I would have to believe that the public shame, embarrassment and ruined reputations must be much worse than the prison time served by these three.

Seriously? I would imagine there are few things in life worse than incarceration, even in minimum security facilities.

Yeah, but when you get out you have to face the reality of what your future is going to look like, the shunning by people you thought were friends, limited employment chances since you are now a felon, the shame put on your family by association, probably too much time on your hands, etc. I think Mark is very lucky to be offered a second chance by Heritage, particularly rejoining the same industry where he got up to his nefarious activities. I have never been inside, fortunately, but have to think the monotony of minimum security prison life can provide some kind rough comfort.

It is hard for me to feel much, if any, sympathy for someone who is getting shunned by people who he thought were his friends because he CHEATED them. He's probably lucky they aren't trying to figure out a way to sue his sorry ass off and make his life even more miserable. He made his choices and now he gets to reap what he sowed. Not one tear being shed here.

Mr Spaeth you have lived a sheltered life.:)

I would agree to a point, but if you' are getting out of prison and immediately being hired by a leader in the very industry in which you committed your crime, where's the shame, embarrassment and ruined reputation?

The document I referred to was not meant for the public but for the FBI report. The FBI have difference criteria for evidence that is applied which enables them to prove a dollar loss amount to set a sentencing for a crime. Their files must be 100% complete and accurate, not up for interpretation and favorable to the defendant. Yes Eric the actual dollar amount is much higher than stated. And again, this only is for the period 2007 to 2009.

My point of the post was that non-Mastro employee consignors of lots in those auctions found a partner to shill bid his/her lots. These partners are just as guilty of fraud as the Mastro family but have escaped exposure or penalty.

Well my statement was perhaps hyperbolic but then again I was responding to a post saying being embarrassed publicly was worse than being jailed.

I have seen some of the governments calculations on the Exhibits and they are not only incorrect,they are blatantly stupid. Far from 100% accurate as you imagine.

A couple shill bids placed for $100 each at an early level with frequent bidding, and then a final shill of $500 placed when the price was 5x higher, was calculated as a $700 loss when the first 2 bids clearly had no effect. But even worse calculation was when a single shill was placed early and the item sold for much higher, they said the loss was the full amount paid. I believe one item that sold for $4,800 was identified as a $4,500 loss to the victim.

I’m not trying to minimize the crime, and certainly the missing years are important, but mis-stating the numbers raises doubt. They didn’t need to inflate them.

Not at all to defend, but just on the question of dollar loss, in any given case I would think it's difficult to truly know the effect of the shill bids, because unless they were placed at the very end, you don't know what the course of legitimate bidding would have been but for the shills. Just by way of example, suppose the high bidder wins for 1000, but if you take out the shills his bid would have been 800. You can't really say that's a loss of 200, because if the high bid had showed at 800, not 1000, someone else might have bid 900.

Indeed, the government did not pursue restitution, perhaps because of difficulties of calculation.

And, I might add, as was pointed out to me in a PM, even a solitary shill bid placed to raise the price to the “hidden” maximum bid assumes that there is a loss to the victim 100% of the time when in some instances someone else may have stepped in with a legitimate bid. No modeling percentages were taken into consideration.

But "someone else" didn't have the opportunity, or the ability, to bid at that level because a fraudulent bid took that ability away. Mastro, et al., created whatever uncertainty exists regarding the number. So, IMO, they get to eat it.

Civilly, that would not not be a defense at all, at least not where I practice. I encounter similar claims pretty frequently. Once the fact of damage is shown, if the defendant's actions created the uncertainty as to the amount, the jury decides what the number is based upon the best evidence available. The "speculation" defense goes away. The bad guys don't get to benefit from the uncertainty they created by their own fraud. I don't know how it works in the criminal arena, but that is an issue -- probably one of the few -- that I have never lost either in state or federal court, in 32 years of practice.

Maybe Kenny, I'd have to think about that although my general understanding is that the plaintiff who has the burden of proof has to have a non-speculative damages theory and simply assuming there wouldn't have been any other bids in the but-for world of no shill bids seems awfully speculative to me. In any event, mine was less an observation about the mechanics of an actual trial than an observation that just academically speaking it's not an accurate measure of loss just to take the high bid and remove the shills.

Peter,

"Viewing this evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, we find that there was substantial evidence reasonably tending to support the jury's verdict. Mr. Musgrove had extensive experience in the travel business and a foundation was properly laid for his testimony relating to the value of Rainbow's good will. Indeed, appellants did not object to Mr. Musgrove's testimony and conceded that he was qualified to express an opinion on the issue of good will. Appellants argue nonetheless that the amount of damages to good will was so uncertain as to be speculative. The rule in Oklahoma, however, is that the prohibition against recovery of damages because the loss is uncertain or too speculative in nature applies to the fact of damages, not to the amount. Martin v. Griffin Television, Inc., 549 P.2d 85, 92 (Okla.1976). “Where it is made to appear that some loss has been suffered, it is proper to let the jury determine what the loss is from the best evidence the nature of the case admits.” Hardesty v. Andro Corporation–Webster Division, 555 P.2d 1030 (Okla.1976). Given the nature of good will, which is an intangible asset dependant upon a business' reputation, it was proper for the district court in this case to submit the question of damages to good will to the jury. See Westric Battery Co. v. Standard Electric Co., Inc., 522 F.2d 986, 987 n. 2 (10th Cir.1975) (“The amount cannot and hence need not be proven with absolute certainty.”). See also Kestenbaum v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 514 F.2d 690, 698 (5th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 424 U.S. 943, 96 S.Ct. 1412, 47 L.Ed.2d 349 (“The wrongdoer may not complain of inexactness where his actions preclude precise computation to the extent of the injury.”)."

Rainbow Travel Serv., Inc. v. Hilton Hotels Corp., 896 F.2d 1233, 1239–40 (10th Cir. 1990) (emphasis added).

Response
 

Impressive post, Kenny. The Law is a very interesting field and I respect your ability to clarify this issue. Some compensation should have been given to the victims. Lacking that, we have no recourse except to seek out Mr. Theotakis and advise him of our displeasure with his confessed crimes.

Dude, you keep saying you want to meet Theo to tell him off, but you might want to just leave it alone.

Kenny fine but I bet I could find lots of cases citing this or similar principles too and not just in a contract context:

Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 352 (1981) states: “Damages are not recoverable for loss beyond an amount that the evidence permits to be established with reasonable certainty.”

Anyhow, we have strayed I think from the topic. I have no doubt that however calculated a substantial aggregate loss was involved here.

What is overlooked in the Mastro Auction case is that consignors of lots in those auctions independently took the opportunity to merge with the ongoing fraud by joining with a partner to shill bid their lots. These consignor/shill bidder teams have significantly enriched themselves while evading exposure or penalty.

Leon, not sure why you seem to be defending this scumbag. And last time I checked, I don’t need your permission to speak to someone in Cleveland, dude.

If he were out of sight, I would never go looking for him.

But, if he’s sitting at HA accepting consignments, well yeah then me and a few of my buds are going to ask him about the money he stole from us. If someone who admitted cheating you and stealing from you, is prancing around in front of you, Leon, wouldn’t you want a few words with him..... ??

I am not defending what he, or the others, did. It was wrong. I have already told him what I thought as we spoke at the last National. I stated my other thoughts above. Say what you want to, it's America.

Except their stated rules allow them to bid on their own auction items.

Would you be happy if a bank teller who stole money was back working at your bank and it was legal for them to steal from you?

There is a nuance in this case that is much different than just giving someone a second chance ...

jeff

That is why he makes such a great addition, he has experience.:eek::D

Talk
 

So, you’re allowed to sit down and talk to him and tell him what you thought, but I can’t? I should “leave it alone”. And 30-40 other victims also don’t have that right? Wait and see dude.

As far as I know everyone has a right to do what they want to do.
I had written a different message in the other post then edited it to be nicer. Nice is always good :) "Leave it alone" sounded better than what I had said originally.
That said, I could care less if you speak with Mark or not. I don't need to wait as there is nothing to see. Happy collecting.

Makes me wonder if he wasn't "rewarded" with a job for being a good boy and not naming names as he went to jail.

That's a pretty strong statement
Probably warrants a full name by your post

Indeed. I also suspect many of his defenders were involved in shilling their own auctions. It is tough to slam someone who was your partner in crime.

It is also possible that the auction records that went missing were chosen to protect certain people. That would be pretty good leverage to make sure someone doesn't testify against you or speak negatively of you. It would be amazing to see those missing auction records.

How about starting your post with "once upon a time?"
I for one wasn't involved in anything except getting ripped off too, so the facts show (of which were recovered of course). Back then I didn't sell much at all.
Maybe those missing records would show your involvement? Who knows but to say people shilled because they have an opinion is quite speculative at best. I know I didn't shill...

ps..>Dave B., above, got ya' covered.

Leave it alone
 

I’m so very happy you didn’t lose a dime, Leon. But I did, so your admonition to “leave it alone” is all the more inappropriate.

Apparently you either can't read or can't comprehend the American language? Who said I didn't lose a dime? I was shilled at least 3x according to the report. Maybe you should get your facts straight before you stick your foot in your mouth again?

$1200 is much more than a dime. D381, E137 and SF Seals are more expensive than one would think.

Eric - You are right - I've listened to others stating that there were errors made. But I do not imagine 100% accuracy, it is rather their stated goal.

The case of fouled up calculations of shill bids is foreign to me. Where are these facts posted?

Error
 

I stand corrected. You said “I wasn’t involved.....except for getting ripped off”. My bad. I only saw the first part. I apologize.
I’m having Surgery on Monday to remove my foot from my mouth. When you had that surgery, did it hurt?


Your bad: telling me to stand down when you already sought him out in Chicago and addressed your concerns with him. Sometimes silence is golden.

Huge amount of misinformation in this thread about the Mastro case, the participants in the fraud, restitution, etc. The stated amount of loss was a fraction of what truly occurred due in part to very conservative calculations by the feds and the fact that Mastro destroyed so many years of records -- solely to hide their crimes.

Here's two things you all need to read:

Mastro shill bidding list: http://haulsofshame.com/blog/wp-cont...l-bid-list.pdf

Mastro, et al. indictment: https://www.justice.gov/archive/usao...pr0725_01a.pdf

I seemed to have missed your name on the victim impact list Jeff posted? I guess it was in those records that got destroyed? You remind me of a chihuahua LOL .... a NY one!!

Thanks Jeff for posting the shill bidding list. Definitely some names there I missed the first time I remember reading through it. Wow!

Leon, I was bidding with Mastro from day one. I finally wised up and yes I’m not down in Jeff’s list. Hell I remember working with Ron Oser.

Yeah a NY chihuahua has no chance against you dude...a Texas junkyard dog.

I would like to start with a full disclosure by stating that I joined this board today with the sole purpose of posting a response to comments in this thread. I have known Mark personally and professionally for more than 30 years and I had a couple purchases with Mastro but don’t believe I was defrauded in any way. I also happily wrote a letter to the judge prior to Mark’s sentencing. My letter in short said Mark is not a bad person. He is a good person that made a bad decision (or decisions). I will follow up on that in a moment.

The first question that I must ask the board is how many of you actually read the full court documents including the sentencing hearing? I’m not calling anyone out, just asking as I imagine some (not all) posting on here have not. Reading those documents can make you very happy you’re not an attorney, but without reading them you may not have all the facts.

There was a poster on this thread that raised the issue of hiring Mark and compared him to Bill Mastro. That is like comparing apples and oranges as evidenced by the U. S. Attorney Zachary Fardon who admitted Mark was largely following the orders of his bosses rather than orchestrating the scheme. He said Mark “opted to take a hands-on role to promote shill bidding, rather than demand change or at least leave the company and find a new position.”

Before anyone reacts, Mark was guilty of committng a crime. He confessed to that and there is no disputing that. However, there is a major difference between being the head of an organization that comes up with a scheme to defraud and a subordinate that is following orders/instructions. Certainly still illegal, but very very different IMO.

For anyone that believes Mark made a fortune through this crime, I have attached a link below to an article which states “from 2002 to 2008, Theotikos worked for Mastro, where he participated in auction operations at a salary of about $100,000 per year.” Now $100k is a solid salary, but how many of you would go through what he has for a $100k salary for 6 years? The reality here is Mark was put in a bad spot by Mr. Mastro and/or Mr. Allen. Mark should have made the decision to leave the company and find new employment. He chose to stay and through that decision committed a crime for which he has paid severely (and everyone on here is entitled to their own opinion on the severity).

For anyone that feels like he hasn't been punished enough let me pose a question. How many of you would be willing to up and quit your job if your current boss asked you to do something you thought was illegal or immoral? It’s easy to cast stones, but when you’re in that situation and the sole earner while raising a family it’s not an easy decision. Some may say, he should have gone to another auction house. That’s a fair statement. How many other auction houses are there in Chicago? I don’t believe there are any. So let me ask the question again in a different way. How many of you would quit your job and relocate your entire family to another state because you thought what your boss was asking you to do was illegal or immoral? If you’re boss is telling you to do you’re not the bad guy right? Besides if you speak up and criticize your boss your the troublemake that isn’t a team player. That will really help you with getting your next job. Right? It’s a very very tough thing to do and I would bet if people are being honest with themselves, most would stay and begrudgingly do what they were asked to do.

To recap, Mark did commit a crime and was convicted of that crime. He has served his sentence and paid a steep price for his actions. I’m not making any excuses for him. However, I stand by my letter to the judge. Mark is a good man that made a bad decision. Anyone that thinks Mark would ever make the same mistake again has simply never met Mark.

Thanks for allowing me to post here and I hope I didn’t offend too many people as that’s not my intent. Those that have been wronged by Mastronet are certainly well within their rights to be upset. Having good knowledge of what really transpired leads me to believe their anger may be misplaced which is why I wanted to make this post.

https://www.sportscollectorsdaily.co...yee-sentenced/

Well just a couple comments to the above post.
1) The " good guy who made bad decisions" and " just following orders " arguments hold NO water with me with regard to guilt.
2) If my boss asked me to do something illegal or immoral- hell
yes I would move on
3) I have made my share of bad decisions/ choices during my lifetime.

You make some valid points, and it's too bad he was in the position/career he was in, but that does not dissolve what he knowingly did.

He paid the price for his decision not to out them, which, I'm sure, if he had to do it all over again, he would, but sometimes we have to do the right things from the get go, especially if one is smart enough to reasonably know or recognize, that what they were doing would one day all come crashing down on them.



v=1EQQYeRAT3ohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EQQYeRAT3o

sorry, but no.
 

Sorry, this is well-intentioned BS. I can easily imagine that Mark found himself in an unpleasant dilemma when Mastro and Allen asked him to facilitate the shilling. But you have already acknowledged that he made the wrong decision. The rest is irrelevant to the main point people are making in this thread. If people here were arguing that Mark should be locked up for life, you would have a valid point. He did his time and should be allowed to pick up his life and move on - BUT NOT HANDED A PLUM JOB IN THE SAME INDUSTRY/HOBBY HE HELPED TO DEFRAUD.

IMO, that is the only point that matters. Let him be hired in any other field, and I am fine with that. But to quote Marsellus Wallace, to me he has "lost his BB card privileges."

I agree and you beat me to it. As I was reading the post, that's all I could think about. NONE of the rest matters at this point except the argument/discussion of whether he should be employed in the collectibles auction business. My opinion is no. That doesn't mean he can't work elsewhere.

I am confused. The attached picture is from the Heritage terms and conditions, which every bidder has agreed to. Can someone explain the difference in this and the illegal shill bids of mastro? Is it merely the location? Or is there an inherent difference in the 2?

Mark Medlin

Start with bidding with the intent to win and having to pay for the item if you do win vs bidding with the knowledge you won’t end up winning but can raise the price.

In Texas, its legal for an auction house and its employees to bid on the items in their auction. Crazy but true. I've asked before.... if they win the item do they pay a 20% buyers premium... to themselves?

Holy crap.... this is for real. It's in the 12 page PDF (terms and conditions of auction) that is buried on the website. At first I thought it was some kind of joke. Perhaps a new thread needs to be opened on this topic.

I'm trying to figure out what a reasonable explanation could be but I can't.


21. The Auctioneer, its affiliates, or their employees consign items to be sold in the Auction, and may bid on those lots or any other lots. Auctioneer or affiliates expressly reserve the right to modify any such bids at any time prior to the hammer based upon data made known to the Auctioneer or its affiliates. The Auctioneer may extend advances, guarantees, or loans to certain consignors.

What does that mean? "Auctioneer or affiliates expressly reserve the right to modify any such bids at any time prior to the hammer based upon data made known to the Auctioneer or its affiliates.

I agree 1000% with Dewey's post.

I saw what you did there :)

Haha, I guess he decided to just get to the point:rolleyes:

Avoiding having his name come out, perhaps.

Pretty sure if you reference Attila the Hun you have to put your name to it, correct.