question.

With something like an autograph opinion is there no leeway for incompetence?
I could express an opinion about an autograph, and put it in writing. But aside from a handful of items I own, all cheap I'd be likely to be wrong. (Unless I'm sure it's bad because the item is too new to have been signed by that person)
So If I claimed something was good and it became an issue a lack of knowledge or skill wouldn't help?

I realize there's also a difference between someone Doing that as a business and someone selling random stuff.
Just like claiming incompetence wouldn't help if I fixed something wrong and someone got hurt.

Steve B

[slidekellyslide]

I never said it was easy. I am saying that the language they use is not the reason it's hard, but rather that it's hard to prove a fraudulent state of mind.

Plus, the odds of getting a jury that knows anything at all about autographs is not good...Mr Morales taking the stand with his "FBI background in forensics" would probably make the average jury member star struck.

[Peter_Spaeth]

In a private suit if I were defending you, I would claim that because you were not holding yourself out as an expert, the plaintiff was not entitled to reasonably rely on your "opinion" or that it was not material.

[Leon]

I never said it was easy. I am saying that the language they use is not the reason it's hard, but rather that it's hard to prove a fraudulent state of mind.


I don't know about that. I think if you read one of CC's LOA's you would find a lot of verbiage making them not liable for their opinion. I haven't read one but I would bet they are pretty good at denying culpability.....

[slidekellyslide]

I don't know about that. I think if you read one of CC's LOA's you would find a lot of verbiage making them not liable for their opinion. I haven't read one but I would bet they are pretty good at denying culpability.....

I think it's quite obvious that as long as they've been running their bogus operation and the FBI hasn't already shut them down that it's been deemed not an easy task.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I don't know about that. I think if you read one of CC's LOA's you would find a lot of verbiage making them not liable for their opinion. I haven't read one but I would bet they are pretty good at denying culpability.....

That's another issue. I haven't seen one either so can't comment.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I think it's quite obvious that as long as they've been running their bogus operation and the FBI hasn't already shut them down that it's been deemed not an easy task.

Given the amount of fraud that goes on in this world, it's obviously not an easy task to build a case that will hold up on a beyond a reasonable doubt standard. Some get busted but most do not. And prosecutorial resources are scarce relative to the number of fraudsters.

[barrysloate]

Peter- here is something I don't understand, and maybe you can explain it: if I rendered an opinion on an autograph, and I got it wrong (I called a bogus autograph genuine) I agree that I could have simply given an erroneous opinion.

But if you gave me a thousand bogus autographs to authenticate, and I said all thousand were genuine, isn't there a tipping point where nobody would believe me? Wouldn't it at some point become obvious that I was committing fraud?

[slidekellyslide]

Given the amount of fraud that goes on in this world, it's obviously not an easy task to build a case that will hold up on a beyond a reasonable doubt standard. Some get busted but most do not. And prosecutorial resources are scarce relative to the number of fraudsters.

CC and Morales are the most obvious fraudsters in the hobby at this time...I would think if what they were doing was easy to prosecute it would have been done by now. They're gaming the system.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Barry, if nobody believed you then is it fraud? At that point your opinion wouldn't be material.

But where I think you meant to go is where I was going with this originally: that at some point there can be enough circumstantial evidence that a seller knows his opinion is false; and if a seller knows his opinion is false that's just as fraudulent as affirmatively stating the item is genuine.

[barrysloate]

I don't know what the threshhold is for fraud, but I understand your response. It seems like CC will go on indefinitely.

[Peter_Spaeth]

CC and Morales are the most obvious fraudsters in the hobby at this time...I would think if what they were doing was easy to prosecute it would have been done by now. They're gaming the system.

Or living on borrowed time.

[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/iteam/2011/06/peter-nash-claims-hes-getting-help-from-sports-memorabilia-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]

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

Seems like he owns you.

[wonkaticket]

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

Seems like he owns you.

Scott no offense I wonder how laid back you would be with having been physically threatened, ripped off for huge amounts of money, given questionable or fake items for collateral on debts owed. All from a guy who pretends to be a hobby sleuth and savior, while yanking his pud in cyberspace and pointing out the whims and legal troubles of others while taking the 5th on his own.

I don’t think Nash “owns” Robert, more like he “owes” Robert money…if anything.

I think poking Rogers is fair if he’s so keen on Nash, and so quick to consign “memorabilia” to Coaches Corner…LOL.

Just my two cents there needs to be 1000 more posts on Nash the hobby needs to know what this guy is.

[wonkaticket]

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? :D

[Runscott]

Scott no offense I wonder how laid back you would be with having been physically threatened, ripped off for huge amounts of money, given questionable or fake items for collateral on debts owed. All from a guy who pretends to be a hobby sleuth and savior, while yanking his pud in cyberspace and pointing out the whims and legal troubles of others while taking the 5th on his own.

I don’t think Nash “owns” Robert, more like he “owes” Robert money…if anything.

I think poking Rogers is fair if he’s so keen on Nash, and so quick to consign “memorabilia” to Coaches Corner…LOL.

Just my two cents there needs to be 1000 more posts on Nash the hobby needs to know what this guy is.

Poking Rogers is definitely fair - the Rogers issues are news to many of us.

I see your point about Robert, but just so he understands - he is known to most (if not all) of us simply as "the guy who hates Peter Nash". That is a positive thing, but most of us who dislike Nash (myself included) aren't known here on a vintage baseball card discussion forum, simply for our hatred of someone. The only person who came close was Travis and his hatred of PSA and JSA, but at least we also knew him as the boxing autograph guy.

But it is Robert's right to inadvertently (or purposely?) label himself here based completely on his relationship to Nash. It is only tiresome to me because I have read most of his 15 posts, and I'm not seeing anything new. But again, that's his right.

Having said all that - sorry, Robert, if I vented unfairly. Please continue, and I sincerely hope you get justice. And if there is something related to the forum that you can contribute, I would love to read it - you sound like a guy who could turn some of that passion toward positive stuff that would be interesting.

[Sunny]

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

Seems like he owns you.

John Roger is the person that bought $550,000 of Peter Nash's stuff in an "AS IS" one lot auction. I’ve been told Roger's got all his money back by selling a few items. I see that a few of those items that Rogers sold ended up in "The National Pastime Museum" for example the Hugh Duffy bat, the Mike King Kelly bat and the Ed Delahanty pocket watch. Many of the item Roger's bought in this "AS IS" auction came from the same place my collateral came from. I know that many of the items that Nash had comes from the John Dooley Collection in MA. John Dooley was friends with Nuf Ced McGreevy and ended up with McGreevy's personal collection. But Peter Nash pleaded the fifth when asked where he got this stuff from. If the stuff was real, why did Nash plead the fifth? I've talked to the Dooley's family attorney and they told me that they considered going after Nash. You have to ask yourself, why did Nash plead the fifth? if he knew the stuff was real. I remember when Peter Nash told me about the treasure trove of stuff he found in Katherine Dooley's basement telling me it was worth millions of dollars. Peter Nash I know you will read this so why don't you give me the provenance of all the collateral I have so it can be sold for top dollar and be applied to your Judgment.

[slidekellyslide]

Poking Rogers is definitely fair - the Rogers issues are news to many of us.

I see your point about Robert, but just so he understands - he is known to most (if not all) of us simply as "the guy who hates Peter Nash". That is a positive thing, but most of us who dislike Nash (myself included) aren't known here on a vintage baseball card discussion forum, simply for our hatred of someone. The only person who came close was Travis and his hatred of PSA and JSA, but at least we also knew him as the boxing autograph guy.

But it is Robert's right to inadvertently (or purposely?) label himself here based completely on his relationship to Nash. It is only tiresome to me because I have read most of his 15 posts, and I'm not seeing anything new. But again, that's his right.

Having said all that - sorry, Robert, if I vented unfairly. Please continue, and I sincerely hope you get justice. And if there is something related to the forum that you can contribute, I would love to read it - you sound like a guy who could turn some of that passion toward positive stuff that would be interesting.

Travis posted 10 posts per day all pertaining to his hatred of PSA/JSA, and would NEVER satisfactorily answer a direct question...I don't think we need to run off a guy who has 15 total posts.

[Runscott]

Travis posted 10 posts per day all pertaining to his hatred of PSA/JSA, and would NEVER satisfactorily answer a direct question...I don't think we need to run off a guy who has 15 total posts.

Do you really think that by suggesting he post about something other than Peter Nash, I'm trying to run him off?

And if that was my intent, do you think there's any chance at all that it would succeed?

(Both rhetorical questions, wrist-slap noted)

[Sunny]

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

Last year I spoke with Jerrold Casway, he wrote a book on Ed Delahanty and I emailed pictures of the bat to him. He told me the bat is 100% real and has no doubt about it. Mr. Casway said he was friendly with Peter Nash and would put a call into him and find out where he got it from. He spoke to Peter Nash and Peter Nash told him I refuse to answer any questions about Robert Fraser or the Ed Delahanty bat. Jerry Casway probably has the largest collection of Ed Delahanty memorabilia and he wrote the book, "Ed Delahanty in the Emerald Age of Baseball".

[wonkaticket]

Last year I spoke with Jerrold Casway, he wrote a book on Ed Delahanty and I emailed pictures of the bat to him. He told me the bat is 100% real and has no doubt about it. Mr. Casway said he was friendly with Peter Nash and would put a call into him and find out where he got it from. He spoke to Peter Nash and Peter Nash told him I refuse to answer any questions about Robert Fraser or the Ed Delahanty bat. Jerry Casway probably has the largest collection of Ed Delahanty memorabilia and he wrote the book, "Ed Delahanty in the Emerald Age of Baseball".

This kind of stuff is truly the sad and disgusting part about Peter Nash. Very few people know as much about baseball as Nash the guy really is a wealth of knowledge. He also obtained thru research many real and amazing items that are part of our national pastime and our shared history.

However it’s clear Peter used his knowledge to create and sell/market questionable to downright fake items this is what disgusts me and should have everyone upset. Because of this we have an amazing item a Delahanty trophy bat which should be cherished and kept for the ages…that now is questionable due to the proximity of Nash and his known shenanigans. Peter instead of going down as an ex rap star and hobby icon will forever be the “Typhoid Mary” of baseball memorabilia.

One thing to fake some Ruth signatures and take some folks for cash, but to destroy and taint real hobby grails thru the games Peter has played for greed…is a tragedy and a betrayal of the game and the hobby.

To rub salt in the wound he’s made no attempt to fix, clear up or take responsibility for the mess. Instead he hides in cyberspace dragging anyone and everyone thru the mud guilty of anything that he himself has done or most likely done it’s truly shameful.

John

[slidekellyslide]

Do you really think that by suggesting he post about something other than Peter Nash, I'm trying to run him off?

And if that was my intent, do you think there's any chance at all that it would succeed?

(Both rhetorical questions, wrist-slap noted)

No, but I did think your first post claiming that Peter Nash "Owns" him was out of line. Not trying to slap your wrist or do any moderating at all, I find all of this fascinating and I don't want Robert to feel like he can't post about what has happened to him.

[HRBAKER]

Jay that is a good question.

What a mess. Is there no limit to the sleaze in collecting? At long last have they no decency?

Sadly, apparently not.

[Peter_Spaeth]

That question from the Army-McCarthy hearings -- have you no sense of deceny, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency? -- is a moment any lawyer would live for. I am very fortunate to have worked with (well, for would be more accurate) people who worked with Joseph Welch.

[Runscott]

No, but I did think your first post claiming that Peter Nash "Owns" him was out of line. Not trying to slap your wrist or do any moderating at all, I find all of this fascinating and I don't want Robert to feel like he can't post about what has happened to him.

Edited - TOTAL POST RE-WRITE :)

Okay, I get it. Just to be clear - I have read ALL of Robert's posts about Peter Nash. They indicated that Robert knows a lot about vintage baseball and has a lot of passion. I completely get the Nash thing - he screwed Robert, Robert hasn't gotten justice and some people are defending Nash as being some sort of hobby watchdog who writes great stories, which is of course bullshit. Robert's comments about the Delehanty bat made it clear that he knows stuff the rest of us don't know, and that we'd probably like to hear more about.

It would be more interesting to me personally, to hear the non-Nash stuff, but I understand that the train-wreckage is still on the track.

[slidekellyslide]

I didn't say not to post about Peter Nash - I suggested that he post about other things as well. You seem to be encouraging him to only post about Nash, and I think he's got more to add to this forum than to simply use it as a space to vent against Nash - that habit of his makes it look like Nash 'owns' him, and if he posted about other things I wouldn't have made the comment.

It would be great if all of our thousands of members with less than 15 posts would contribute more, but I just felt like your post was unnecessarily hostile, and I'd rather not chase off someone who has a lot to tell us about a situation that I'd like to learn more about.

[Runscott]

No, but I did think your first post claiming that Peter Nash "Owns" him was out of line. Not trying to slap your wrist or do any moderating at all, I find all of this fascinating and I don't want Robert to feel like he can't post about what has happened to him.

It would be great if all of our thousands of members with less than 15 posts would contribute more, but I just felt like your post was unnecessarily hostile, and I'd rather not chase off someone who has a lot to tell us about a situation that I'd like to learn more about.

"out of line", "unnecessarily hostile" - why Dan, those are the nicest things you've said to me in years. I'm moving away from the train-wreck before I get my wrists "not slapped" for a third time.

[slidekellyslide]

"out of line", "unnecessarily hostile" - why Dan, those are the nicest things you've said to me in years. I'm moving away from the train-wreck before I get my wrists "not slapped" for a third time.

Eh, okay. But don't try to pass off your first post as really wanting to crack Robert's knowledge of the hobby. You weren't fooling anyone. :rolleyes:

[Exhibitman]

On the Delehanty bat: If it is good, why not get the opinions of several of the authenticators out there and sell it with all of their certs? Seems simple enough...

[Exhibitman]

That question from the Army-McCarthy hearings -- have you no sense of deceny, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency? -- is a moment any lawyer would live for. I am very fortunate to have worked with (well, for would be more accurate) people who worked with Joseph Welch.

So that makes you the man who met the man who met Joseph Welch? Sort of like Al Bundy, the man who met the man who met Andy Griffith...

http://photos.imageevent.com/exhibitman/dropins/Griffith%20meeter.jpg

[Peter_Spaeth]

So that makes you the man who met the man who met Joseph Welch? Sort of like Al Bundy, the man who met the man who met Andy Griffith...

http://photos.imageevent.com/exhibitman/dropins/Griffith%20meeter.jpg

Yeah I was only 4 when he died so no oppotunity to work with him directly.

[Sunny]

On the Delehanty bat: If it is good, why not get the opinions of several of the authenticators out there and sell it with all of their certs? Seems simple enough...

The problem is once they hear that it came from Peter Nash they want nothing to do with it. Let me give you an example, last year I consigned some items to Lelands Auctions. When they found out the stuff came from Peter Nash, Josh Evans called me cursing me out and threatening to report me to the FBI. I told him the FBI has already questioned me about this stuff and that I told the FBI that many of the items I have originally came from the Dooley family in Mass. Peter Nash acquired many items from Elizabeth Dooley and after she died Nash befriend old lady Katherine Dooley and acquired a huge amount of items from Katherine Dooley. Josh Evans went off on me telling me I’m a liar and that Nash never knew the Dooley family. When I told him I meet Katherine Dooley back in 2007 with Nash at her house he told me I was full of shit. But I was there when Nash and his crew was shooting the film “The Birth of Red Sox Nation”. I watched the old lady give Nash some stuff that came from McGreevy’s bar. I was so pissed off I called the Dooley’s attorney to help me get provenance on some of the collateral items I have. The law firm was very helpful and sent me some documents. The funny thing is Josh Evans lied to me saying he knew nothing about the Dooley family. The truth is this same law firm consigned Hugh Duffy’s gold pocket watch to Lelands Auctions which came from Katherine Dooley's Estate. I saw this same Hugh Duffy gold pocket watch in Katherine "Kitty" Dooley's living room in a glass case back in August of 2007. John Dooley, Kitty's father was best friends with Hugh Duffy and ended up with most of Hugh Duffy's personal items. Josh Evans knew full well that Hugh Duffy's pocket watch was from Katherine Dooley's estate. I have a copies of Lelands Auction's consignment papers and Lelands was clearly informed that the pocket watch came from Katherine Dooley's estate.

[calvindog]

Josh Evans called me cursing me out and threatening to report me to the FBI. Josh Evans went off on me telling me I’m a liar and that Nash never knew the Dooley family. When I told him I meet Katherine Dooley back in 2007 with Nash at her house he told me I was full of shit. The funny thing is Josh Evans lied to me saying he knew nothing about the Dooley family.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!!!!!!!! You got off easy!

[wonkaticket]

Josh Evans called me cursing me out...

LOL, I'm with Jeff welcome to the club you must have caught him on a good day. :)

[Rob D.]

The quote feature rocks.

[Runscott]

Eh, okay. But don't try to pass off your first post as really wanting to crack Robert's knowledge of the hobby. You weren't fooling anyone. :rolleyes:

...and either are you, Dan, so roll those virtual eyes all you want.

You da boss, so knock yourself out.

[wonkaticket]

The quote feature rocks.

I agree.

BTW. .... .- -.. / -. --- / .. -.. . .- / -.-- --- ..- / --. ..- -.-- ... / .-- . .-. . / -.-. .-.. --- ... .

[calvindog]

I agree.

BTW. .... .- -.. / -. --- / .. -.. . .- / -.-- --- ..- / --. ..- -.-- ... / .-- . .-. . / -.-. .-.. --- ... .

I'm surprised as well.

-.-- --- ..- / --. ..- -.-- ... / -... . - - . .-. / -.-. ..- - / .. - / --- ..- - / --- .-. / .-- . / .-- .. .-.. .-.. / .- .-.. .-.. / --. . - / -... .- -. -. . -.. .-.-.-

[Rob D.]

Well, that ends that fun, too.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Well, that ends that fun, too.

Show some self respect and have an avatar.

[Rob D.]

Show some self respect and have an avatar.

Searching for a portrait of HughJass right now.

[slidekellyslide]

Hugh!

[WhenItWasAHobby]

Peter- here is something I don't understand, and maybe you can explain it: if I rendered an opinion on an autograph, and I got it wrong (I called a bogus autograph genuine) I agree that I could have simply given an erroneous opinion.

But if you gave me a thousand bogus autographs to authenticate, and I said all thousand were genuine, isn't there a tipping point where nobody would believe me? Wouldn't it at some point become obvious that I was committing fraud?

Barry, if nobody believed you then is it fraud? At that point your opinion wouldn't be material.

But where I think you meant to go is where I was going with this originally: that at some point there can be enough circumstantial evidence that a seller knows his opinion is false; and if a seller knows his opinion is false that's just as fraudulent as affirmatively stating the item is genuine.

The key element of fraud is proving that the person knew that the material representation he made was false. The big problem is that someone can designate themselves as an "expert" and rubberstamp everything as authentic and as long as that stuff sells, its a win-win situation for both the expert and the seller of the bogus items and why even try to do a competent job by rejecting items? That would be leaving good money on the table. All the expert has to do is be vigilant in believing and communicating what he is authenticating is real.

For something like that to be shut down it would take either an FBI sting like what happened in Operation Bullpen or have a network TV news magazine like 20/20, Dateline or 60 Minutes give them knowingly bad items expose the gross incompetence or fraud and essentially force them out of business.

I recall around 2004, PSA had a World Series of Grading contest at the National. An independent group should do the same with the grading companies of cards, autographs and memorabilia. If done properly it could bring a lot of them problems to light.

[E93]

Question: when Rogers bought the PSA5 MC Wagner, if I am not mistaken, Doug was handling his phone bid at the live auction. Was that one Legendary owner dealing with another?

I was wondering this too, but if I remember correctly, that was Mastro Auction's last stand.
JimB

[Sunny]

On the Delehanty bat: If it is good, why not get the opinions of several of the authenticators out there and sell it with all of their certs? Seems simple enough...

This is not a repeat I've added to my original post and I'm hoping Josh Evans the owner of Lelands Auctions reads this.

The problem is once they hear that it came from Peter Nash they want nothing to do with it. Let me give you an example, last year I consigned some items to Lelands Auctions. When they found out the stuff came from Peter Nash, Josh Evans called me cursing me out and threatening to report me to the FBI. I told him the FBI has already questioned me about this stuff and that I told the FBI that many of the items I have originally came from the Dooley family in Massachusetts. Peter Nash acquired many items from Elizabeth Dooley and after she died Nash befriended old lady Katherine "Kitty" Dooley and acquired a huge amount of items from Kitty Dooley. Josh Evans went off on me telling me I’m a liar and that Nash never knew anybody from the Dooley family. When I told him I meet Katherine Dooley back in 2007 with Nash at her house in Milton, MA he told me I was full of shit. But I was there when Nash and his crew was shooting the film “The Birth of Red Sox Nation”. I watched the old lady give Nash some stuff that came from McGreevy’s bar. I was so pissed off I called the Dooley’s attorney to help me get provenance on some of the collateral items I have. The law firm Nutter McClennen & Fish LLP was very helpful and sent me some documents. The funny thing is Josh Evans lied to me saying he knew nothing about the Dooley family. The truth is this same law firm consigned Hugh Duffy’s gold pocket watch to Lelands Auctions which came from Katherine Dooley's Estate. I saw this same Hugh Duffy gold pocket watch in Kitty Dooley's living room in a glass case back in August of 2007. John Dooley, Kitty's father was best friends with Hugh Duffy and ended up with most of Hugh Duffy's personal items. Josh Evans knew full well that Hugh Duffy's pocket watch was from Katherine Dooley's estate. I have a copy of Lelands Auction's consignment paper and Lelands was clearly informed that Duffy's pocket watch came from Katherine Dooley's estate. The Red Sox once a year gives out an award called the Elizabeth "Lib" Dooley Award, saluting the team's most loyal fan. See articles below about Elizabeth & Katherine Dooley.

http://www.nytimes.com/2000/06/22/sports/elizabeth-dooley-87-a-friend-of-the-red-sox-without-an-equal.html?pagewanted=print

http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2009/06/katherine_m_doo.html

[D. Bergin]

Perhaps Josh was pissed because he was afraid Nash would write several hit pieces on his auctions if he attempted to sell his collateral, in essence sabotaging several of his auctions in the process.

It may not always be a case of whether it's real or not, but whether or not you might get stuck in a legal entanglement, similar to what Robert Edward Auctions has gone through with Nash.

I could also picture Nash getting some sort of an injunction against the sale of his "collateral".

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

I am relatively new to collecting. What did Nash do? I know there has to be a great story behind all of this.

[Sunny]

I am relatively new to collecting. What did Nash do? I know there has to be a great story behind all of this.

Here’s something to get you started an article from sports Illustrated about Peter Nash.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/the_bonus/12/09/nash/

[WhenItWasAHobby]

Here’s something to get you started an article from sports Illustrated about Peter Nash.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/the_bonus/12/09/nash/

That article has been discussed a while ago. This statement has become a hobby truism:

For all its many upstanding, passionate collectors, the baseball-memorabilia subculture is also a notoriously seedy shadowland of Mametesque schemers and dreamers, thick with forgeries and thefts, conflicts of interest, dubious "authenticators," shill bidding, card doctoring and any number of other dubious practices. "The hobby is mostly filled with low-life hucksters, some of whom grow up to own important auction houses," says a longtime collector of early baseball material. "You can count the number of people who are smart and educated and honest on one hand."

[HRBAKER]

That article has been discussed a while ago. This statement has become a hobby truism:

For all its many upstanding, passionate collectors, the baseball-memorabilia subculture is also a notoriously seedy shadowland of Mametesque schemers and dreamers, thick with forgeries and thefts, conflicts of interest, dubious "authenticators," shill bidding, card doctoring and any number of other dubious practices. "The hobby is mostly filled with low-life hucksters, some of whom grow up to own important auction houses," says a longtime collector of early baseball material. "You can count the number of people who are smart and educated and honest on one hand."

Dan those last two sentences might be a slight exaggeration but unfortunately it's closer to the truth than it should be.

[Cardboard Junkie]

Dan those last two sentences might be a slight exaggeration but unfortunately it's closer to the truth than it should be.

Sadly, I agree.:( So what we've got is a bunch of slime balls calling each other slimeballs, and us arguing about who is the biggest slimeball.

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

Here’s something to get you started an article from sports Illustrated about Peter Nash.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/the_bonus/12/09/nash/

Thanks for the link. Sounds like a dirtbag.

[Cardboard Junkie]

Thanks for the link. Sounds like a dirtbag.

Sounds like a bunch of dirtbags.

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

Sounds like a bunch of dirtbags.

Who are the other members of the "bunch?"

[Cardboard Junkie]

The thieves, liars, cheats, etc, mentioned in the previous 140 posts.

[thetruthisoutthere]

Plus, the odds of getting a jury that knows anything at all about autographs is not good...Mr Morales taking the stand with his "FBI background in forensics" would probably make the average jury member star struck.

A thread I did on Chris "I Never Saw An Autograph I Didn't Like" Morales.

http://live.autographmagazine.com/profiles/blogs/chris-morales-appears-in-court

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

A thread I did on Chris "I Never Saw An Autograph I Didn't Like" Morales.

http://live.autographmagazine.com/profiles/blogs/chris-morales-appears-in-court

Wow. Interesting article. Also, great name. I have the X-files poster up in my office.

[atx840]

WTF...Jeff & the fine lawyers on Net54, do I have any "rights" to have this clown remove my photo from his site?

http://haulsofshame.com/blog/?p=26290#more-26290

[slidekellyslide]

WTF...Jeff & the fine lawyers on Net54, do I have any "rights" to have this clown remove my photo from his site?

http://haulsofshame.com/blog/?p=26290#more-26290

Did you ask him to remove it and he's refusing?

[atx840]

I'm checking here before I send a note.

[Cardboard Junkie]

:eek:Holy Cow, Chris, you got any more quaaludes? (jes teasin)

[WhenItWasAHobby]

WTF...Jeff & the fine lawyers on Net54, do I have any "rights" to have this clown remove my photo from his site?

http://haulsofshame.com/blog/?p=26290#more-26290

How do you believe he obtained your photo?

[atx840]

Likely found it on my gmail or wife's Facebook account. I have asked him to remove it....no word yet.

[Fuddjcal]

I know, right? I'm biting my nails waiting for that hard hitting piece of journalism to come forth.

PS where did Travis Roste go? Anyone seen him around?

yeah, Hero of the Stupid has been busy "pushing carts at a big box store" according to his website...figures... right where the hard headed ape belongs.

[shelly]

Chris, he should have used this picture. It would have scared him.:eek:


131321

[wonkaticket]

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/net54shared/large/fe41bb2ff9ff45428dbf8b5907e016bc-1.jpg

LOL, you’re in the minor leagues Chris. Call me when you get your own headline.

http://haulsofshame.com/blog/

Peter I know you’re reading this as this is where all of your "information" comes from before you twist it into the wonderful chestnuts of fantasy that is The Hauls of Blame.

I thought I would add something to your article that is rarely seen on your website some facts. I actually bought over $200k from REA last year and consigned $85k worth of items. Here’s another interesting note for the article I paid my bills in full….you should try it sometime people seem to really like it and don’t take you to court. Why would I be open like this…well I have no reason to plead the fifth etc. I also spent a bunch of money with Legendary as well Peter so I must be a huge John Rogers "fanboy" also, funny that didn't make the article?

Also I think your quote feature seems to be broken because not only did you quote me wrong on many things. You also seemed to have missed the parts quoting me on your fraud and legal troubles? Hmm wonder why that was? Also why do you never provide links to this site in your articles? Wouldn’t you want all of your readers to see what trolls the few of us are for themselves? Seems odd you would hide all that great info from your readers… :confused:

I’m sure it was just a simple oversight and will make the next article in which you will address all those concerns I have brought up about you. Keep up the good work Peter, and nice NYC dinner shot let me know if you would like a more up to date headshot I’ve changed glasses recently. :)

Cheers,

John

[MattyC]

Wow, I never knew what some of you guys looked like.

What a handsome crowd. The guy on the top left looks so nice and happy. The top right guy reminds me of a Rodin sculpture.

Now I feel obligated to post a selfie or something. Maybe a glam press shot.

[wonkaticket]

Wow, I never knew what some of you guys looked like.

What a handsome crowd. The guy on the top left looks so nice and happy. The top right guy reminds me of a Rodin sculpture.

Matt we got to get you out more often are you sure wen to the right site? :)

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

After reading that article and the trash talking about Net54 I don't think I will visit HaulsofShame again.

[Leon]

After reading that article and the trash talking about Net54 I don't think I will visit HaulsofShame again.

There is a lot of negativity going on over there. I can't imagine the life he lives. Sad, sad, sad.....

[MattyC]

Matt we got to get you out more often are you sure wen to the right site? :)

Wait-- oh my bad, I was on pornhub. Whoops. Return to your normal programming.

[MyGuyTy]

Matt we got to get you out more often are you sure wen to the right site? :)

Lol, John I would have taken you for a "handsome billionaire" type, chiseled 6'3" with the looks of Ryan Gosling......;)

Nice bald head though, you've joined my club :cool:

[MyGuyTy]

Wait-- oh my bad, I was on pornhub. Whoops. Return to your normal programming.

xvideos is better.........but I wouldn't know anything about that.

[DerekMichael]

can i ask seriously, who is this person who wrote all of that stuff? i have heard the name, but know nothing about him. it was completely vile what he was saying.

is this a joke or something? the article reads like the national enquirer or something

i am pretty sure everyone on net54 has seen people like Leon Luckey and John McDaniel spend what must have been hours upon hours upon hours to alert board members of various fraud in the hobby and trying to protect people ... so where does all of this stuff even come from???

i love this hobby, but sometimes stuff honestly boggles my mind ... am i missing something here? is this like settling a score, or what ?!?!?!

DEREK HOGUE

[wonkaticket]

There is a lot of negativity going on over there. I can't imagine the life he lives. Sad, sad, sad.....

Even sadder Leon is he’s probably happy. In his twisted world he thinks he’s doing something good and everyone else is just out to get poor Peter Nash. Only in Nash’s world is a comment that I made about the late Barry Halper somehow out of line and worthy of reporting as some sort of big news.

In the past McDaniel has taken his defense of Halper even further stating, “Did Halper have stuff that was questionable, sadly, no doubt. I also think many of us would have had bad items had we built and acquired a collection of that size. In fact, Halper would have been and was a big target for the unsavory of the world to work their trade.”

It’s a laughable thing to watch unless your one of the many collectors left with questionable merchandise from guy who pleads the fifth at every turn.

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

There is a lot of negativity going on over there. I can't imagine the life he lives. Sad, sad, sad.....

I honestly didn't know Mr. Nash was a lawyer and capable of rendering intelligent opinions on legal causes of action such as slander. However, since he is then I am sure that he is also aware of the tort of defamation. Having such information one would think that Mr. Nash might want to be careful making public statements that directly accuse people of committing a tort.

Then again what do I know....

[DerekMichael]

He says at one point that Rob Lifson was forging a Ruth signature and selling it?

That is a very serious accusation! Does he even have proof?

To the resident Counsel ... is that not character assassination? Is that not a HUGE deal?

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

He says at one point that Rob Lifson was forging a Ruth signature and selling it?

That is a very serious accusation! Does he even have proof?

To the resident Counsel ... is that not character assassination? Is that not a HUGE deal?

That would potentially be defamation.

[Cardboard Junkie]

He says at one point that Rob Lifson was forging a Ruth signature and selling it?

That is a very serious accusation! Does he even have proof?

To the resident Counsel ... is that not character assassination? Is that not a HUGE deal?

I think he said Mr. Lifson sold a forged Ruth auto, not that he created it.
He also said Mr. Lifson is a convicted felon.

[wonkaticket]

He says at one point that Rob Lifson was forging a Ruth signature and selling it?

That is a very serious accusation! Does he even have proof?

To the resident Counsel ... is that not character assassination? Is that not a HUGE deal?

Impossible! Peter I demand to know how Rob could sign such a Ruth signature what with my head always up his ass and all? :)

[Section115]

I think the man FKA Prime Minister Pete Nice should send me $7.99. That is what I blew on Derelicts of Dialect back in 1991. Horrible album.

[wonkaticket]

Oh what the hell I’ll bite…. :)

David do you think there is wake-up call needed for the hobby on Leon, Dan B, Adam W, Barry S, Jay M and myself?

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/junkforumimages/websize/Untitled-1_4.jpg

[Cardboard Junkie]

No John, my wake up call remark had to do with the FBIs recent search of John Rogers home and business, and the why of it..............and yes you do bite.:D Cheers

[DerekMichael]

"In the 1999 Halper sale Lifson catalogued and sold fake uniforms, misrepresented game-used equipment, forged Babe Ruth autographs and even a phony 1846 Knickerbocker baseball he claimed was genuine."

[DerekMichael]

The way he writes leaves things very much open for interpretation.

[DerekMichael]

I guess I should just shut the eff up, but to me, the way he wrote this was very vile and throws out all of these very harsh allegations, but does not offer much in the way of proof.

It just feels this was done in bad taste, at least to me personally.

[wonkaticket]

I guess I should just shut the eff up, but to me, the way he wrote this was very vile and throws out all of these very harsh allegations, but does not offer much in the way of proof.

It just feels this was done in bad taste, at least to me personally.

You asked earlier what's his deal? Derek you figured exactly his deal it in about 10 mins, you’re a lot smarter than most that read his silly site.

I wish it was more fun...bottom line guy owes folks tons of money has mountains of legal problems. He has been accused of selling tons of fake items to some very prominent collectors and may be one of the hobby’s most prolific forgers. When questioned about this past in legal settings he pleads the fifth. Now he spends his days in cyberspace making up fake investigations, claiming to have sources and attacking anyone who brings up his past or says boo against him to draw attention away from his own misery.

What is the result of his deep investigations you ask? Well dig up old photos of me at a NYC dinner with some members. Sort of tally up my REA winnings from 2013 only because I share them here with members….and then make some innuendos about me. I’ve seen more in depth reporting from TMZ.

[bmarlowe1]

Nash quotes me as follows with respect to the Rogers's "Chadwick" photo:
"... SABR’s photographic committee chairman..co-chairman, and I wasn't co-chairman at the time of the Chadwick thread].. claimed the man did not resemble Chadwick after comparing the nose and ears to other photos.."

I never said that they did not resemble eachother (in fact they kind of did) nor did I say anything about the ears. I did say, "...First of all you are comparing a fuzzy image to another fuzzy image - pretty worthless. BTW - if you compare the nose to a clear Chadwick semi-profile image - it doesn't seem quite right. But again - the tintype is too fuzzy to be sure about anything."

I asked Mr. Rogers to post a better scan (what was posted was only 100 dpi). He declined.

Sloppy reporting. He did get the pencil thing right.

[wonkaticket]

Nash quotes me as follows with respect to the Rogers's "Chadwick" photo:
"... SABR’s photographic committee chairman..co-chairman, and I wasn't co-chairman at the time of the Chadwick thread].. claimed the man did not resemble Chadwick after comparing the nose and ears to other photos.."

I never said that they did not resemble eachother (in fact they kind of did) nor did I say anything about the ears. I did say, "...First of all you are comparing a fuzzy image to another fuzzy image - pretty worthless. BTW - if you compare the nose to a clear Chadwick semi-profile image - it doesn't seem quite right. But again - the tintype is too fuzzy to be sure about anything."

I asked Mr. Rogers to post a better scan (what was posted was only 100 dpi). He declined.

Sloppy reporting. He did get the pencil thing right.

Mark the nice thing about Peter is he doesn’t let a little thing like facts get in the way of a good story.

[Exhibitman]

Whatever. Just spell my name right; it's all free publicity.

[slidekellyslide]

"Sources indicate that McDaniel, Bretta, Fraser and others knew full well that the Rogers LOA’s were forgeries, yet chose to post the accusations anyway."

"Sources"??? What sources KNEW that I had prior knowledge of forged LOA's. That's hilarious. :D I think anyone with a semi-functional brain can see that I was surprised that Rogers had anything to do with CC since I actually posted that pretty much word for word and it was even included in Nash's "article". That guy should work for cable news.

[Peter_Spaeth]

This would make a great Goudey or Exhibit 4 in 1 fantasy card.

[WhenItWasAHobby]

Note to Mr. Nash. Slander is communicated in spoken form while libel is communicated in written form.

[slidekellyslide]

Note to Mr. Nash. Slander is communicated in spoken form while libel is communicated in written form.

To be fair, his source may have overheard me tell my wife.

[Cardboard Junkie]

Maybe his source is your....no, I won't say it.:D

[wonkaticket]

I want to go on record and say this was all Dan’s idea he called me and put me up to it. He hates Rogers as a kid he had a box of old photographs fall on him and since that day has vowed to take anyone down who is related to old photographs. :)

[autograf]

Then......

Henry.....he is coming for Yee!

[slidekellyslide]

I want to go on record and say this was all Dan’s idea he called me and put me up to it. He hates Rogers as a kid he had a box of old photographs fall on him and since that day has vowed to take anyone down who is related to old photographs. :)

You just fell off the birthday list, pal. :D

[Sunny]

Here’s something to get you started an article from sports Illustrated about Peter Nash.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/the_bonus/12/09/nash/

Peter Nash you are the conman. You conned my wife and I out of $11,000 to pay your rent at the house you used to rent in Saratoga Springs, NY. Your credit was so bad you made a deal with the landlord to pay 6 months’ rent up front.

Besides cheating us out of the $11,000, you gave us a bunch of tainted memorabilia as collateral. After we won the lawsuit you have refused to help us sell the collateral. Is it possible that some of the collateral you gave us is stolen? After all one of the items of collateral you gave us was a book entitled “Boston Baseball Club 1871-1897” that was owned by Tim Murnane’s grandson, Raymond Quinn. But you lied and claimed you owned the book and put a value of $2,500 on it and gave it to us as collateral, that is called FRAUD Peter Nash or in other words stolen property. As you are aware the Judge Ordered the book returned to Raymond Quinn which has been done. It’s my understanding the value you put on the book was high. Did you put that price of $2,500 on the book because it had Tim Murnane’s signature inside the book? I would like to know because I want to tell Raymond Quinn. Here’s a nice article baseball historian John Thorn wrote on sportswriter/baseball player Tim Murnane.

http://ourgame.mlblogs.com/2013/05/08/tim-murnane-heart-of-the-game/

Peter Nash I see that after you used up the $11,000 you were evicted out of the house, see below.

WebCivil Local - Case Detail

Court: Saratoga Springs City Court
Index Number: LT-002832-07/SS
Case Name: MARKS, LINDA COSEO, f/k/a LINDA COSEO
vs.
NASH, PETER
NASH, ROXANNE
Case Type: Landlord and Tenant
Classification: Non-Payment
Filing Date: 11/09/2007
Disposition Date: 11/21/2007
Calendar Number:
Jury Demand: No
Judge Name: Honorable Douglas C. Mills

Attorney/Firm(s) For Petitioner - LINDA COSEO MARKS:
DEAN M COON ESQ Attorney Type: Attorney
188 CHURCH STREET
SARATOGA SPRINGS, New York 12866
518-584-6300


Attorney/Firm(s) For Respondent - ROXANNE NASH:
Self-Represented Litigant

Attorney/Firm(s) For Respondent - PETER NASH:
Self-Represented Litigant

[Michael B]

To be fair, his source may have overheard me tell my wife.

Pillow talk? My this is getting salty.

Disclosure: I am probably one of the few people on this site who has been mentioned on H.O.S. in a positive way.

Mîçhæ£ ßöw£ß¥

[wonkaticket]

This would make a great Goudey or Exhibit 4 in 1 fantasy card.

You mean like this. :)

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/net54shared/small/hauls%20of%20blame.jpg

[Leon]

Pillow talk? My this is getting salty.

Disclosure: I am probably one of the few people on this site who has been mentioned on H.O.S. in a positive way.

Don't you think folks should know your full name, given your disclosure?

btw, John, nice Goudey!! Looks to be artificially aged too..

[Peter_Spaeth]

You mean like this. :)

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/net54shared/small/hauls%20of%20blame.jpg

Now you just need names and teams LOL.

[MyGuyTy]

You mean like this. :)

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/net54shared/small/hauls%20of%20blame.jpg

Looks like a reprint.....need a back scan please....

[Sunny]

Perhaps Josh was pissed because he was afraid Nash would write several hit pieces on his auctions if he attempted to sell his collateral, in essence sabotaging several of his auctions in the process.

It may not always be a case of whether it's real or not, but whether or not you might get stuck in a legal entanglement, similar to what Robert Edward Auctions has gone through with Nash.

I could also picture Nash getting some sort of an injunction against the sale of his "collateral".

I get your point. Peter Nash gets sued by so many people. Check this out, here's a lawsuit from Lelands Auctions suing Peter Nash. What was this lawsuit about Josh Evans? Does this lawsuit have any reason why Peter Nash never writes anything about you? I guess Peter you didn't know John Rogers back then so you couldn't get money from him to fund your lawsuit. You could have asked one of Bekim Laiqi's cousins to borrow money from or maybe you were to deep into them by then. You know Pete how you used to tell me how you had to pay the vig.

WebCivil Local - Case Detail


Court: New York County Civil Court
Index Number: CV-008757-99/NY
Case Name: HOUSE, LELAND'S AUCTION vs. NASH, PETER
Case Type: Civil
Classification:
Filing Date: 03/22/1999
Disposition Date: 06/12/2000
Calendar Number:
Jury Demand: No
Judge Name:


Attorney/Firm(s) For Plaintiff - LELAND'S AUCTION HOUSE:
HERRICK & FEINSTEIN Attorney Type: Firm
2 PARK AVENUE
New York, New York 10016
2125921400


Attorney/Firm(s) For Defendant - PETER NASH:

[Michael B]

Don't you think folks should know your full name, given your disclosure?

btw, John, nice Goudey!! Looks to be artificially aged too..

Leon,

Not a problem at all. I am not a fan of Nash and the guilt by skewed innuendo. Nor do I fall for the "If I act the muckraker then perhaps everyone will forget that I am a big pile of muck myself" act either. I just felt that if I commented in this thread that I should at least put that out there. It was the Babe Ruth's will recovery post. I was the one back in 1998 that first discovered probate documents were being stolen from courthouses and assisted the FBI.

Mîçhæ£ ßöw£ß¥

[Sunny]

Now you just need names and teams LOL.

Truthfully there’s a real card Peter Nash tried to con me to invest in for $250,000. It’s so crazy and over the top you will never forget it and I think we can all agree that Peter Nash needs to seriously get professional help. It’s very sad that Nash actually thought I believed in his conman scheme. Here’s the true story:

January of 2007, Pete and I where at the Fireplace Restaurant on route 17 in Paramus, NJ. After we ate Pete tried to pitch to me an investment that would make me millions. Pete wanted me to invest in the 1912 Red Sox first pitched baseball that he had purchased for approximately $140,000 in auction from Sotheby’s. Sometime thereafter buying the 1912 baseball Nash needing money consigned the 1912 baseball to Robert Edward Auctions and borrowed a large sum of money from Robert Edward Auctions against it. Nash wanted me to give him $250,000 for 49% ownership in the 1912 baseball and most of the money would be used to get the 1912 baseball back from Robert Edward auctions. He would then have the baseball cut up and take the string from inside the baseball and have the string cut into 2 inch lengths. Nash knew the full length of the string inside the baseball and how many 2 inch pieces could be made. Then Nash would have a professional company take the 2 inch pieces of string and put them onto a baseball card. After that he would make a deal with the Red Sox and Memorabilia shops to sell this 1912 Red Sox first pitch baseball cards for $20 each. Nash had this crazy conman proposal all figured out showing a gross profit of $28 million and a net profit of $23 million. At the time I was friends with him so I didn’t want to laugh at the idea and tell him how crazy the idea was so I told him my wife, Lisa probably won’t go for it. So then Pete went for the second pitch to get money from me. He asked me to invest in a bunch of Joe Jackson bricks that he acquired from Shoeless Joe Jackson’s house, I’ll leave that story for another time.

Peter Nash instead of writing a bunch of crap on your website and wasting your time. Why don’t you do something constructive and do a nice write up on all the collateral we have of your so we can sell it and apply it to the Judgment we have against you. As you are aware we have a Court Order to sell this collateral in a commercially reasonable manner. As you are aware we have moved our judgment to NY State and filed it in Saratoga County where you live. Remember any money we spend on legal fees going after your assets, we will make a motion to the court for you to pay those legal fees. The interest on the Judgment is over $100 per day. So why don’t you help yourself and pay down on the Judgment by helping us sell your collateral we have been Court Ordered to sell. Our attorney told us we have many options, asset depositions, wage garnishment, bank accounts, personal property, including attaching your website and selling it to the highest bidder. I hope you will help yourself and send me that write up on your collateral.

[wonkaticket]

including attaching your website and selling it to the highest bidder.

What's the starting bid Robert? :)

[atx840]

What's the starting bid Robert? :)

Dolla dolla bill y'all

http://i.imgur.com/jJahS5D.jpg

[Ease]

Selling $28mil of old baseball string would be quite a feat. I'd love to hear the Joe Jackson bricks story.

[wonkaticket]

Dolla dolla bill y'all

http://i.imgur.com/jJahS5D.jpg

Funniest thing that's not even Peter Nash, that is a look alike...I know LOL, but true.

[Cardboard Junkie]

Let's see....28 million bucks divided by 20 Bucks for each card=1,400,000. cards.

2 inches of string per card= 2,800,000 inches of string.

There are 63,360 inches in a mile or enough for 31,680 cards....but we need 1,400,000 cards

So one would need over44 miles of string to make 1,400,000 cards at 20 bucks a pop to get 28 megabucks.

Are there 44 miles of string in a hardball?

My research says there are 363 feet of string in a baseball, and 744 feet of yarn. I dunno maybe my math is off. Anyone?

[Sunny]

What's the starting bid Robert? :)

On which items? The website or the collateral. The website I guess I can start it at $1.00 and see where the bidders take it. I’m sure there's a few companies or people out there that would want to bid on the website.

If Nash doesn’t give provenance or a write up on the collateral maybe I’ll sell all the collateral items in an “AS IS” auction. I can start the bidding at $1.00 and see where it goes. My problem is I hope some of the collateral I have wasn’t stolen from old lady Katherine Dooley in MA. Her attorney Jeff Roberts told me last year they considered going after Nash. He asked me, where is the Hugh Duffy bat. I told him John Rogers bought it in an “AS IS” auction along with a lot of other stuff that came from the Dooley collection, including the signed Babe Ruth mitt that came from McGreevy’s bar. Jeff Roberts, Esq. told me that Nash was allowed to take some stuff from Katherine Dooley’s house and get it appraised but they were never told what those items were. Nash never came back with an appraisal. The law firm did give me a bill of sale of 54 items Peter Nash did buy for $25,000 from Katherine Dooley plus 2 scrap books from sportswriter John Drohan, that Nash paid $1,000 for. But the bill of sale does not include the Hugh Duffy bat nor other McGreevy items like the King Kelly bat, Cap Anson Bat and the signed Babe Ruth mitt and so on. They did give me an inventory list which had the Hugh Duffy listed but the bat was not on the bill of sale. Maybe this is why Peter Nash pleaded the fifth dozens of times. The bill of sale did include the 1898 Hugh Duffy trophy but why didn’t Nash show Robert Edward auctions the bill of sale of the Hugh Duffy trophy. Instead that trophy was part of the “AS IS” sale. One of the law firm’s attorney’s was 50% executor of Kathrine Dooley’s estate. The law firm has a fiduciary responsibility to tell all the heirs what happen with the memorabilia. I wonder if the FBI was searching for the Dooley items at John Rogers properties. She died in June of 2009 so I guess the statute of limitations are good. By the way Legendary Auctions sold the 1898 Hugh Duffy trophy for $36,000. the Hugh Duffy bat and King Kelly bat are now in The National Pastime Museum. legendary Auctions sold the Cap Anson bat in August of 2012 for $53,775.

Peter Nash you should know that just a few months ago that Katherine Dooley’s law firm was deposed. The lawyer said a lot of interesting thing about you such as you returning a baseball that was missing and giving it to the attorney at Katherine Dooley’s funeral.

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

Seizing the website is an interesting idea. I would definitely look into wage garnishment and possibly going after any ownership interest in his music.

[Leon]

Robert - have you considered Nash possibly not being able to give provenance on some items unless he confessed to fraudulently making them himself? Such as taking something like an old ribbon, attaching it to an old bat, and making something completely (new) out of something old? Kind of like 1 +1 = 3?

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

Robert - have you considered Nash possibly not being able to give provenance on some items unless he confessed to fraudulently making them himself? Such as taking something like an old ribbon, attaching it to an old bat, and making something completely (new) out of something old? Kind of like 1 +1 = 3?

Or it could be stolen. One interesting thing would he having your lawyer research the statute of limitations, if you knew the state the items came from. If the clock has run out then there is no 5th amendment privilege.

[Sunny]

Seizing the website is an interesting idea. I would definitely look into wage garnishment and possibly going after any ownership interest in his music.

Lifson already went after the music Royalties and got nothing because the IRS got there first. The surprising thing is Nash’s Royalties are extremely very small less than $1,000 a year. I don’t know how Peter Nash makes money. Maybe he’s on John Rogers payroll? I don’t think he makes any money with the website because I don’t see any advertising. Maybe John Rogers pays Nash to run the website. I heard that John Rogers may have funded the Hauls of Shame website but I don’t know if that’s true. Rogers should speak for himself and not have Nash do his bidding for him on his website.

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

Lifson already went after the music Royalties and got nothing because the IRS got there first. The surprising thing is Nash’s Royalties are extremely very small less than $1,000 a year. I don’t know how Peter Nash makes money. Maybe he’s on John Rogers payroll? I don’t think he makes any money with the website because I don’t see any advertising. Maybe John Rogers pays Nash to run the website. I heard that John Rogers may have funded the Hauls of Shame website but I don’t know if that’s true. Rogers should speak for himself and not have Nash do his bidding for him on his website.

I meant seizing the actual ownership interest in the music and not just the royalties. However it is possible that he does not own any of it.

[ctownboy]

If I were owed hundreds of thousands of dollars and was getting stiffed/led on by someone who owned a website that reported on fraud and payment didn't look like it was coming any time soon, I would find out who the hosting service of the website was and see if I could start my own web site.

I would call it "(name of the person) owes me money". I would give the background story and the legal case number and then put two running counters on; one for how many dyas I had been owed money and the second for how much money I was owed.

That way, when people Googled the name of that person they would see my site. Also, if there were ways to see what other sites that hosting service had, then people would see the fraud reporting site and my site reporting what the fraud reporter owed me.

It might not get my money back but I am pretty sure I would feel better about the situation,

David

[Sunny]

Robert - have you considered Nash possibly not being able to give provenance on some items unless he confessed to fraudulently making them himself? Such as taking something like an old ribbon, attaching it to an old bat, and making something completely (new) out of something old? Kind of like 1 +1 = 3?

You are correct, I just want Nash to tell me which stuff is real. For instance I have a King Kelly framed photo. Nash told me this framed photo was displayed at Mike “King” Kelly’s funeral in 1894 in Boston. How does Nash know this? I had the photo checked out by 2 photo experts and told me the photo is real and told me it’s a first print meaning it’s off the original negative. But the card stock is not a normal Hastings mount, but Hastings is written on the back. Did Nash have an unmounted paper print of Mike Kelly and create this framed photo? Only Peter Nash know and so far he’s not talking. But he has a lot to say on his Hauls of Shame website. Why can’t he talk about his own stuff?

I do know that Nash once bought a damaged Imperial Cabinet photo of King Kelly for $500 on eBay. Paid someone to have it repaired and then sold it for $46,400.

[Sunny]

I meant seizing the actual ownership interest in the music and not just the royalties. However it is possible that he does not own any of it.

Lifson tried that too. He talked to a company that bought music rights. Nash’s music rights are not worth much. Being that the IRS has a lien on it the money of the sale would go to the IRS. Maybe Peter Nash is collecting Welfare, Food Stamps and rent subsidy. I will find out soon enough through the courts.

[Sunny]

If I were owed hundreds of thousands of dollars and was getting stiffed/led on by someone who owned a website that reported on fraud and payment didn't look like it was coming any time soon, I would find out who the hosting service of the website was and see if I could start my own web site.

I would call it "(name of the person) owes me money". I would give the background story and the legal case number and then put two running counters on; one for how many dyas I had been owed money and the second for how much money I was owed.

That way, when people Googled the name of that person they would see my site. Also, if there were ways to see what other sites that hosting service had, then people would see the fraud reporting site and my site reporting what the fraud reporter owed me.

It might not get my money back but I am pretty sure I would feel better about the situation,

David

That’s a good idea. I was thinking about writing a book and calling it “Ex- Rapper Peter Nash, Bernie Madoff of Baseball Memorabilia”.

Peter Nash, I noticed that you talk about writing a book about Barry Halper. Why did you buy so much stuff from the Halper’s auction in 1999 if you though he was so terrible? I remember you telling me you met Barry Halper and sold him stuff. You used our credit card to buy thousands of dollars’ worth of items in the auction. You told us that some of the items were being sold at bargain prices. I hope you didn’t cheat us out of the money you made from reselling the stuff, you were supposed to split the profits with us. You used up all my ink in my printer a few times staying up all night printing items from the Barry Halper’s auction. You need to get a life and forget about baseball memorabilia, it’s ruined your life.

[yanks12025]

Sunny,
Could you post photos of these item. Would like to see what they look like.

[Sunny]

Selling $28mil of old baseball string would be quite a feat. I'd love to hear the Joe Jackson bricks story.

Scan_Pic0001.jpg (68.5 KB)

Peter Nash where exactly are these bricks? In your deposition you said there in South Carolina but where exactly, you need to give details.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Was the idea to dismantle the museum?? It is brick.

http://www.panoramio.com/photo/12213246

[WhenItWasAHobby]

I have a better idea. Encapsulate the entire house with a plastic holder and assign it a grade.

[HRBAKER]

I have a better idea. Encapsulate the entire house with a plastic holder and assign it a grade.


...and then have it redone 3-4 times in hopes of a bump.

[slidekellyslide]

...and then have it redone 3-4 times in hopes of a bump.

Increase your odds of bumping by giving it to Dmitri Young.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Increase your odds of bumping by giving it to Dmitri Young.

Or pristine_paper

[Cardboard Junkie]

....or Pankywitz, or whatever that guys name is. Then have problemstine sell :it!:D

[Sunny]

Let's see....28 million bucks divided by 20 Bucks for each card=1,400,000. cards.

2 inches of string per card= 2,800,000 inches of string.

There are 63,360 inches in a mile or enough for 31,680 cards....but we need 1,400,000 cards

So one would need over44 miles of string to make 1,400,000 cards at 20 bucks a pop to get 28 megabucks.

Are there 44 miles of string in a hardball?

My research says there are 363 feet of string in a baseball, and 744 feet of yarn. I dunno maybe my math is off. Anyone?

The way Nash had it figured out he would take the string apart and use the thread of the string to make the cards. I guess I should have explained it better. Besides trying to con me out of my money I sometime think maybe in his delusional mind he may have believed in his crazy scheme. But of course using somebody elses money. Peter Nash is so delusional he thought the documentary movie he made “Rooters The Birth of Red Sox Nation” would make him a net profit of $600,000. In reality he lost money making the movie.

Pete you need to get a real job. I remember Bekim Laiqi telling me you’re not the same person he use to know. Angela Thomas told my wife and me that you owe Bekim Laiqi and his cousin $300,000. Did you pay them back? I heard you pawned off the collateral they had to a pawn shop. Do you have any memorabilia left? Or did you give everything to Bekim’s cousins when they paid you that unannounced visit.

[Sunny]

Scan_Pic0001.jpg (68.5 KB)

Peter Nash where exactly are these bricks? In your deposition you said there in South Carolina but where exactly, you need to give details.

Hey Pete, why haven’t you told the story about the Joe Jackson bricks on your website Hauls of Shame? What, why would you be embarrassed, the Joe Jackson house had some real merit. Oh, come on Peter just because you were embarrassed by the joke Richard Davis, from “Flip This House” played on you. Playing that joke on you with the Shoeless Joe Jackson shoes would have made great TV. You could have use the TV show to promote the bricks and made some quick money. You should have let it go, but instead for about one year you went back and forth like a fool editing the film. They got tired of your silliness and cut you out altogether and aired the show without you. I told you to leave it alone. The joke they pulled on you would have made great TV and it would have given you great provenance to promote the Joe Jackson house bricks you own. How foolish to blow an opportunity to make some real money when you needed the money badly. Just think, if you had allowed the TV show to air their way your whole life would be much different. Your pride and arrogance and stupidity have led you down the road of destruction. Where are those bricks now Peter Nash? Rob Lifson has a Court Order to attach and seize any property, personal of real, which belongs to you and the Order specifically names the “building material/bricks from Joe Jackson’s home” among many other items, including the 1880’s Radbourn Providence Silver Trophy Baseball. But you said in your deposition that John Rogers has your Radbourn Sliver Trophy Baseball because you’re working it into a business deal. So does that means John Rogers lied in his affidavit saying all of his loans to you were unsecured? Peter what happen to that signed Joe Jackson baseball that Legendary Auctions had of yours. I was told John Rogers bought it for $15,000 and as you are aware any proceeds of that ball was supposed to be sent to Rob Lifson, minus any commissions owed to Legendary Auctions. You and Rogers have a lot of explaining to do. You better tell Rogers to send that Radbourn Silver Baseball and the money for the Joe Jackson baseball to Lifson because you certainly don’t need any more legal problems. But Pete don't be delusional the bricks are not worth what you think they are, although you could have made some money with them. I certainly hope that place in South Carolina still has the bricks because you certainly need to pay down on your debt.

[Ease]

So Richard Davis owned the house and Pete acquired the scrap from the flip this house renovation? Then he pitches you on the email scheme with that scrap for 250k?

[Sunny]

So Richard Davis owned the house and Pete acquired the scrap from the flip this house renovation? Then he pitches you on the email scheme with that scrap for 250k?

After I’m done working I’ll post the details. Richard Davis told me dealing with Peter Nash was a nightmare. He told me Nash is the type of guy that after you shake his hand you have to make sure some of your fingers aren’t missing.

Hey Pete please let me know what collateral I have of yours is real. What’s up with this 1912 Boston Red Sox framed team photo that you put $1,000 value on? It looks like a magazine photo that you put in an old frame. What say you? Peter where is my 1912 World Series Player Diamond Stickpin and the 1868 Albumen photo of the Brooklyn Atlantics that you stole from me and gave to Al Angelo for collateral? I have a Court Order for you to return them and I want them back immediately. Please tell Al Angelo to give them to me. I assume your aware that your prior attorney returned the 5 other items you stole from me that you gave to Al Angelo as collateral. If Mr. Angelo doesn't return the items to me I guess I'll have to file criminal charges. The last time I spoke with Al Angelo he hung up the phone on me.

[Sunny]

Hey Pete, why haven’t you told the story about the Joe Jackson bricks on your website Hauls of Shame? What, why would you be embarrassed, the Joe Jackson house had some real merit. Oh, come on Peter just because you were embarrassed by the joke Richard Davis, from “Flip This House” played on you. Playing that joke on you with the Shoeless Joe Jackson shoes would have made great TV. You could have use the TV show to promote the bricks and made some quick money. You should have let it go, but instead for about one year you went back and forth like a fool editing the film. They got tired of your silliness and cut you out altogether and aired the show without you. I told you to leave it alone. The joke they pulled on you would have made great TV and it would have given you great provenance to promote the Joe Jackson house bricks you own. How foolish to blow an opportunity to make some real money when you needed the money badly. Just think, if you had allowed the TV show to air their way your whole life would be much different. Your pride and arrogance and stupidity have led you down the road of destruction. Where are those bricks now Peter Nash? Rob Lifson has a Court Order to attach and seize any property, personal of real, which belongs to you and the Order specifically names the “building material/bricks from Joe Jackson’s home” among many other items, including the 1880’s Radbourn Providence Silver Trophy Baseball. But you said in your deposition that John Rogers has your Radbourn Sliver Trophy Baseball because you’re working it into a business deal. So does that means John Rogers lied in his affidavit saying all of his loans to you were unsecured? Peter what happen to that signed Joe Jackson baseball that Legendary Auctions had of yours. I was told John Rogers bought it for $15,000 and as you are aware any proceeds of that ball was supposed to be sent to Rob Lifson, minus any commissions owed to Legendary Auctions. You and Rogers have a lot of explaining to do. You better tell Rogers to send that Radbourn Silver Baseball and the money for the Joe Jackson baseball to Lifson because you certainly don’t need any more legal problems. But Pete don't be delusional the bricks are not worth what you think they are, although you could have made some money with them. I certainly hope that place in South Carolina still has the bricks because you certainly need to pay down on your debt.

Peter Nash told me he bought the Joe Jackson house for $105,000 from Dan Rawls (just the house not the real property) and right after Nash closed on the house he flipped the house to Richard Davis for a price of $130,000 and Davis moved the house and donated it to be used as the Joe Jackson museum. Nash’s deal with Richard Davis was that he got to keep a certain amount of bricks, the garage in the back yard and some other parts of the house. Nash told me he didn’t have the money to close on the house and Dan Rawls wanted to sell the house directly to Richard Davis, Nash threatened a lawsuit. I was told by Bekim Laiqi that his cousin lent $100,000 to Nash to close on the Joe Jackson house. Bekim told me his cousin took the profit and Peter was left with the Joe Jackson material/bricks.

Richard Davis pull a prank on Peter Nash and Peter fell for it all the way. Davis told Peter that there’s a rumor that Joe Jackson buried his shoes under the house for good luck when he had the house built. So Davis got an old pair of shoes and buried them under the house. When the construction crew lifted the house Nash found the shoes and went wild thinking he won the million dollar lottery. Eventually Davis told Nash it was a prank and Nash felt like a fool and was pissed off. Below is a couple of emails Richard Davis sent me.

From: "Richard C. Davis"
Date: Tuesday, November 27, 2012 6:36 pm
Subject: Re: Joe Jackson House
To: "lkochfraser@optonline.net"

> I can probably find a copy somewhere in the office, what is your
> address? Don't know the Cox guys other than that move, I paid
> them personally to do that move, your Dumb Ass Pete seemed to
> think TV networks paid for everything, my show was real and that
> was real money that he cost me for not signing the release. I
> ought to just post the prank footage on youtube:) but I learned
> to not let the viewing public associate with people like him
> with my company or show, therefore I made sure even his shadow
> didn't make the episode.
>
> RCD

From: "Richard C. Davis"
Date: Monday, November 26, 2012 1:38 pm
Subject: Re: Joe Jackson House
To: "lkochfraser@optonline.net"

> Robert,
>
> Yes, he was a pain in the Ass and got in our way every day and
> ultimately never would sign a release so we had to cut footage
> around him so he never was on the show. …

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xsd3OqKRslo

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2442326

[Fuddjcal]

Hey Pete, why haven’t you told the story about the Joe Jackson bricks on your website Hauls of Shame? What, why would you be embarrassed, the Joe Jackson house had some real merit. Oh, come on Peter just because you were embarrassed by the joke Richard Davis, from “Flip This House” played on you. Playing that joke on you with the Shoeless Joe Jackson shoes would have made great TV. You could have use the TV show to promote the bricks and made some quick money. You should have let it go, but instead for about one year you went back and forth like a fool editing the film. They got tired of your silliness and cut you out altogether and aired the show without you. I told you to leave it alone. The joke they pulled on you would have made great TV and it would have given you great provenance to promote the Joe Jackson house bricks you own. How foolish to blow an opportunity to make some real money when you needed the money badly. Just think, if you had allowed the TV show to air their way your whole life would be much different. Your pride and arrogance and stupidity have led you down the road of destruction. Where are those bricks now Peter Nash? Rob Lifson has a Court Order to attach and seize any property, personal of real, which belongs to you and the Order specifically names the “building material/bricks from Joe Jackson’s home” among many other items, including the 1880’s Radbourn Providence Silver Trophy Baseball. But you said in your deposition that John Rogers has your Radbourn Sliver Trophy Baseball because you’re working it into a business deal. So does that means John Rogers lied in his affidavit saying all of his loans to you were unsecured? Peter what happen to that signed Joe Jackson baseball that Legendary Auctions had of yours. I was told John Rogers bought it for $15,000 and as you are aware any proceeds of that ball was supposed to be sent to Rob Lifson, minus any commissions owed to Legendary Auctions. You and Rogers have a lot of explaining to do. You better tell Rogers to send that Radbourn Silver Baseball and the money for the Joe Jackson baseball to Lifson because you certainly don’t need any more legal problems. But Pete don't be delusional the bricks are not worth what you think they are, although you could have made some money with them. I certainly hope that place in South Carolina still has the bricks because you certainly need to pay down on your debt.

anyone to buy a "brick"...any brick in the first place needs his head examined. what a complete idiot. I like the stories the Pete tells, but with-out a doubt Sunny, I like reading your your stories just a little more. Never stop dogging Brick Boy...I can see it now, storing bricks at his house that are probably from his backyard planter LOLOL, if he has a backyard anymore? If he does, I hope you take it. Good luck chasing your money Sunny!

[Cardboard Junkie]

There are quite a few "brick" collectors.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/LONG-RECTANGULAR-BRICK-2100-B-C-/221347029659?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item33894fa29b
Someone had the brilliant idea to market Olympia bricks (the old Red Wing playground), after the place was demolished. They made some good money. Just saying collectible bricks can be cool. Heck I even had a brick from "hadrians wall" I picked up in England in76....sold for $500.00 jes sayin:)

[Peter_Spaeth]

Better a brick than a slab.

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

The Hadrian's wall brick sounds very cool.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bigtrain]

Interesting that Mr. Nash posts an "Editor's Note" explaining that he has been involved in lawsuits with Fraser, Lifson and REA but fails to point out that those parties have huge civil judgments against him, judgments that, I presume, are based on his fraud and therefore cannot be discharged in bankruptcy. No ax to grind there.

[Sunny]

Interesting that Mr. Nash posts an "Editor's Note" explaining that he has been involved in lawsuits with Fraser, Lifson and REA but fails to point out that those parties have huge civil judgments against him, judgments that, I presume, are based on his fraud and therefore cannot be discharged in bankruptcy. No ax to grind there.

You are correct The Fraser’s Judgment and Lifson’s Judgment against Nash are grounded in fraud so therefore the Judgments cannot be discharged in bankruptcy. Fraser’s Judgment collect 8.5% interest and Lifson’s 10%. Peter Nash has a minority interest in the McGreevy’s bar in Boston and Lifson collects all of Nash’s money from the bar which amounts to approximately $50,000 per year. It’s too bad that Nash doesn’t own more of the bar. I was told by Bekim Laiqi that Nash owed one of Bekim’s cousin’s approximately $50,000 back in 2008 so Nash sold 10% of his interest in the bar for $75,000 to pay off this debt. John Iannuzzi an FBI Agent told me it’s not wise to borrow money from the Albanians. John Iannuzzi is an FBI agent that called me a few times asking me questions about Peter Nash. This same FBI agent told me Nash is trying to save himself with this Hauls of Shame website. As an interesting note FBI agent Iannuzzi told me Peter Nash hung up the phone on him.

[Cardboard Junkie]

"John Iannuzzi an FBI Agent told me it’s not wise to borrow money from the Albanians."
Doesn't sound too politically correct for a federal agent. Downright inappropriate.:) jes sayin

[Leon]

You are correct The Fraser’s Judgment and Lifson’s Judgment against Nash are grounded in fraud so therefore the Judgments cannot be discharged in bankruptcy. Fraser’s Judgment collect 8.5% interest and Lifson’s 10%. Peter Nash has a minority interest in the McGreevy’s bar in Boston and Lifson collects all of Nash’s money from the bar which amounts to approximately $50,000 per year. It’s too bad that Nash doesn’t own more of the bar. I was told by Bekim Laiqi that Nash owed one of Bekim’s cousin’s approximately $50,000 back in 2008 so Nash sold 10% of his interest in the bar for $75,000 to pay off this debt. John Iannuzzi an FBI Agent told me it’s not wise to borrow money from the Albanians. John Iannuzzi is an FBI agent that called me a few times asking me questions about Peter Nash. This same FBI agent told me Nash is trying to save himself with this Hauls of Shame website. As an interesting note FBI agent Iannuzzi told me Peter Nash hung up the phone on him.


Yikes...

[Peter_Spaeth]

Background.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/i-team/boston-red-sox-1912-world-series-trophy-auction-legal-battle-peter-nash-robert-fraser-article-1.1126889

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

I probably would not quote an FBI agent on a forum, as a courtesy to the agent.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[butcher354435]

Quoting an agent is probably ok but I definitely wouldn't list his name.

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

Quoting an agent is probably ok but I definitely wouldn't list his name.


That's what I meant. ;)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sunny]

"John Iannuzzi an FBI Agent told me it’s not wise to borrow money from the Albanians."
Doesn't sound too politically correct for a federal agent. Downright inappropriate.:) jes sayin

That may be true but that’s what he said. But he didn’t mean it in a bad way. This same FBI agent wasn’t happy with Nash putting his name on his website so Nash was told to take it down. I was told by Bekim Laiqi that he and his cousins has a huge amount of memorabilia as collateral that Peter Nash gave them against money Nash borrowed from them. I was later told by somebody close to the Nash’s, Angela Thomas that Peter owed them $300,000. Let’s put it this way Bekim is a nice guy but I wouldn’t want to owe him money. As Bekim told me they don’t do lawsuits they take care of it in their own way. In early 2010 Bekim called me and asked me if I had Peter Nash’s address, I told him I do and gave it to him. They paid Nash an unannounced visit and I was told Peter Nash ended up pawning all the memorabilia to some pawnshop dealer in NY State. This pawnshop dealer is Kevin Gottlieb and has a location in Albany called Albany gold buyers 1321 Central Ave, Albany, NY and another location in Utica, NY call AAA Cash Corner. I visited Kevin Gottlieb and he’s some character. He wanted to sell me a Hugh Duffy scrap book and some frame thing relating to the 1909 Pittsburgh Pirate having a celebration at the Waldorf Astoria that had many signatures on it. When I ask to see the rest of Nash’s stuff he told me I had to put $100,000 in escrow to prove that I’m a serious buyer, so I left. Below is some information on Kevin Gottlieb. My gut feeling was Nash was trying to get the stuff back but couldn’t.

http://www.wktv.com/news/local/New-legislation-may-require-pawn-shops-to-document-every-purchase-133699853.html

http://wibx950.com/utica-man-arrested-twice-for-circumventing-ignition-interlock-device/

http://www.dhr.ny.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/Commissioners-Orders/sevilla_v_the_cash_corner.PDF

[Ease]

Wow, what a tangled and mangled web that has been woven.

[Sunny]

Wow, what a tangled and mangled web that has been woven.

One of the many things I sued Peter Nash for was that he made a fraudulent sales receipt saying he bought the 1912 Boston Red Sox World Series Trophy, when in fact the Fraser's bought it. Then Nash used this phony receipt to borrow money from people and one of those people was Bekim's cousin. Below is an email I sent to Bekim and copied to John Rogers, FBI, etc..

Subject: Regarding your phone call about Peter Nash

Date: 11/30/10 04:54:42 PM

From: lkochfraser@optonline.net

To: "Laiqi, Bekim" <blaiqi@aol.com>
Cc: "Thomas, Angela" <angela@pranamarketing.com>, "Kozyra, Barry" <barrykozyra@kozyrahartz.com>, INFO@ROGERSARCHIVE.COM, "Iannuzzi, John M." <John.Iannuzzi@ic.fbi.gov>

Hi Bekim,

After receiving your phone call today I thought it would be best to communicate to you in writing. You told me Peter Nash read you some emails that I sent John Rogers a memorabilia dealer from North Little Rock, Arkansas that has agreed to give Peter Nash some money to defend the lawsuit that my wife, Lisa and I have filed against Peter Nash, Roxanne Nash and Nash’s previous attorney Wolfgang Heimerl.

In our conversation you made it clear that you do not want your name mentioned in the lawsuit or involved in the lawsuit. The facts are you are involved in the lawsuit; paragraph 97 refers to you and your cousin. About three weeks ago you called me telling me Peter Nash was very upset that I mentioned you and your cousin in the lawsuit. I told you I referred to you and your cousin as creditors in paragraph 97.

Earlier this year you are the one that called Angela Thomas and got her to give you my unlisted telephone number and when you called me you told me Peter Nash owed you and your cousin money and wanted to know where Peter Nash lived because Peter refused to give you his address. It didn’t surprise me that Peter owed you money he told me that you and your cousins had lent him money many time before. I remember the time when Peter paid back a loan for $35,000 in cash at your kitchen table at your parents’ house in Bedford, NY. I sat there and watch you and Peter Nash count it.

It was very shocking when you told me that your cousin believed that he owned the 1912 WS Trophy because Peter Nash had not paid him back and that your cousin had some type of legal document signed by Peter Nash and notarized proving your cousin had ownership. You told me your cousin considered suing my wife and me for the 1912 trophy. Then on another occasion you wanted us to sell it and split the proceeds with your cousin. You also told me Peter Nash was very upset that you were talking to me and you actually said Peter was “mortified”. I spent a lot of time emailing you many documents to prove that the Frasers own the 1912 WS Trophy/Bruce Garland Collection and that the Frasers were always the owners of the Trophy and Peter Nash never had ownership in the 1912 WS Trophy/Bruce Garland Collection. The shocking thing Peter Nash did was sign a FRAUDULENT SALE AGREEMENT FOR $55,000. And then tells people that he is the owner and borrowed money against it.

After I sent you the proof that the Frasers own the 1912 WS trophy/Bruce Garland Collection you said your cousin doesn’t want to sue Peter Nash for the money but will take care of it in his own way. Obviously your cousin was scammed by Peter Nash big time but so was I. Now Peter Nash is borrowing money from some wealth memorabilia dealer in Arkansas. Maybe Peter is selling this guy the Brooklyn Bridge.

Peter Nash is a LIAR and has hurt me and my family and I will not hold back on anything. I’m sorry that you’re involved but blame that on Peter Nash. We are all victims of Peter Nash.

Regards,

Robert Fraser

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

That's intense.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Leon]

One of the many things I sued Peter Nash for was that he made a fraudulent sales receipt saying he bought the 1912 Boston Red Sox World Series Trophy, when in fact the Fraser's bought it. Then Nash used this phony receipt to borrow money from people and one of those people was Bekim's cousin. Below is an email I sent to Bekim and copied to John Rogers, FBI, etc..

Subject: Regarding your phone call about Peter Nash

Date: 11/30/10 04:54:42 PM

From: lkochfraser@optonline.net

To: "Laiqi, Bekim" <blaiqi@aol.com>
Cc: "Thomas, Angela" <angela@pranamarketing.com>, "Kozyra, Barry" <barrykozyra@kozyrahartz.com>, INFO@ROGERSARCHIVE.COM, "Iannuzzi, John M." <John.Iannuzzi@ic.fbi.gov>

Hi Bekim,

After receiving your phone call today I thought it would be best to communicate to you in writing. You told me Peter Nash read you some emails that I sent John Rogers a memorabilia dealer from North Little Rock, Arkansas that has agreed to give Peter Nash some money to defend the lawsuit that my wife, Lisa and I have filed against Peter Nash, Roxanne Nash and Nash’s previous attorney Wolfgang Heimerl.

In our conversation you made it clear that you do not want your name mentioned in the lawsuit or involved in the lawsuit. The facts are you are involved in the lawsuit; paragraph 97 refers to you and your cousin. About three weeks ago you called me telling me Peter Nash was very upset that I mentioned you and your cousin in the lawsuit. I told you I referred to you and your cousin as creditors in paragraph 97.

Earlier this year you are the one that called Angela Thomas and got her to give you my unlisted telephone number and when you called me you told me Peter Nash owed you and your cousin money and wanted to know where Peter Nash lived because Peter refused to give you his address. It didn’t surprise me that Peter owed you money he told me that you and your cousins had lent him money many time before. I remember the time when Peter paid back a loan for $35,000 in cash at your kitchen table at your parents’ house in Bedford, NY. I sat there and watch you and Peter Nash count it.

It was very shocking when you told me that your cousin believed that he owned the 1912 WS Trophy because Peter Nash had not paid him back and that your cousin had some type of legal document signed by Peter Nash and notarized proving your cousin had ownership. You told me your cousin considered suing my wife and me for the 1912 trophy. Then on another occasion you wanted us to sell it and split the proceeds with your cousin. You also told me Peter Nash was very upset that you were talking to me and you actually said Peter was “mortified”. I spent a lot of time emailing you many documents to prove that the Frasers own the 1912 WS Trophy/Bruce Garland Collection and that the Frasers were always the owners of the Trophy and Peter Nash never had ownership in the 1912 WS Trophy/Bruce Garland Collection. The shocking thing Peter Nash did was sign a FRAUDULENT SALE AGREEMENT FOR $55,000. And then tells people that he is the owner and borrowed money against it.

After I sent you the proof that the Frasers own the 1912 WS trophy/Bruce Garland Collection you said your cousin doesn’t want to sue Peter Nash for the money but will take care of it in his own way. Obviously your cousin was scammed by Peter Nash big time but so was I. Now Peter Nash is borrowing money from some wealth memorabilia dealer in Arkansas. Maybe Peter is selling this guy the Brooklyn Bridge.

Peter Nash is a LIAR and has hurt me and my family and I will not hold back on anything. I’m sorry that you’re involved but blame that on Peter Nash. We are all victims of Peter Nash.

Regards,

Robert Fraser


I think a film about all of this would be very interesting!!

[slidekellyslide]

I think a film about all of this would be very interesting!!

Only if it ends with Peter Nash in prison.

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

I think a film about all of this would be very interesting!!


I think this could be part of a larger 30 for 30 about fraud in the memorabilia industry.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HRBAKER]

I think this could be part of a larger 30 for 30 about fraud in the memorabilia industry.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I'm afraid you need more than thirty minutes for that one.

[Rich Klein]

for at least an hour so more than 30 minutes is already assumed. 30 for 30 meant 30 documentaries covering the 1st 30 years (or now more) of ESPN.

Don't worry, there will be plenty of time to talk about all these characters.

Rich

[HRBAKER]

for at least an hour so more than 30 minutes is already assumed. 30 for 30 meant 30 documentaries covering the 1st 30 years (or now more) of ESPN.

Don't worry, there will be plenty of time to talk about all these characters.

Rich

I stand corrected. I don't pay much attention to the Worldwide Leader anymore.

[Sunny]

Only if it ends with Peter Nash in prison.

Peter Nash I see that you wrote an article about Roger Connor’s signature. But what about the Roger Connor signature you gave to me as collateral. The back of this 1889 NY Giants team photo (bottom left corner) it has written on it “Return to R. Connor Springfield Mass.” It also says “Send back to Murnane Globe”. Did you get this when you bought the Tim Murnane collection from Murnane’s grandson? Murnane’s grandson told me you bought the collection for $50,000. Comparing the Connor signature I have to Heritage’s mine looks good. In deposition you told Barry Kozyra, Esq. you believe that the Roger Connor signature I have is good. Nash you need to give provenance to where you got this cabinet photo from so I can sell it and apply it to your Judgment! You go on and on about other people’s provenance but what about your own items! Do I have have to get a Court Order to make you answer and don’t forget any legal fees I spend you will eventually have to pay for. I hope this Roger Connor signature I have as collateral wasn’t stolen like the Fred Tenney stuff you stole and consigned to Robert Edward Auctions in 2007 and then they obtain a Court Order to have the Fred Tenney items returned to the rightful owner. Peter Nash why don’t you post the Cooperstown, NY Police report when the rightful owner of the Tenney items reported the memorabilia stolen? After all your website is called Hauls of Shame! If anyone would like to buy this Connor signature please contact me.

http://www.net54baseball.com/images/attach/jpg.gif

[Peter_Spaeth]

Robert it sounds like you are in need of some supplementary proceedings if you have not already gone that route.

[jhs5120]

Robert it sounds like you are in need of some supplementary proceedings if you have not already gone that route.

+1

It seems like the route you are currently taking is not working. You cannot sit around and wait for Nash to provide providence to each and every item he has given you. He's not going to, ever.

It might be time to take further legal action.

[Cardboard Junkie]

I'm not a lawyer, Robert, but it might be wise to consult a lawyer about posting here. Don't want to get hung by your own petard. Dave.

[Peter_Spaeth]

"For 'tis sport to have the engineer/ Hoist with his own petar …"

[wonkaticket]

I'm not a lawyer, Robert, but it might be wise to consult a lawyer about posting here. Don't want to get hung by your own petard. Dave.

David since were giving advice. Perhaps you can spend your time trying to get the “Large Ass” Herzog card shipped to you vs. offering up legal advice to Robert. If the guy wants to post this information that’s his business. Just like if you want to read Peter’s website and pat a self-admitted fraudster on the back that is your business. The same goes for Peter it's his business if he wants to continue to attack people in cyberspace to draw attention away from his problems...well I guess that's his business as well.

Also a big tip of the hat to Mr. Steve Ivy CEO of Heritage for the below response to Peter Nash.

“We have an obligation to both the consignor, and any potential buyer, as covered by our consignment agreement, and terms of sale. As outlined in Chris’s email, we also have an obligation to deal with any 3rd party that may have a claim, and we do so when such situations occur. We can’t address what ultimately amounts to conjecture, as you are asking us to do, as that may harm the consignor who has warranted good title. As you are aware, we also warrant good title to any potential buyer, and clearly have the financial wherewithal to back it up. You obviously have no standing in this matter. Your continued attempts to create issues where none exist (at least to our knowledge) to promote your own interests is transparent to all who know you.”

[Cardboard Junkie]

John, your lack of heterosexuality and manliness is astounding. 4Q2.
Dave