Mastro sentencing update

[Peter_Spaeth]

As many of the letters submitted to the Court attest,3 Bill’s public
confession had such a profound effect precisely because he was a pioneer within the industry,
professionalizing and improving the experience for consignors and collectors alike.
Those letters provide the specific, first-hand evidence of Bill’s profoundly positive
influence on the industry despite his transgressions.

Marshall Fogel, a former prosecutor,
practicing attorney, and nationally known collector of baseball memorabilia for more than 25
years, witnessed the growth of the sports memorabilia industry from its early beginnings. (Ex.
3). He credits Bill with transforming a “nascent struggling hobby” into the “thriving $100
million per year industry” that it is today. According to Mr. Fogel, Bill’s creation of descriptive,
detailed auction catalogs not only increased public access to quality memorabilia, but also
“single handedly legitimized the sports collectibles industry.” Mr. Fogel credits Bill as the
person “who introduced the trend of writing clear descriptions of items, including information on
provenance,” which helped “collectors obtain higher quality inventories with greater value than
ever thought possible.”


James Spence, an independent autographed memorabilia authenticator, similarly
describes Bill “as a trailblazer in legitimizing the sports memorabilia industry.” (Ex. 4). Mr.
Spence believes that Bill “deserves exclusive credit for pioneering what has become today’s
standard of integrity in the autographed memorabilia business.” It was Bill’s commissioning of
authenticators like Mr. Spence to “separate authentic items from those which were forgeries”—
previously undetected in the industry—that allowed Mastro Auctions to be “the first to offer a
product that would garner both universal trust and authentic value.” Mr. Spence recalls that,
before Bill’s “intervention” into the authentication of items, it was the standard practice for
auction houses to accept and sell any items from large consignors, regardless of authenticity.
Importantly, other auction houses, dealers, and collectors eventually followed Bill’s example,
which is why Mr. Spence concludes that the sports memorabilia industry has “been a better
business environment ever since Bill’s involvement.”


John Scott, a former auction house owner who has been involved in the baseball card and
sports memorabilia industry since 1976, has written a letter of support for Bill even though they
were once fierce competitors. (Ex. 5). He too describes Bill as someone who “promoted value”
in the industry and as a “proponent of authentication.” Even though Mr. Scott often competed
with Bill to obtain collection consignments, Mr. Scott recalls that Bill and his companies were
always “professional and congenial.” Bill has openly and frankly discussed his misconduct with
Mr. Scott, leaving him certain that Bill is genuinely remorseful for the harm that he has caused
clients and the industry.

Thomas O’Connell, a longtime hobby journalist and the former editor of Sports
Collectors Digest, has written extensively about the sports memorabilia industry and auctions.
(Ex. 6). He has known Bill for about 25 years and has spent a significant amount of time with
him while writing articles about Mastro Auctions. Mr. O’Connell believes that “many of the
important auction rules and safeguards for both consignor and bidder were heartily championed
by Bill over the last 20 years.” Despite Bill’s offense conduct, Mr. O’Connell can state with
“assurance that the sports memorabilia hobby/industry is deeply indebted to him for much of the
work that he has done and in his efforts to raise the profile of his business and to ensure that the
hobby was as honest and as transparent as possible.”


Rex Stark, a full-time dealer in historical Americana for 37 years, also recognizes Bill as
someone who has “contributed tremendously to the high visibility and nationwide appeal of
sports collecting today.” (Ex. 7). Just as Bill has confessed to others, Bill admitted his
transgressions to Mr. Stark, and expressed his remorse to him. Still, Mr. Stark considers Bill to
be “one of the most honest, reliable, and hardworking people in the business.” As an industry
insider for nearly four decades, Mr. Stark believes that Bill’s “public acceptance of responsibility
will highlight conduct that is in fact very commonplace in the world of auctions,” and that Bill
will, in this way, “once again contribute to making the auction business more reliable and
transparent.”

[whitehse]

As someone who knows zip about the law....how much of an impact will these letters written on behalf of Mastro help his case? I am sure it depends on many factors but in general, do letters like this from either side sway the judge in any way?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Sorry could not resist one more.

Not only, Randy [his brother]
writes, did Bill serve “tens of thousands of satisfied customers in facilitating hundreds of honest
transactions that helped collectors realize fair value for authentic goods,” but he “helped
transform a hobby populated by oddballs and misfits into what it is today—a respected field for
serious collectors and enthusiasts alike.”

Seems to me the hobby is still populated by oddballs and misfits.

[HRBAKER]

....and fraudsters - part of the charm, no doubt.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Randy [his brother]
writes, did Bill serve “tens of thousands of satisfied customers in facilitating hundreds of honest transactions..."

The above really says it all.

[darwinbulldog]

Originally Posted by Runscott

The above really says it all.

Ha! I didn't even notice that. It's the greatest backhanded compliment I've ever seen.

[Boccabella]

http://www.sportscollectorsdaily.com...out-of-prison/

[bcornell]

Originally Posted by Boccabella

http://www.sportscollectorsdaily.com...out-of-prison/

"Monico stated Mastro would never again be involved in the sports memorabilia industry. “He cannot and would not go back. His case is now an epic tale within the industry, a lesson to all about the consequences of auction-related misconduct.” "

I will believe that when I (don't) see it. I'd bet on Mastro crawling out from under his rock before everything is said and done.

Also, for the love of everything holy, can we please stop referring to this 500-person hobby as an "industry"? Thank you.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by whitehse

As someone who knows zip about the law....how much of an impact will these letters written on behalf of Mastro help his case? I am sure it depends on many factors but in general, do letters like this from either side sway the judge in any way?

The memo addresses this.

Because a defendant’s record of charity and good works may justify a lenient sentence—
indeed, a probationary sentence—it is common enough for white-collar defendants to seek mercy
based on their purported generosity and character. As a result, sentencing courts may be
skeptical, understandably, of white-collar defendants who pursue leniency through “checkbook
philanthropy.” Although that skepticism is warranted in some cases, it simply is not merited
here. The 223 character letters presented to the Court attest to Bill’s uncommon humanity and
commitment to helping others—what the Senior Probation Officer describes as a “genuine sense
of altruism” long predating the “instant criminal investigation.” (S.R. at 2). These letters are
written by men and women who have witnessed and been enriched by Bill’s generosity and
selflessness first-hand—family members and friends, business associates and religious clergy,
fellow addicts in recovery and fellow volunteers. Taken together, the letters demonstrate that
Bill’s extraordinary, decades-long dedication to service exists at the core of who he is. The
letters attest to the quiet way in which Bill serves others—never seeking credit or acclaim—and
to his meaningful and selfless good works. We respectfully submit that the character revealed by
Bill’s charitable acts, as well as the genuine remorse evidenced by his acceptance of
responsibility and substantial cooperation, merit leniency.

[Kenny Cole]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

The memo addresses this.

Because a defendant’s record of charity and good works may justify a lenient sentence—
indeed, a probationary sentence—it is common enough for white-collar defendants to seek mercy
based on their purported generosity and character. As a result, sentencing courts may be
skeptical, understandably, of white-collar defendants who pursue leniency through “checkbook
philanthropy.” Although that skepticism is warranted in some cases, it simply is not merited
here. The 223 character letters presented to the Court attest to Bill’s uncommon humanity and
commitment to helping others—what the Senior Probation Officer describes as a “genuine sense
of altruism” long predating the “instant criminal investigation.” (S.R. at 2). These letters are
written by men and women who have witnessed and been enriched by Bill’s generosity and
selflessness first-hand—family members and friends, business associates and religious clergy,
fellow addicts in recovery and fellow volunteers. Taken together, the letters demonstrate that
Bill’s extraordinary, decades-long dedication to service exists at the core of who he is. The
letters attest to the quiet way in which Bill serves others—never seeking credit or acclaim—and
to his meaningful and selfless good works. We respectfully submit that the character revealed by
Bill’s charitable acts, as well as the genuine remorse evidenced by his acceptance of
responsibility and substantial cooperation, merit leniency.

I just threw up in my mouth.

[Jay Wolt]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

The memo addresses this.

Because a defendant’s record of charity and good works may justify a lenient sentence—
indeed, a probationary sentence—it is common enough for white-collar defendants to seek mercy
based on their purported generosity and character. As a result, sentencing courts may be
skeptical, understandably, of white-collar defendants who pursue leniency through “checkbook
philanthropy.” Although that skepticism is warranted in some cases, it simply is not merited
here. The 223 character letters presented to the Court attest to Bill’s uncommon humanity and
commitment to helping others—what the Senior Probation Officer describes as a “genuine sense
of altruism” long predating the “instant criminal investigation.” (S.R. at 2). These letters are
written by men and women who have witnessed and been enriched by Bill’s generosity and
selflessness first-hand—family members and friends, business associates and religious clergy,
fellow addicts in recovery and fellow volunteers. Taken together, the letters demonstrate that
Bill’s extraordinary, decades-long dedication to service exists at the core of who he is. The
letters attest to the quiet way in which Bill serves others—never seeking credit or acclaim—and
to his meaningful and selfless good works. We respectfully submit that the character revealed by
Bill’s charitable acts, as well as the genuine remorse evidenced by his acceptance of
responsibility and substantial cooperation, merit leniency.

If I skimmed a ton of money I'd be generous too!
I would have that excess of funds that I can shower my friends & family with.
But since I'm not a crook, I have little money to spend on friends & family

[jcmtiger]

I know Bill Mastro had a massive collection, does anyone know if he still has it?

Joe

[Jay Wolt]

Originally Posted by jcmtiger

I know Bill Mastro had a massive collection, does anyone know if he still has it?

Joe

His attorneys probably own that fine collection

[Peter_Spaeth]

To begin, though some of those letters concern alleged shill bidding at Mastro Auctions,
many do not. See Doc. Nos. 90, 114, 150. Several do not even contain specific allegations of
misconduct, by Bill or anyone else. See, e.g., Doc. Nos. 124, 146; Supplemental Report to S.R.
at 3-4. Certainly, these letter writers felt aggrieved by Bill’s conduct. And we do not intend to
minimize Bill’s conduct, for which he has taken, and continues to take, full responsibility. We
simply observe that most of the letters submitted to the Court do not relate to Bill’s offense
conduct, convey allegations neither established nor relied upon by the Government and, in
multiple instances, do not even allege any specific wrongdoing.

Moreover, several of the letter writers assume they were victimized by shill bidding
because the items they purchased, or related items, subsequently depreciated in value. But such
allegations simply do not suggest, let alone prove, shill bidding. Scott Joy, for example, writes
that he has “no proof I was shilled but it sure feels like it” because some of the cards he
purchased from Mastro Auctions have resold for “50-70% of what I paid.” (Doc. No. 113). Mr.
Joy does not identify the specific items in question. But even accepting that Mr. Joy’s purchases
were subsequently resold at lower prices, that does not mean—or even suggest—that the original
sales were affected by shill bidding. Items purchased at auction reflect one person’s
idiosyncratic valuation; sometimes collectibles, like many other market goods, lose value.


Similarly, Richard Levy writes that he “feel[s] that it is likely that I was a victim of shill
bidding” on the Jackie Robinson game-used bat that he purchased for $82,356 because other
Robinson bats have since realized lower prices at auction; thus, Mr. Levy concludes, the price at
which he purchased his bat must have been artificially inflated by shill bidding. (Doc. No. 91).
Mr. Levy’s feeling is inconsistent with the available evidence. First, Mr. Levy’s final bid on this
item was actually a ceiling bid of $90,798, which means that Mr. Levy was voluntarily prepared
to pay any price up to $90,798 for this bat. But Mr. Levy was not “bid up” to his ceiling: he won
the bat for $82,356. Second, this specific bat—the only available “game-used” bat from
Robinson’s 1949 MVP season—had unique historical significance, which explains why it sold
for a higher price than other Robinson game-used bats available in the market.21 Third, Mr. Levy
alleges that the value of his bat has not risen because a different Robinson game-used bat sold for
$83,650 in August 2011. But in fact, in July 2013, Mr. Levy’s exact bat was resold for more
than $156,000—approximately 57% higher than Mr. Levy’s purchase price.


Steven Cummings also claims to have been a victim of shill bidding and requests a
refund of the “over charges incurred during the shill bidding process.” Although he has never
met Bill, he goes on to suggest that Bill suffers from a personality disorder and “major character
defect.” (Doc. No. 124). Like Mr. Levy and Mr. Joy, there is no evidence whatsoever that Mr.
Cummings was a victim of shill bidding. Just the opposite: like Mr. Levy, Mr. Cummings won
several lots for less than the maximum prices he had voluntarily bid and was willing to pay. For
example, Mr. Cummings won a first-edition 19th-century baseball publication, for which he had
placed a ceiling bid up to $10,454, for $4,875. He won an early 20th-century baseball
publication, for which he had placed a ceiling bid up to $25,286, for $17,270. He won an
autographed 1928 Ty Cobb biography, for which he had placed a ceiling bid up to $4,506, for
$3,076. And like Mr. Levy’s bat, all of these items were ultimately resold at higher prices at
auction.

Again, we offer these clarifications without intending, in any way, to minimize the
seriousness of Bill’s crime or to diminish Bill’s acceptance of responsibility. Bill apologizes to
customers and colleagues in the industry for any harm he has caused them. Given all of the
publicity surrounding Bill’s offense, as well as the solicitations on hobbyist message boards to
contact the Court, see supra note 20, it is certainly understandable how it came to pass that
eleven former customers wrote to the Court to share their grievances. We respectfully submit
that the hundreds of letters of support on Bill’s behalf, scores of them written by former
customers and colleagues, provide meaningful context for the eleven that the Court has received
directly.

[WhenItWasAHobby]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

AMarshall Fogel, a former prosecutor,
practicing attorney, and nationally known collector of baseball memorabilia for more than 25
years, witnessed the growth of the sports memorabilia industry from its early beginnings. (Ex.
3). He credits Bill with transforming a “nascent struggling hobby” into the “thriving $100
million per year industry” that it is today. ”

Reading through all of the testimonials, I find this statement highlighted in bold as being more damaging than obviously intended. I love participating in nascent struggling hobbies rather than high-dollar mature industries any day of the week.

[nolemmings]

Seems to me Bill was more interested in dealing with a nescient and not nascent hobby.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I don't know what that word means, I guess that makes me nescient.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by WhenItWasAHobby

Reading through all of the testimonials, I find this statement highlighted in bold as being more damaging than obviously intended. I love participating in nascent struggling hobbies rather than high-dollar mature industries any day of the week.

He saw an industry with un-tapped potential, which needed a few questionable jump-start techniques in order for guys like himself, Marshall and James to realize their own personal financial potential (they were all "nascent" as well).

[vintagewhitesox]

I practice in that building and in front of that judge often.
I take a slightly different view, but I understand the ire and anger towards Mastro for what he has done to this hobby.

His lawyers are just acting as zealous advocates for their client. Under the federal sentencing guidelines, a judge can consider both the actual federal guidelines (ussc.gov), as well as something called the "3553(a)" factors, which are characteristics of the defendant that the guidelines don't consider. These factors include the nature and circumstances of the offense, the personal history of the defendant, the risk of recidivism and harm to the public.

I have countless times given character letters to judges recounting my clients good deeds and selfless acts, despite being convicted of drug and gun trafficking, human trafficking, and also wire and health care fraud. The important thing is to sentence the entire person, not just the act for which he's plead guilty.
In that sense, I understand where his attorneys' are coming from. As a collector and someone who has bid in mastro's auctions, is disappointing, to say the least.

[travrosty]

Originally Posted by vintagewhitesox

I practice in that building and in front of that judge often.
I take a slightly different view, but I understand the ire and anger towards Mastro for what he has done to this hobby.

His lawyers are just acting as zealous advocates for their client. Under the federal sentencing guidelines, a judge can consider both the actual federal guidelines (ussc.gov), as well as something called the "3553(a)" factors, which are characteristics of the defendant that the guidelines don't consider. These factors include the nature and circumstances of the offense, the personal history of the defendant, the risk of recidivism and harm to the public.

I have countless times given character letters to judges recounting my clients good deeds and selfless acts, despite being convicted of drug and gun trafficking, human trafficking, and also wire and health care fraud. The important thing is to sentence the entire person, not just the act for which he's plead guilty.
In that sense, I understand where his attorneys' are coming from. As a collector and someone who has bid in mastro's auctions, is disappointing, to say the least.

There are just so many, good, decent human traffickers out there, this makes me puke.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by travrosty

There are just so many, good, decent human traffickers out there, this makes me puke.

Then change the system. Under ours, a criminal defendant has a right to counsel, and counsel has an ethical obligation to represent the defendant zealously within the bounds of the law. There is nothing at all wrong with what Josh does, or what Mastro's lawyers did in this case (unless they misrepresented something).

[buymycards]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Then change the system. Under ours, a criminal defendant has a right to counsel, and counsel has an ethical obligation to represent the defendant zealously within the bounds of the law. There is nothing at all wrong with what Josh does, or what Mastro's lawyers did in this case (unless they misrepresented something).

There may not be anything illegal about what Josh does, but yes, there are many things wrong with it.

[Kenny Cole]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Then change the system. Under ours, a criminal defendant has a right to counsel, and counsel has an ethical obligation to represent the defendant zealously within the bounds of the law. There is nothing at all wrong with what Josh does, or what Mastro's lawyers did in this case (unless they misrepresented something).

Peter is absolutely right. Reading what Mastro's attorneys say makes me want to puke too, but that is what their job is. Every criminal defendant has the right to zealous representation, irrespective of how heinous the crime is that they are charged with. Period. End of story. That's the way it works and that's the way it was designed to work by our founders for a multitude of good and sufficient reasons.

Back to the topic at hand, those who are aggrieved by Mastro's actions have the job of writing the judge and informing him why they believe he deserves a harsher penalty than Mastro's attorneys are requesting. I haven't looked at the docket sheet recently, but based on what I've read here, it sure seems like Mastro's lawyers are performing their obligation of zealously representing their client and many of those who feel aggrieved by Mastro's actions are doing, shall I say, a less than stellar job of zealously informing the judge why they think Mastro should get more than the proverbial slap on the wrist. As Jeff has previously indicated, the judge is unlikely to read this web site, so let him know your feelings via letter or quit your bitching.

[travrosty]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Then change the system. Under ours, a criminal defendant has a right to counsel, and counsel has an ethical obligation to represent the defendant zealously within the bounds of the law. There is nothing at all wrong with what Josh does, or what Mastro's lawyers did in this case (unless they misrepresented something).

I didn't say they can't represent them or defend them, but to put in a good word for a human trafficker and hit the highlights on how great a human being they are, i mean, c'mon.