NonSports Forum

Net54baseball.com
Welcome to Net54baseball.com. These forums are devoted to both Pre- and Post- war baseball cards and vintage memorabilia, as well as other sports. There is a separate section for BSelling and Trading - the B/S/T area!! If you write anything concerning a person or company your full name needs to be in your post or obtainable from it. . Contact the moderator at leon@net54baseball.com should you have any questions or concerns. Enjoy!
Net54baseball.com
Net54baseball.com
ebay GSB
T206s on Ebay
Pre-WWII Cards
Post WWII Cards
Vintage Memorabilia
Babe Ruth Cards
Ty Cobb Cards
Lou Gehrig Cards
Mickey Mantle Cards
Goudey Cards
Bowman Cards
T205s on Ebay
Tobacco "T" Cards
Caramel "E" Cards
Vintage Baseball Postcards
Football Cards on Ebay
Exhibit Cards
Strip Cards
Baking Cards
Sporting News
Playball Cards on Ebay

Go Back   Net54baseball.com Forums > Net54baseball Main Forum - WWII & Older Baseball Cards > Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-29-2014, 10:48 AM
calvindog's Avatar
calvindog calvindog is offline
Jeffrey Lichtman
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 5,127
Default John Rogers Home and Business Searched by the FBI

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/arti...-business-home
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-29-2014, 11:05 AM
WhenItWasAHobby's Avatar
WhenItWasAHobby WhenItWasAHobby is offline
Dan Marke1
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Houston-area
Posts: 605
Default

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.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-29-2014, 11:14 AM
slidekellyslide's Avatar
slidekellyslide slidekellyslide is offline
Dan Bretta
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Lincoln, Nebraska
Posts: 5,813
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WhenItWasAHobby View Post
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?
__________________
Looking for Nebraska Indians memorabilia, photos and postcards
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-29-2014, 11:17 AM
WhenItWasAHobby's Avatar
WhenItWasAHobby WhenItWasAHobby is offline
Dan Marke1
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Houston-area
Posts: 605
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by slidekellyslide View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-29-2014, 11:25 AM
teetwoohsix's Avatar
teetwoohsix teetwoohsix is offline
Clayton
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Las Vegas,Nevada
Posts: 2,461
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WhenItWasAHobby View Post
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
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-29-2014, 11:33 AM
calvindog's Avatar
calvindog calvindog is offline
Jeffrey Lichtman
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 5,127
Default

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.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-29-2014, 11:38 AM
slidekellyslide's Avatar
slidekellyslide slidekellyslide is offline
Dan Bretta
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Lincoln, Nebraska
Posts: 5,813
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by calvindog View Post
It's fairly obvious they've searched these premises for evidence of a crime.
I wonder what they took?
__________________
Looking for Nebraska Indians memorabilia, photos and postcards
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-29-2014, 11:44 AM
teetwoohsix's Avatar
teetwoohsix teetwoohsix is offline
Clayton
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Las Vegas,Nevada
Posts: 2,461
Default

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
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-29-2014, 11:58 AM
calvindog's Avatar
calvindog calvindog is offline
Jeffrey Lichtman
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 5,127
Default

Of course, the warrant specifies what can be taken. But the materials identified are often very broad: computers, correspondence, financial records, etc.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-29-2014, 12:05 PM
teetwoohsix's Avatar
teetwoohsix teetwoohsix is offline
Clayton
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Las Vegas,Nevada
Posts: 2,461
Default

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
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 01-29-2014, 12:06 PM
Exhibitman's Avatar
Exhibitman Exhibitman is offline
Ad@m W@r$h@w
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Beautiful Downtown Burbank
Posts: 7,467
Default

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

Like an IRS audit without the glitz...
__________________
Please visit my web site: www.americasgreatboxingcards.com
Judge a man by how he treats someone who can do nothing for him--Nick Charles
10% off any BIN in my eBay store (user name: exhibitman) for N54 members buying direct from me through this site instead, just PM me.

Last edited by Exhibitman; 01-29-2014 at 12:07 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 01-29-2014, 12:31 PM
I Only Smoke 4 the Cards's Avatar
I Only Smoke 4 the Cards I Only Smoke 4 the Cards is offline
Alex
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,093
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by teetwoohsix View Post
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.
__________________
Tackling the Monster
T206 = 213/524
HOFs = 13/76
SLers = 33/48
Horizontals = 6/6

ALWAYS looking for T206 with back damage.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 01-29-2014, 12:37 PM
RichardSimon's Avatar
RichardSimon RichardSimon is offline
Richard Simon
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New York City
Posts: 5,401
Default

Seems like some here are watching too much Law & Order SVU .
__________________
Sign up & receive my autograph price list. E mail me,richsprt@aol.com, with your e mail. Sports,entertainment,history.
-
Here is a link to my online store. Many items for sale. 10% disc. for 54 members. E mail me first.
www.bonanza.com/booths/richsports
--
"I have never killed a man, but I have read many obituaries with great pleasure."- Clarence Darrow
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 01-29-2014, 12:47 PM
teetwoohsix's Avatar
teetwoohsix teetwoohsix is offline
Clayton
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Las Vegas,Nevada
Posts: 2,461
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardSimon View Post
Seems like some here are watching too much Law & Order SVU .
I've never watched one episode of that show in my life-seriously.

Sincerely, Clayton
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 01-29-2014, 01:04 PM
teetwoohsix's Avatar
teetwoohsix teetwoohsix is offline
Clayton
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Las Vegas,Nevada
Posts: 2,461
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by I Only Smoke 4 the Cards View Post
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?
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 01-29-2014, 01:30 PM
drcy's Avatar
drcy drcy is offline
David Ru.dd Cycl.eback
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,692
Default

..

Last edited by drcy; 01-31-2014 at 02:56 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 01-29-2014, 02:00 PM
nolemmings's Avatar
nolemmings nolemmings is offline
Todd Schultz
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 2,726
Default

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.
__________________
I know the rent is in arrears, the dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears, but it's alright
Cow is giving kerosene, kid can't read at seventeen
The words he knows are all obscene, but it's alright
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 01-29-2014, 02:03 PM
Brian Van Horn Brian Van Horn is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 4,440
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardSimon View Post
Seems like some here are watching too much Law & Order SVU .
OK, I'll go for the cheap joke.

Richard,

Given it's both home and business, didn't you mean Law and Order SUV?
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 01-29-2014, 02:09 PM
teetwoohsix's Avatar
teetwoohsix teetwoohsix is offline
Clayton
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Las Vegas,Nevada
Posts: 2,461
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nolemmings View Post
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

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

Fife and drum on the way....

Sincerely, Clayton
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 01-29-2014, 02:10 PM
Peter_Spaeth's Avatar
Peter_Spaeth Peter_Spaeth is offline
Peter Spaeth
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 19,311
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nolemmings View Post
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?
__________________
Stuff trumps all. Even tainted stuff.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 01-29-2014, 02:17 PM
WhenItWasAHobby's Avatar
WhenItWasAHobby WhenItWasAHobby is offline
Dan Marke1
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Houston-area
Posts: 605
Default

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/f...bkaynUTfVrtA2g

Last edited by WhenItWasAHobby; 01-29-2014 at 02:18 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 01-29-2014, 02:20 PM
Peter_Spaeth's Avatar
Peter_Spaeth Peter_Spaeth is offline
Peter Spaeth
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 19,311
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WhenItWasAHobby View Post
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/f...bkaynUTfVrtA2g
Perhaps the definition of WMD is expanding.
__________________
Stuff trumps all. Even tainted stuff.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 01-29-2014, 02:50 PM
shernan30's Avatar
shernan30 shernan30 is offline
Steven H.
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Lancaster, Ohio
Posts: 990
Default

Maybe he bought the bats from Gibson?!?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
Current Search:
Bob Meusel Set: 12/41
R312 Pastels Set: 6/50
1941 Skybirds: 14/24
1903-1908 Highlander Photos: 0/11
---------------------------------------------------------------
Check out our collection: Bailen Cards
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 01-29-2014, 04:14 PM
oldjudge's Avatar
oldjudge oldjudge is offline
j'a'y mi.ll.e.r
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: The Bronx
Posts: 4,160
Default

Wasn't the Wagner that Rogers bought the one that was auctioned off in Goldin Auctions last year?
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 01-29-2014, 06:25 PM
I Only Smoke 4 the Cards's Avatar
I Only Smoke 4 the Cards I Only Smoke 4 the Cards is offline
Alex
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,093
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by teetwoohsix View Post
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.
__________________
Tackling the Monster
T206 = 213/524
HOFs = 13/76
SLers = 33/48
Horizontals = 6/6

ALWAYS looking for T206 with back damage.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 01-29-2014, 06:34 PM
wonkaticket wonkaticket is offline
John
J0hn McD@niel
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,686
Default

I wonder if Peter Nash will be reporting on this...his buddy...and all....
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 01-29-2014, 07:55 PM
calvindog's Avatar
calvindog calvindog is offline
Jeffrey Lichtman
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 5,127
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by I Only Smoke 4 the Cards View Post
"Sealed" pertains to the public.
"Sealed" in this case pertains to everyone but the government, not just the public.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 01-29-2014, 08:24 PM
slidekellyslide's Avatar
slidekellyslide slidekellyslide is offline
Dan Bretta
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Lincoln, Nebraska
Posts: 5,813
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wonkaticket View Post
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.
__________________
Looking for Nebraska Indians memorabilia, photos and postcards
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 01-29-2014, 10:21 PM
I Only Smoke 4 the Cards's Avatar
I Only Smoke 4 the Cards I Only Smoke 4 the Cards is offline
Alex
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,093
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by calvindog View Post
"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.
__________________
Tackling the Monster
T206 = 213/524
HOFs = 13/76
SLers = 33/48
Horizontals = 6/6

ALWAYS looking for T206 with back damage.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 01-29-2014, 10:28 PM
calvindog's Avatar
calvindog calvindog is offline
Jeffrey Lichtman
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 5,127
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by I Only Smoke 4 the Cards View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 01-30-2014, 04:21 AM
teetwoohsix's Avatar
teetwoohsix teetwoohsix is offline
Clayton
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Las Vegas,Nevada
Posts: 2,461
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by calvindog View Post
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
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 01-30-2014, 06:27 AM
calvindog's Avatar
calvindog calvindog is offline
Jeffrey Lichtman
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 5,127
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by teetwoohsix View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 01-30-2014, 09:12 AM
calvindog's Avatar
calvindog calvindog is offline
Jeffrey Lichtman
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 5,127
Default

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.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 01-30-2014, 09:16 AM
Leon's Avatar
Leon Leon is offline
Leon
peasant/forum owner
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: near Dallas
Posts: 27,796
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by calvindog View Post
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.
__________________
Leon Luckey
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 01-30-2014, 09:23 AM
calvindog's Avatar
calvindog calvindog is offline
Jeffrey Lichtman
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 5,127
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leon View Post
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!
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 01-30-2014, 09:31 AM
Leon's Avatar
Leon Leon is offline
Leon
peasant/forum owner
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: near Dallas
Posts: 27,796
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by calvindog View Post
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.....
__________________
Leon Luckey
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 01-30-2014, 09:37 AM
calvindog's Avatar
calvindog calvindog is offline
Jeffrey Lichtman
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 5,127
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leon View Post
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
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 01-30-2014, 12:40 PM
Sunny Sunny is offline
Rob.ert Fra.ser
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 60
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wonkaticket View Post
I wonder if Peter Nash will be reporting on this...his buddy...and all....
Quote:
Originally Posted by slidekellyslide View Post
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/ite...morabilia-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.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 01-30-2014, 01:19 PM
wonkaticket wonkaticket is offline
John
J0hn McD@niel
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,686
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunny View Post
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/ite...morabilia-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!

Peter Nash keeping the hobby safe as long as there’s no mirror around.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 01-30-2014, 01:21 PM
wonkaticket wonkaticket is offline
John
J0hn McD@niel
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,686
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunny View Post
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?
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 01-30-2014, 02:19 PM
tbob's Avatar
tbob tbob is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,600
Default

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...
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 01-30-2014, 02:21 PM
tbob's Avatar
tbob tbob is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,600
Default

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
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 01-30-2014, 03:10 PM
4815162342's Avatar
4815162342 4815162342 is offline
Daryl
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,097
Default

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

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=91558
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 01-30-2014, 04:31 PM
sylbry sylbry is offline
Bry.an Sylv.est3r
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 228
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by slidekellyslide View Post
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...photo-archive/
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 01-30-2014, 04:43 PM
WhenItWasAHobby's Avatar
WhenItWasAHobby WhenItWasAHobby is offline
Dan Marke1
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Houston-area
Posts: 605
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tbob View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 01-30-2014, 05:05 PM
benjulmag benjulmag is offline
CoreyRS.hanus
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 558
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WhenItWasAHobby View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 01-30-2014, 05:10 PM
RichardSimon's Avatar
RichardSimon RichardSimon is offline
Richard Simon
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New York City
Posts: 5,401
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WhenItWasAHobby View Post
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.
__________________
Sign up & receive my autograph price list. E mail me,richsprt@aol.com, with your e mail. Sports,entertainment,history.
-
Here is a link to my online store. Many items for sale. 10% disc. for 54 members. E mail me first.
www.bonanza.com/booths/richsports
--
"I have never killed a man, but I have read many obituaries with great pleasure."- Clarence Darrow
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 01-30-2014, 05:28 PM
wonkaticket wonkaticket is offline
John
J0hn McD@niel
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,686
Default

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.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 01-30-2014, 05:52 PM
Peter_Spaeth's Avatar
Peter_Spaeth Peter_Spaeth is offline
Peter Spaeth
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 19,311
Default

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
__________________
Stuff trumps all. Even tainted stuff.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 01-30-2014, 06:11 PM
WhenItWasAHobby's Avatar
WhenItWasAHobby WhenItWasAHobby is offline
Dan Marke1
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Houston-area
Posts: 605
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by benjulmag View Post
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardSimon View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
John Rogers - Slightly OT bobfreedman Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 8 10-28-2012 07:55 PM
John Rogers article Hot Springs Bathers Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 4 08-21-2011 08:27 PM
John Rogers Archive Makes Amazing Discovery about Lou Gehrig Jersey in REA ChrisGalbreath Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 0 05-07-2011 02:33 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:46 PM.


ebay GSB