Posted By:
Peter_SpaethOr I think it does anyhow, let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
I concur with the observation above by Jeff. I have no way of knowing the truth here, but as an observer trying to form a judgment it does not lend credibility to the accuser's story when (1) he gets a CRITICAL piece of information wrong, to wit the identity of the card in question, and (2) he provides no before and after evidence to support his claim. At the moment, now that he seems to have corrected his misidentification of the card, all we have to go on is the accuser's statement that based on his experience (was he ever a PSA dealer? my understanding is that he principally deals in raw off grade cards, but perhaps that is wrong), the card would not have been graded an 8 absent it being altered. That opinion, by itself, does not seem sufficient to me given the subjectivity inherent in grading, as I posted before.
Now to add to my issues, in his first post the accuser stated that the card in his opinion must have been trimmed, pressed, or altered in some way. That seemed quite vague and did not suggest any particular flaw with the card. Now, in the second post, we are told the reason the accuser did not think it would grade 8 is the rough cut. Does one press out a rough cut? I would hope not. So if the issue was the rough cut all along, why initially post that the card was trimmed, pressed, or altered in some way, why not just say it was trimmed? Perhaps the accuser had a further recovery of memory?
Anyhow, to summarize, I have no idea of what the truth is, and I am NOT saying the accuser is not right, but as someone who can only go by what is posted, I see some question marks in the evidence that has been presented to date in support of a highly serious accusation affecting a man's reputation. Perhaps some clarification will be forthcoming.