View Full Version : The real truth about Peter Nash
BeanTown
07-12-2017, 07:43 PM
Just posted online.
http://peternashpublicdocuments.com/
ajjohnsonsoxfan
07-12-2017, 08:14 PM
Incredible that someone could get away with so much fraud. He's done a good job of propagating outright lies to mask his own illegal behavior. He'd be a great hire in D.C. as someone's spokesman
There is still hope he lands in jail for a long time. And there are some prominent board members who actually like this criminal.
.
rjackson44
07-13-2017, 06:02 AM
This is a good one for this television series. Seems like a nut job
bobbyw8469
07-13-2017, 06:26 AM
I'm guessing the royalties from "The Gas Face" aren't as lucrative as one would think..... :-p
tazdmb
07-13-2017, 07:38 AM
I know what I am doing the rest of today :D
samosa4u
07-13-2017, 08:43 AM
The cease and desist notice is 411 pages? LOL! I don't even think a Hollywood script is that big.
Peter_Spaeth
07-13-2017, 08:51 AM
The cease and desist notice is 411 pages? LOL! I don't even think a Hollywood script is that big.
Exhibits.
Kevin Savage
07-13-2017, 09:09 AM
Wow this is like Moby Dick..... really gets good about page 200...... just kidding- I don't read real fast (spent more time buying collections than going to class in college....) and need to carve out the better part of a month to read the whole thing.... but found what I had time to read to be very interesting..... Thanks for posting!
Rich Klein
07-13-2017, 09:14 AM
remind me never to get Mr. Lifson upset at me :D
Cooptown
07-13-2017, 09:29 AM
I have always been intrigued by Peter Nash. His brother Brian was an asst coach at my college (St. Bonaventure) and was the nicest guy. Women loved him. I had a buddy that thought about becoming a team manager and that was his contact. He mentioned to me one time; did you know Brian Nash's brother Peter was in Third Base and it always stuck with me.
When I re-entered the hobby after college, I heard his name a lot and had have read some of his articles. The HOS twitter account has been very active lately with the selling of the Sheen/Ruth items. I have always wondered who exactly Peter Nash was, outside of a controversial blogger and former rapper. Collector? Writer? What were his motivations? But any thread on him seemed like a hot topic and there were many pages (too lazy to comb through it all).
I guess this 411 page document outlines it all.
I don't know American law, and not much about CDN law either, but what are the chances the individual who wrote the cease and desist letter ever collects any of his money?
I can also assume Peter Nash is in hiding or his whereabouts are unknown, but if he is ever located, can his assets be sold (if he has any?) to help pay off the award?
Cooptown
07-13-2017, 09:53 AM
I don't know American law, and not much about CDN law either, but what are the chances the individual who wrote the cease and desist letter ever collects any of his money?
I can also assume Peter Nash is in hiding or his whereabouts are unknown, but if he is ever located, can his assets be sold (if he has any?) to help pay off the award?
I'm also curious to know how many people are behind Halls of Shame? The HOS twitter account was active this morning. Is Peter Nash still posting and "liking" or are there many people with access to their twitter account.
Is there a Cliff's note version to who Peter Nash is?
darwinbulldog
07-13-2017, 10:25 AM
The cease and desist notice is 411 pages? LOL! I don't even think a Hollywood script is that big.
1 page per minute is the rule of thumb for Hollywood.
Keith H. Thompson
07-13-2017, 10:53 AM
About a month ago in between a special Fenway Park Tour and the evening game vs Detroit I had lunch with Peter Nash at the McGreevy Bar on Boyleston Street. I was with my son and innocent four year old twin granddaughters, and Peter was the perfect host.
The Fenway Park tour was great. One gets to go behind the scoreboard in left field and see the physical signage and the cramped quarters. It is difficult for two people to pass. I believe entrance is only through the playing field door made notorious by Manny Ramirez who occasionally ducked in for a sandwich (or something or nothing) between innings. I'm told there is no air conditioning or running water nor did I see any. Ended with a very good buffet luncheon hosted by Dick Flavin, a former Red Sox announcer and Poet Laureate.
The Detroit game not so good for a life long Detroit fan "whose world still tips a little when the Tigers lose."
I would like to see a count of hands for anyone who believes that the Charlie Sheen Ruth 1927 World Series Ring was "resized for Claire Ruth in homage to her husband."
Keith H Thompson
hcv123
07-13-2017, 10:58 AM
Pop goes the Weasel! I guess when your knee deep in Sh--, you are going to get dirty!! I have no ties or allegiances to any of the parties (other than having consigned once and bid in RE auctions) . I have read a lot of the historical documentation on HOS and the little that has been put out by REA - While I am sure there is A lot of BS exaggeration in there - clearly Nash has much to answer for and at the same time I don't believe RL or REA are squeaky clean here - although clearly a hell of a lot smarter and more resourceful.
BeanTown
07-13-2017, 11:03 AM
I'm also curious to know how many people are behind Halls of Shame? The HOS twitter account was active this morning. Is Peter Nash still posting and "liking" or are there many people with access to their twitter account.
Is there a Cliff's note version to who Peter Nash is?
That's a GREAT question Scott. In 2012 The Hauls of Shame wrote about a Peck and Snyder card That Legendary was going to auction off. They mentioned the consignor by name as a longtime collector and were unsure where the card ended up after the FBI looked at it, at the National.
Then a year or two later the HOS wrote about another Peck and Snyder card and referenced back to the longtime collector as a scumbag along with other choice words. Completely a different writing style and tune. Very obvious the writer was a different writer from the 2012 article and this new writer had a personal agenda they were trying to get out.
I believe there are a couple "prominent board members" who are in cahoots with Peter Nash. They were also most likely ghost writers on Hauls Of Shame. They used it as their soap box for whatever self serving reason they deemed fit. Sometimes a good clue when reading the HOS articles is to look at all the chest pumping adjectives when describing a person. It's very possible that the actual writer of the article was the person who was getting all the props in the article.
What does it take to become a Ghost Writer on the Hauls Of Shame?
1. Befriend and smoooze with Peter Nash to get on his goodside
2. Be a great writer who knows how to manipulate words and have an attitude.
3. Get a clever subscriber handle like "Mastro Monkey" to make posts on articles
4. Have a vandictive personality where you want reconning to occur.
Hauls Of Shame was basically a hobby tabloid that spewed out propaganda against anyone that got in their way or anyone they wanted to go after.
HOS mixed in facts with a ton of biased opinions and reckless reporting which is why they lasted about as long as the singing/dancing group known as Milli Vanilli. For those that are not famerial with the defunct band. Milli Vanilli got caught lip syncing as other people sang the songs and all these guys did was dance around the stage acting like it was them.
Peter_Spaeth
07-13-2017, 11:09 AM
Agenda or not, I would think anyone in possession of stolen property should return it.
Agenda or not, I would think anyone in possession of stolen property should return it.
Clearly not everyone feels that way.
Peter_Spaeth
07-13-2017, 11:41 AM
Well it sucks to spend a lot of money on something and find out it's stolen, but the last I checked a thief can't convey good title and that goes down the chain of subsequent sales, so it's unfortunate but so it goes.
BeanTown
07-13-2017, 11:54 AM
It becomes art and then you hope one day they will dearchive or transfer title with a nice donation. I hear many muesuems and Liberies do this from time to time. Many victims over the last 40 years from items that have been stolen that are buried in many deep collections.
Peter_Spaeth
07-13-2017, 11:57 AM
It becomes art and then you hope one day they will dearchive or transfer title with a nice donation. I hear many muesuems and Liberies do this from time to time. Many victims over the last 40 years from items that have been stolen that are buried in many deep collections.
In other words, keep stolen property hoping the rightful owner will give up and abandon it? Wow. Don't like that code of ethics.
BeanTown
07-13-2017, 12:26 PM
Keeping on the thread, it's about Peter Nash. Peter and Greg have you ever written for Hauls Of Shame before?
Peter_Spaeth
07-13-2017, 12:29 PM
Keeping on the thread, it's about Peter Nash. Peter and Greg have you ever written for Hauls Of Shame before?
No. I don't know Peter at all.
Keeping on the thread, it's about Peter Nash. Peter and Greg have you ever written for Hauls Of Shame before?
Absolutely not. Never even posted there.
If Nash has been convicted in a summary judgement of fraud presumably he is out on bail awaiting sentencing - and giving tours of Fenway! Perhaps home confinement at the old French prison in Surinam would be a suitable venue while he waits for the wheels of justice to finally turn.
hangman62
07-13-2017, 12:56 PM
Just loaded his hiphop song - Pop goes the weasel , on my Ipod
Its got a beat you can dance to
bobbyw8469
07-13-2017, 01:14 PM
Just loaded his hiphop song - Pop goes the weasel , on my Ipod
Its got a beat you can dance to
Bad guys wear black, must have been a white guy that started all that.
Cooptown
07-13-2017, 01:41 PM
That's a GREAT question Scott. In 2012 The Hauls of Shame wrote about a Peck and Snyder card That Legendary was going to auction off. They mentioned the consignor by name as a longtime collector and were unsure where the card ended up after the FBI looked at it, at the National.
Then a year or two later the HOS wrote about another Peck and Snyder card and referenced back to the longtime collector as a scumbag along with other choice words. Completely a different writing style and tune. Very obvious the writer was a different writer from the 2012 article and this new writer had a personal agenda they were trying to get out.
I believe there are a couple "prominent board members" who are in cahoots with Peter Nash. They were also most likely ghost writers on Hauls Of Shame. They used it as their soap box for whatever self serving reason they deemed fit. Sometimes a good clue when reading the HOS articles is to look at all the chest pumping adjectives when describing a person. It's very possible that the actual writer of the article was the person who was getting all the props in the article.
What does it take to become a Ghost Writer on the Hauls Of Shame?
1. Befriend and smoooze with Peter Nash to get on his goodside
2. Be a great writer who knows how to manipulate words and have an attitude.
3. Get a clever subscriber handle like "Mastro Monkey" to make posts on articles
4. Have a vandictive personality where you want reconning to occur.
Hauls Of Shame was basically a hobby tabloid that spewed out propaganda against anyone that got in their way or anyone they wanted to go after.
HOS mixed in facts with a ton of biased opinions and reckless reporting which is why they lasted about as long as the singing/dancing group known as Milli Vanilli. For those that are not famerial with the defunct band. Milli Vanilli got caught lip syncing as other people sang the songs and all these guys did was dance around the stage acting like it was them.
Interesting. Thanks for sharing. I have long read HOS, sort of taking it with a grain of salt knowing it may not be true. But have long been fascinated with Peter Nash, having met his brother. Just too lazy to read through the hundreds and hundreds of pages written on this board about it.
Peter_Spaeth
07-13-2017, 01:44 PM
I wouldn't necessarily take JC's view as gospel. Just sayin.
tazdmb
07-13-2017, 02:27 PM
Agenda or not, I would think anyone in possession of stolen property should return it.
Agreed, while I hate the unsubstantiated accusations made by Peter Nash, I would be lying if I did not admit I have learned a great deal from his website in terms of stole autographs/artifacts. Without his help, I think my collection would be littered with stolen goods that would make me feel very uncomfortable.
On I side note, I have gotten to know Bill Hasse, former Senior VP of the Hall of Fame, and flat out asked him why the HOF has not taken more steps to return some of the stolen artifacts. He told me that, unfortunately, much of the stuff that was stolen was never properly archived so that they had 100% proof, which is what the FBI wanted, to get the items returned. While other items, like the Johnson Presidential balls, was a pretty open and shut case.
steve B
07-13-2017, 05:14 PM
Agreed, while I hate the unsubstantiated accusations made by Peter Nash, I would be lying if I did not admit I have learned a great deal from his website in terms of stole autographs/artifacts. Without his help, I think my collection would be littered with stolen goods that would make me feel very uncomfortable.
On I side note, I have gotten to know Bill Hasse, former Senior VP of the Hall of Fame, and flat out asked him why the HOF has not taken more steps to return some of the stolen artifacts. He told me that, unfortunately, much of the stuff that was stolen was never properly archived so that they had 100% proof, which is what the FBI wanted, to get the items returned. While other items, like the Johnson Presidential balls, was a pretty open and shut case.
That's pretty much true for a lot of archives and museums. Many aren't well funded or have ups and downs. So a large collection gets "archived" which basically means boxed up hopefully in something more archival than a cardboard box, and labeled with a general idea of what's there. Like "famous person X collection, box 5 miscellaneous correspondence 1920-35" And there is sits awaiting a better cataloging, which may never happen.
I don't know how detailed they are about stuff that gets deaccessioned these days, hopefully they make a detailed record. But years ago if you had something the current director wanted and asked to swap for something from "one of those boxes in the basement" you might just get what you wanted. One of the people running the national stamp collection at one time would have stuff specially printed to trade for items they needed. Not exactly on the up and up, but at the time it was accepted. And there weren't many records kept at all.
It's not a good situation, and makes stuff prone to theft.
Steve B
Peter_Spaeth
07-14-2017, 07:49 AM
JC, now that I've answered your question about whether I ever posted on Nash's site, please answer one of mine: has the NYPL -- the owner of the stolen Peck and Snyder in question -- asked you to return it?
Bpm0014
07-14-2017, 08:00 AM
Bad guys wear black, must have been a white guy that started all that.
With those little white lies....
- 3rd Bass
JC, now that I've answered your question about whether I ever posted on Nash's site, please answer one of mine: has the NYPL -- the owner of the stolen Peck and Snyder in question -- asked you to return it?
If I were JC I would not only not answer your question I might just tell you to F off.
.
Peter_Spaeth
07-14-2017, 08:09 AM
He can do what he wants, Leon, but JC raised the subject himself in post 17, and then purported to justify not returning stolen property in post 21. So I'm just asking a logical follow up question.
He can do what he wants, Leon, but JC raised the subject himself in post 17, and then purported to justify not returning stolen property in post 21. So I'm just asking a logical follow up question.
Forget the not telling you part, i would just say F OFF to you if I were him. I have firsthand knowledge very few (except one close hobby friend) have on returning things to the NYPL . Just my opinion, everyone has one, some more informed than others. I am done but I will tell you this, I am 100% on JC's side on this.
.
Peter_Spaeth
07-14-2017, 08:20 AM
Forget the not telling you part, i would just say F OFF to you if I were him. I have firsthand knowledge very few (except one close hobby friend) have on returning things to the NYPL . Just my opinion, everyone has one, some more informed than others. I am done but I will tell you this, I am 100% on JC's side on this.
.
I am sure he is glad of your support.:)
david_l
07-14-2017, 08:30 AM
I don't want to stir the pot but Leon, it seems like you're taking a hear/see no evil philosophy to items stolen from archives and other public collections. You seem like a decent guy so I guess I just want to clarify.
I don't want to turn this into a flame war or anything but being that I'm an archivist myself, it's important for me to understand the viewpoint of the board's moderator/owner so I can make my own decision if I should keep participating in the community. I do know the history of your card and the NYPL. Your previous statement gave me pause though.
Post #21 talks about hoping to wait out an archive with the hopes that stolen materials will eventually be legally yours (not likely btw). That deeply concerns me on many different levels. What about you?
I don't want to stir the pot but Leon, it seems like you're taking a hear/see no evil philosophy to items stolen from archives and other public collections. You seem like a decent guy so I guess I just want to clarify.
I don't want to turn this into a flame war or anything but being that I'm an archivist myself, it's important for me to understand the viewpoint of the board's moderator/owner so I can make my own decision if I should keep participating in the community. I do know the history of your card and the NYPL. Your previous statement gave me pause though.
Post #21 talks about hoping to wait an archive out so that stolen materials will eventually be [I]legally[\/i] yours. That deeply concerns me on many different levels. What about you?
David, From what I have been told by reliable sources I believe the NYPL committed gross negligence many (20?) years ago in not trying to get their stuff back while it was being sold at auction or a lot of this could have been prevented. When they chose to look the other way, to me, it made the future issues their own and not anyone else's. I should add, otherwise I agree with you, when things can be proven they were stolen they should be returned.
Peter_Spaeth
07-14-2017, 09:21 AM
So JC now has good title because the NYPL was not diligent enough in seeking to recover the card 20 years ago? Because if he doesn't have good title, it ain't his. And if it ain't his, it's still the NYPL's, and he should return it. But he can tell me to F off.
So JC now has good title because the NYPL was not diligent enough in seeking to recover the card 20 years ago? Because if he doesn't have good title, it ain't his. And if it ain't his, it's still the NYPL's, and he should return it. But he can tell me to F off.
I am saying it is my belief, from what I have been told (and reiterated to on a phone call a minute ago) that the NYPL should possibly be held accountable for their gross negligence. I am not a lawyer but I believe a case of equitable estoppel could potentially be made, from reading what that is on Wiki :). The NYPL was told what was going on and chose to ignore it.
If I take something from your house and you see me and let me go, can you come back to me 20 yrs later and say you want the item back and be successful?
Peter_Spaeth
07-14-2017, 09:35 AM
First of all, JC did not try to justify his keeping the card on the basis of anything that happened 20 years ago. He talked about waiting out the owner, in post 21. "You hope one day they will dearchive or transfer title..." This is a new gloss you are adding.
In any case, in order to have an informed discussion about what happened 20 years ago and its legal effect if any (about which I am skeptical), I would want to know more than the conclusions you are offering. So please post what you know.
Peter_Spaeth
07-14-2017, 09:51 AM
PS at a very high level, negligent conduct normally wouldn't give rise to equitable estoppel as I understand it, there has to be some sort of intentional conduct by the party inconsistent with its present claim. Also reliance by the other party is typically required which wouldn't seem to be the case here.
PS at a very high level, negligent conduct normally wouldn't give rise to equitable estoppel as I understand it, there has to be some sort of intentional conduct by the party inconsistent with its present claim. Also reliance by the other party is typically required which wouldn't seem to be the case here.
Maybe this better defines it. "Estoppel by silence or acquiescence: Estoppel that prevents a person from asserting something when he had the right and opportunity to do so earlier, and such silence put another person at a disadvantage."
.
Peter_Spaeth
07-14-2017, 09:59 AM
Nah, you need INTENT to disadvantage someone for that to apply. And you need a duty to have acted. Since we are in google soundbite land:
Estoppel by silence is also sometimes called estoppel by inaction, estoppel by standing or acquiescence. It is not just staying silent, but doing that with an intention to bring harm to someone.
Nah, you need INTENT to disadvantage someone for that to apply. And you need a duty to have acted.
So you are saying, You don't have a duty to act when told you are being stolen from? And then 20+ yrs later it is ok for you to act and disadvantage a third party? Please help me understand that.
OK, I see the intent to harm.....but it is beyond my GED education to argue further.
Jeffrompa
07-14-2017, 10:05 AM
My Dad bought tons of stuff from libraries that closed and sold to him and sold to others . Unless that item was reported specifically no way could they come back and ask for it .
Peter_Spaeth
07-14-2017, 10:07 AM
So you are saying, You don't have a duty to act when told you are being stolen from? And then 20+ yrs later it is ok for you to act and disadvantage a third party? Please help me understand that.
I am saying I don't know enough about the facts of what happened 20 years ago to make a legal assessment, and for now, my presumption is that the NYPL is still the owner and is not estopped to claim ownership. You have stated conclusions. Post the facts, and we'll see where it goes.
steve B
07-14-2017, 09:42 PM
If I take something from your house and you see me and let me go, can you come back to me 20 yrs later and say you want the item back and be successful?
That's exactly what's being done with some antiquities often much more than 20 years after the fact.
Steve B
ALR-bishop
07-15-2017, 06:37 AM
Egypt and a few other countries I have visited of would love to get some stuff back:)
NewEnglandBaseBallist
07-15-2017, 09:49 AM
I have his two Images Of America books in my baseball library, the one on on the Royal Rooters and Baseball Legends of Brooklyn's Green-Wood Cemetery, both of which, in my opinion, are pretty good. Now he's lower than a cockroach. What a waste.
david_l
07-15-2017, 10:52 AM
David, From what I have been told by reliable sources I believe the NYPL committed gross negligence many (20?) years ago in not trying to get their stuff back while it was being sold at auction or a lot of this could have been prevented. When they chose to look the other way, to me, it made the future issues their own and not anyone else's. I should add, otherwise I agree with you, when things can be proven they were stolen they should be returned.
Leon, I respect you as a person and it's obvious you're a smart and caring guy. I also appreciate you directly responding to me even though I'm sure this is a subject you're sick of reading about on the forum. I have a fundamental difference of opinion on this though. The following post is not about you or your experiences but rather just my opinion on the subject and some posts I've seen here.
IHHO..
A lazy employee or understaffing does not constitute negligence. More importantly, the NYPL collection is a public collection. No matter how long anybody filibusters or how many times an item is sold, an item removed from the NYPL will never actually belong to anyone but the public. You can possess this property, sell or trade it, but in the end you will always just be possessing stolen poperty at the expense of the greater public and the community you spend so much time participating in. If history, knowledge, and community is important to us we should be enthusiastically returning these items to the public and we should be praising those that do. I'm not trying to villainize anyone. We all love this hobby and sports history but anybody possessing items from a public archive is explicitly hurting the community, both present and future.
It is true that many items in an archive are uncatalogued and may never be viewed by researchers. It's true that some archive employees may potentially be lazy or self serving. These are merely hollow justifications though. You never know what a researcher may find important in fifty years. Or what one item can tell us about another. A small theft can turn out to be quite a significant loss to future researchers. I could go on and on about this but I think everyone gets my point.
This argument of ownership doesn't even get into the potential legal and financial risk of owning such materials. A quick web search will show countless other collectors who have gotten burned for owning items taken from archives, libraries, and other public and private collections.
I won't be posting anymore on subjects although I will continue to read (how can I stop?).
I understand that others may have differing opinions but I believe our overall goals are the same.
Wishing everyone the best and their collecting endevours,
David Lu$t1g
(Edited last name for web searching purposes. Thanks).
Peter_Spaeth
07-15-2017, 11:21 AM
Good post. I think you should continue to share your views whether or not they are in sync with Leon's, or others'. In the end, even the moderator is just one guy with an opinion; his opinion doesn't define the forum or dictate anyone else's, and I am sure he would agree.
Leon, I respect you as a person and it's obvious you're a smart and caring guy. I also appreciate you directly responding to me even though I'm sure this is a subject you're sick of reading about on the forum. I have a fundamental difference of opinion on this though. The following post is not about you or your experiences but rather just my opinion on the subject and some posts I've seen here.
IHHO..
A lazy employee or understaffing does not constitute negligence. More importantly, the NYPL collection is a public collection. No matter how long anybody filibusters or how many times an item is sold, an item removed from the NYPL will never actually belong to anyone but the public. You can possess this property, sell or trade it, but in the end you will always just be possessing stolen poperty at the expense of the greater public and the community you spend so much time participating in. If history, knowledge, and community is important to us we should be enthusiastically returning these items to the public and we should be praising those that do. I'm not trying to villainize anyone. We all love this hobby and sports history but anybody possessing items from a public archive is explicitly hurting the community, both present and future.
It is true that many items in an archive are uncatalogued and may never be viewed by researchers. It's true that some archive employees may potentially be lazy or self serving. These are merely hollow justifications though. You never know what a researcher may find important in fifty years. Or what one item can tell us about another. A small theft can turn out to be quite a significant loss to future researchers. I could go on and on about this but I think everyone gets my point.
This argument of ownership doesn't even get into the potential legal and financial risk of owning such materials. A quick web search will show countless other collectors who have gotten burned for owning items taken from archives, libraries, and other public and private collections.
I won't be posting anymore on subjects although I will continue to read (how can I stop?).
I understand that others may have differing opinions but I believe our overall goals are the same.
Wishing everyone the best and their collecting endevours,
David Luftig
Hi David
I can certainly respect your opinion.
I don't expect other members to agree or disagree with me only to have civil dialogue and enjoy the hobby we love. Happy collecting....
ps.... I think it's worth reiterating that I do feel stolen items should generally be returned to their owners. Unfortunately we don't live in a black and white world. And as far as I know I am the rightful owner of everything in my collection :).
pps...and of course I agree with Peter. The only thing I learned as a liberal arts major is that I am in the minority of opinions of the majority in those classes, by a long shot. Sometimes I was, or felt like I was, the lone person on the other side of a view for the whole class.
Side tracking a bit-- but since it was brought up--, for Egypt and China there are recent laws put in place (1983 for Egypt and 1991 for China) making it illegal for certain types of artifacts to be exported-- and those laws are respected internationally. If you are a foreigner and bought the item before the year of law-- or the item you bought was originally exported before the date-- you are the legal owner and the item can be bought and sold any number of times (though it's good if there is proof that it was originally purchased before the date)-- after the year, you've broken the law and don't own it and can't sell it. The laws aren't retroactive. You'd likely be prosecuted pretty hard by those countries too for illegally exporting items that are considered part of their national heritage.
On PBS’s Antiques Roadshow, someone brought in a valuable ancient Egyptian figure. A sticker on the bottom showed that not only had it once been purchased from a well known and respected old time dealer of Egyptian antiquities, but that it was purchased before 1983 and was legal to own and resell. Good news for the guy who brought it to the show . . . On the flip side, I saw a guy on the show bring in an item where the appraiser told him that it was very nice but that he couldn't legally resell it.
Also, China does still allow antique but not ancient items to be sold to people outside their country, and the government puts a red sticker on those items indicating that they were legally exported. But, as said, if you have a relic that your parents bought on a 1960s vacation to Cairo or Bejing, you are the legal owner and can sell it as you wish.
In museum studies, we had a big section on the international law and ethics of items of important national heritage that are in museums all around the world-- many taken by foreigners, including foreign governments, from the countries years and sometimes centuries ago. The Elgin Marbles of Ancient Greece in the British Museum is probably the most famous case study that is still hotly debated between the two countries. Often times, the law is clear, while the ethics, along with other practical and philosophical considerations, is what is the matter for debate. I believe Britain has legal right to the marbles, but many, including the Greek government, said they should still return them. And the ethical and related issues often are not black and white, with compelling arguments from both sides-- I could detail Britain's non-legal arguments why they should keep them.
I could also go into the rules and ethics of museums deaccessioning (selling) items, but I've already bored you enough in this post-- though I can say that most non-profit museums, and all the major ones, are licensed/accredited and there are strict rules about how, when and what for they can sell items from the permanent collection. For example, one rule is they can only sell items from the permanent collection to purchase other items for their permanent collection. They aren't allowed to sell permanent collection items even to cover the operating or building budget or to hire new employees. If the Museum of Modern Art sells a Modigliani to finance the procurement of a Rembrandt that would be okay rule-wise, but if they sell the Modigliani to finance a new cafeteria it would lose its accreditation. This issue came to head when the City of Detroit wanted the public Detroit Art Museum to sell valuable art to cover city debt, but museum rules forbade it. Luckily, it was worked out and the art kept by the museum.
steve B
07-16-2017, 06:03 PM
I could also go into the rules and ethics of museums deaccessioning (selling) items, but I've already bored you enough in this post--
Speaking for myself, no, not at all tome this is all fascinating.
Steve B
earlywynnfan
07-16-2017, 07:16 PM
Speaking for myself, no, not at all tome this is all fascinating.
Steve B
I agree!!
I agree!!
My final museology thesis project was doing a museum exhibit on the outsider artist Henry Darger (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Darger). Now, there's a curious topic.
Michael B
07-17-2017, 11:27 AM
If Nash has been convicted in a summary judgement of fraud presumably he is out on bail awaiting sentencing - and giving tours of Fenway! Perhaps home confinement at the old French prison in Surinam would be a suitable venue while he waits for the wheels of justice to finally turn.
Nice "Papillon" reference however, you are confusing your countries. Suriname, either spelling is accepted, is Dutch, the former Dutch Guiana. It changed its name in 1948. French Guiana, located next to Suriname, is the home of the infamous Ile de Diable as chronicled in the book by Henri Charriere later made into the movie of the same name.