I am not defending him. This is a civil case and everyone one is makeing it out to be a criminal case. I am just defending his right to write and artical no more no less. If you dont want to believe what he writes fine.:confused:

And Shelly, I put it to you that most of the people he writes about fall into the same criteria. So why isn't he fair game here?? I'm sure Nash knows about this thread. I would like to hear from him.

Same thing to you, Travis, in your rants against PSA and JSA.

He is fair game and I would like him to come on here as well. I am not taking sides.As I said from the very begining. I feel that he has every right to write what he wants and you have the same rights not to believe it.

I don't thnk it is an all or nothing proposition in believing what he writes or not. He clearly does a lot of research and he regularly presents readily-varifiable facts.

What is pertinent about his past history of fraudulant behavior is that his writings need to be read more critically. Case in point:

When speaking here about a questionable Ruth baseball (I think it was that, one of the longer threads in the last year), a well-respected poster on these boards posted that he had spoken to several people who didn't think the ball was genuine. I have absolutely no reason to question this person, and his stellar reputation led me to take him at his word.

On the other hand, when Nash writes that "experts" share an opinion that something is or is not genuine, he does not get the benefit of that doubt from me. Travis can say I'm protecting the status quo all he wants, but the fact of the matter is that Nash has lost the right (in my eyes) to make sweeping and anonymous generalizations.

That being said, I hope he continues and takes steps to tighten up his writing and use of sources (and drops the needless, unrelated bashing in his posts). I will keep reading, that's for sure.

Well said.:)

I'm not talking about a book from some branch library of the NYPL. I'm talking about artifacts cared for by professional, trained, librarians/curators at the main branch--Fifth Avenue and 42nd Street--the finest research library in the country.

you have never disproven any of my facts against psa or jsa.

go ahead, post proof that anything i have shown as mistakes made by them are an error in my part.

go ahead!

Travis- when I get the time, and it will be by tomorrow, I will be posting many more court actions against Nash. Do you realize when you sleep with dogs you get fleas? The old saying, you are the company you keep....have you ever heard that?

Now, all of this doesn't mean that some of what Nash says isn't true. I am sure it is. I am sure he is a very smart person too. What I never understand about his type is that if they used their smarts for good, instead of bad, they could be so successful. I truly don't understand it. He reminds me of the scammer on the card side that lives his life scamming people and dodging authorities. I don't think that is any way to live your life....

Leon, I think that everyone has an idea who Pete Nash is. I think the way your doing it looks like your representing Rob. Over kill is not needed;)

Shelly is right Leon......is Rob supplying you with all these documents?

Seems whomever is, has an agenda too.

So what if someone has an agenda?

Are you going to tell me that Travis doesn't have an agenda?

Or that I don't have an agenda?

Not at all. Just that some of you cry that Mr. Nash is not to believed because he has an agenda.

But your answer is sufficient.

I think the point is that someone who has the time to clean up other's houses might well take a broom to their own first.
Frankly that's an understandable POV but it does not make what he says untrue.
See, Emperor has no clothes.

Adam,

Your post is too insightful for this thread. Please cease and desist sir.

Mike

Has anyone seen Peter Nash and Travis Roste in the same room?

:D



















(kidding here -- carry on) ;)

some of these places, (not psa or jsa ofr course) want money over everything and admitting mistakes and correcting them for the good of the hobby doesnt fit their profit sharing plan so to speak. in other words they dont care.

If Peter Nash is mentioning Rob Lifson who has a huge judgement against him I don't believe a word he says...other stuff? Who knows, it's not like this guy is Ghandi. It's stunning to me the amount of support he seems to be getting in this forum considering the fraud he committed. I think if this conversation takes place in the card forum he gets no support at all.

Are you actually saying that without irony in a thread about a man who ripped people off for over $760,000???????????????????? A man who loves slamming others' mistakes but refuses to acknowledge his own??

I think most of us agree with this....are the mistakes being made by JSA and PSA mistakes or something sinister? I seriously don't see what benefit PSA gets from giving a thumbs up to a printed PT Barnum signature.

Of course you are being facetious in your first line, but we all agree with you on this Travis. You will not find a single person here who thinks the TPAs want what's good for the hobby over profit. They are marketing machines, selling a flawed product. It just doesn't seem to bother most of us as much as it does you.

The smartest sentence in this thread.

And thats the biggest problem i think we have as a hobby, the apathy.

See, I worked at Topps for two years. It is a very poorly run company where one hand doesn't know what the other 33 are doing. It was also a pretty hectic job with lots of deadlines. But that didn't really bother me because it was just baseball cards, which is something I used to tell myself if I found stress creeping in at the job, "It's just baseball cards." I wasn't curing cancer, but I wasn't causing it, either. Can you see my point?

Now, when I go on other hobby websites that are more focused on modern baseball cards, there are arguments happening that shadow those here about the TPAs, but they are about Topps. Topps doesn't care about us, they are ruining the hobby, etc. You know where I side on those? It's just baseball cards. If you don't like what Topps is doing, don't patronize them, and if it is causing anger and higher blood pressure, than perhaps painting or birdwatching (or better yet, vintage!) might be a better hobby. But I can promise you that there is no evil plot or fraudulant behavior going on at Topps, just a group of jabronis at a poorly run company struggling to get a product on the street. It's just baseball cards.

I feel the same way about TPAs. I like autograph collecting. I have been doing it for 20+ years. The hobby had problems before the TPAs came along, and it will have problems when they fail. But when it comes to the opinions of these self-proclaimed experts, I can use or ignore them, which is more and more becoming the latter. You can call this apathy. I call it enjoyment and staying sane. It's just scribbles on paper.

Granted, I don't make my livlihood from autos, like some around here do, but maybe this will help you better understand my position on the topic.

Isn't this kind of an ironic question given the agendas that Travis and Nash seem to have? Yes, I have an agenda. It is to expose Nash with incriminating evidence, and most of that being notarized court documents, when he goes after other people and companies. The same can't be said for Travis or Nash, with respect to empirical evidence. Who really cares where I got them? Just like everyone, yourself included, saying (in essence)....what does it matter that Nash is the biggest fraudster to stand foot in the hobby, what he says might be true!! Well, EVERYTHING I have posted is factual. And I have already said I am not comfy with Nash specifically because a good hobby friend is holding 6 figures of bad 19th century memorabilia that allegedly can't be traced back before Nash. The rumor is that Nash took, or takes, good 19th century stuff....puts one and one together, and makes three. Also, some concourse balls that were consigned by him were found to be fake (or at least have materials that weren't around at the time the memorabilia was used/made.) I am going to save the pile of other documents for a rainy day. Suffice it to say there is nothing that will make Nash or his allies look too good. Just more squirming, crawfishing, stealing and lying the way it seems he always has. Nothing new there.....
.
,

Not any of this means that some of what Nash says isn't true. As stated already, I am sure it is. But maybe Nash needs to apologize, make restitution and pay back people he has swindled before he cures the hobby of all fraud. That would be a good start to giving him some respectability. But then again, some people don't care.

Leon, I think that you underestimate the people on this site.We do care and I understand your wanting to help a friend.
I like most people on here are not looking at who is writeing the story vs is the story fact or fiction. Rob is no angle and he knows it. None of us are. I just feel there is a fourm for your thread and a forum for what he writes.
Yes Ken I do believe that they should be seperate. The conversation should be is what he writes true or not. There have been questionable people out there that have written very important things that turned out to be true.
Last time. He has a right to print what he believes is the truth and you have a right not to believe it bad guy or not.

I am sick of the "nash is a bad guy so everything he writes is fake" crowd.
its stupid. so lifson doesnt like him , so what?

You obviously can't comprehend the English language. Show me one place where anyone has said that, especially me? One place Travis.....

Are you serious, Travis!!!

Please quote where that has been written.

Travis, you simply don't like the fact that Nash is being criticized.

Nash has made himself fair game.

Wow, you really do only see things in black and white, don't you? A hundred percent or nothing?

It's sad, really.

Heh.

Didn't realize that this thread was still going. I don't know Peter Nash and am too old, I guess, to have been a fan of his music. I do not know Rob Lifson either. I do know that Rob Lifson and others have sued Nash for fraud, Lifson getting a judgment in excess of $750,000.00. I do know that Nash's father took $50,000.00 from Bishop Ford High School's development fund to keep Peter's Cooperstown property from being foreclosed and that he was not prosecuted. I do know that Nash has admitted fraud in Court and has also admitted not filing tax returns for five years. As my family has a summer home near Cooperstown, I do know that if you mention Peter Nash's name to anyone there who has been in town for more than a few years, eyes start rolling. Nevertheless, I do read Nash's website from time to time and knowing that he has an agenda, I can sort through some of what he writes and find that it does have value. As they say even a blind squirrel finds an acorn once in a while and Peter Nash is a busy little squirrel.

Very interesting stuff. Like the poster above, I know nothing about any of these people.

But from what I can gather reading the last few pages, would this be like Barry Bonds writing a book bashing on steroid abusers? Or not at all?

One thing that would help me discern that someone is lying is to have knowledge that they are historically a liar. Why start believing someone that is a habitual liar? I do not believe that you can be a fraud like Nash and then make a public relations announcement that you are now out to clean up the hobby that is ridiculous. If he was truly out to clean up the hobby why not remove him self from it? Please do not take this personally Shelly, I just do not agree with you on this even though I respect your opinion.

Anyone have the cliff notes on this thread? Too lazy to read all the posts.

Why? Because what he writes is easily checked, and has been found to be true.

Leon calls out Nash.
Travis hates TPA's.

Awesome post! LOL :D

Leon
 

Not only calls out Nash, but has proof

Travis bashes TPA's

Rich

I hate to pull out the old Cycleback trick
 

And follow myself but in these cases the court judgements are public informaton and I'm sure a good google search can find these docs.

Search sometimes for fan injuries at baseball games and lawsuits and you will get all those documents as well

they hate the fact that it's true. its always the tactic that gets used, misdirect, change the subject and deflect. that's why the tpa's bonehead authentications and the stolen material can change hands all this time. If there were dozens and dozens of vigilant people instead of just a few, it would be all fixed by now.

Instead some want what is going on right now to continue.

100 worst authentications from the abc, xyz's coming up soon. get a front row seat.

I'm on pins and needles waiting...

100 out of how many hundreds of thousands???? You ck eBay, auctions, the web in search of items to post.. What else do you do with yourself?

Ben,
It is not just the multiple mistakes that bother people. We all make mistakes.
In the opinion of some it is a far worse problem than multiple mistakes.

when you issue an loa for an item and the loa says it was checked against exemplars, and then only after being caught, you pull the loa from the auction house due of a lack of exemplars, then is it a mistake?

how can i or anyone else make that "mistake"? it is the gravity of the 'mistakes' that is very concerning not the fact that one occasionally occurs. It's too many 'mistakes' and too many big mistakes that could have easily been caught to chalk up to JUST human error and not other factors like too few authenticators, authenticators authenticating out of their specialty. going too fast, too few/no exemplars.

A mistake occurs when you have all your ducks in a row, put forward your very best effort using all available resources at your disposal, and a mistake still occurs. Is this the case? you be the judge.

Once upon a time a guy posted a baloney jim corbett signature here and i said to myself, "it's obviously bad to someone with a lot of experience in boxing signatures, but i bet it gets either an abc or xyz cert."

sure enough in a few weeks, he posts it again with an xyz cert, and xyz company lists no boxing experts on their site. I knew it would happen and it did. How is that a classic definition of a mistake?

properly authenticating an autograph like that requires experience and preparation, neither of which was evidently executed in this case. If i dont know dentistry and someone comes to me with an abcess tooth and i pull the wrong tooth, did i just make a 'mistake'? well yes and no, but it's not a mistake that should have happened because I am not a dentist.

Some of these companies are authenticating autographs they have no business authenticating, and without the proper exemplars, staff and manpower, they set themselves up for their own failure. I didn't tell them to do it that way and the collecting public needs to know what is REALLY happening. You don't want people to know? you think they are doing great? please explain why you think that?

It's just the 100 WORST authentications by these companies, not all of them. It had to be pared down greatly to make 100, there were easily scores more that didn't make the final cut.

Geez, Travis, looks to me like a "misdirection ploy" by Nash to deflect his own issues in the hobby......

Oh that's right, Travis, it's only "misdirection" if someone posts a thread about Nash.............

This thread is about Peter Nash...stop deflecting and misdirecting.

Sounds like you are announcing a hockey game :).

You, too, Scott........

I guess what Travis is saying is that we should only write about what Travis wants to write about.

Travis, is it okay for you to write about the TPA's, but we shouldn't be writing about Peter Nash?

no go right ahead, write about nash, but i dont see any williams writing about nash, because its all a fake. you arent going to write about nash. you dont care about nash, this thread wasnt started for people to write about nash, because if you look at it, other than the originals papers posted that have been posted many times before, its not about nash, it's about how what he says on hos should be disregarded, but its not about him. it was posted in response to me mentioning heritage, but it's not about nash at all.

just like when i post about psa or jsa, then out comes todd mueller. its not about mueller. it's never been about mueller. if it was, you would post about mueller all the time, even when i dont even visit net54 and dont post about psa or jsa.

but you only bring out mueller when i mention psa or jsa, just like leon only brings the nash thread out when i mention heritage, their sponsor.

it's all fake misdirection people, and always has been.

if you want to post about him, why dont you post about him then? you just made a post with a question aimed at me, why wasnt your post about nash? because you dont care about nash.

here's an assignment for chris williams,

1. write about nash, and write about him each day for two weeks. tell us how much you know about him and write about him, no matter what anyone else writes about. just like i write about psa and jsa no matter what anyone else writes about, I could care less what anyone else writes about. show us you are interested in writing about nash.

just as i thought.

All in good time, Travis. All in good time.

Basically, Travis, what you are writing, is that you don't like anyone (me included, of course) mentioning Mueller or Nash.

Just remember our "Gentleman's Bet," Travis.

Then stop rambling about "misdirection" or whatever you term it. You evidently care or else you'd stop.

Mike

Again, a guy like me has no idea who any of these people are or what they are about.

However, it seems like Travis knows or his friends (?) with Mr. Nash, so I'll ask him. Is this Nash guy really a criminal? Has he done bad things in the hobby?

Thanks in advance for taking the time.

Totally untrue and you know it. I specifically asked you TWICE about Nash and what you thought about his $700,000+++ fraud. You ignored me both times.

You wrote this: "some of these places, (not psa or jsa ofr course) want money over everything and admitting mistakes and correcting them for the good of the hobby doesnt fit their profit sharing plan so to speak. in other words they dont care." And I asked you about it. Has Nash corrected his mistakes, or doesn't he care. You ignored me this time, too.

I asked Shelly if NASH should get a free pass. I didn't direct that one to you, so you ignored it.

Every misdirection in this thread has been from you, Travis, and everybody sees it.

I'm asking you direct questions about NASH, Travis. Man up and answer them.
Ken

He won't answer your question (see the post above this one-he hasn't answered any direct questions in this thread).

OK. Thanks.

Sometimes when people don't answer, it's all the response you need.

Without getting into the moralistic aspects of Mr. Nash's character, from what I have seen, Mr. Nash's disputes with others, via the court system, are strictly civil in nature. I have not seen where Mr. Nash has been charged and/or convicted of anything of a criminal nature.

If others have anything to dispute this, please post this information.

I do have one question for Leon. Has Nash ever paid Rob any money or does he still owe him 700 thousand.
Ken, this is not defending what he did. If he is paying the man back would you then think differently about him?

A little history on the Peter vs Rob feud.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/ba...ticle-1.431288

It would, esp. if he admitted his wrongdoings. Also, I'd want to hear his side on the whole Cooperstown Forger fiasco. From what I've read, the evidence (or what seems like evidence) against Nash there is more damning than most of the evidence Nash posts against others.

Ken

Thank you for bringing this back up. I have asked several times about who authored the White Betsy blog and what happened to it, but either no one knows or they don't want to say.

It is my understanding that some items were sold and were used to pay back part of the debt. I believe Lifson is still owed over 100k. It is also my understanding he still owes the Fraziers close to 475k after interest.

To answer the question concerning is what Nash has done criminal or civil, I don't know, I am not a lawyer. I do know that a good friend of mine is in possession of over 100k of fraudulent 19th century memorabilia that came from Nash. To me that is criminal. Until he is made whole I won't have a warm fuzzy about Pete Nash. Also, all of the lies and twists and turns.....just not good. And I have quite a few other documents I can and will post at some point. All of them are Nash's entanglements with the legal system...They seem to show him lying, cheating and generally being a bad person. And it's a shame too because I have heard he has a brilliant mind.

Leon, if he commited grand theft then it should be criminal. I just dont understand how everthing the guy did is a civil case. If you commit a felony you get arrested.:confused:

Ken, again it comes back to not what he did but is what he is writeing fact or fiction. Untill now I see no one disagreeing with his findings. That is what is so crazy about this. Like everything else time will tell.
It was just about a year ago that Bill Mastro told the world the Wagner was trimmed.Not that half the world all ready knew it. Strang things do happen.

I didn't say he committed grand theft. I don't even know the specifics of what it takes for that to be the case. Maybe he has the coaches corner syndrome. Does everything to the brink but not over it, concerning getting pinned. I don't know, that is just a guess. I don't think I have seen a criminal case against him either.

I guess what makes me angry about this thread is that all of the Peter Nash supporters won't even address his past issues with fraudulent behavior, we're supposed to ignore that and listen to what he is saying today. Or they try to downplay it calling it all a "Civil" matter. I think it's a bunch of crap. This guy ripped people off for a lot of money, he stole items that he was loaned and apparently has some connection to the mysterious "Cooperstown forger". I think some of you guys would take child care lessons from Casey Anthony. :mad:

+1

I never trust people's assertions, I always judge of them by their actions.
- Ann Radcliffe (1764 - 1823), The Mysteries of Udolpho, 1764

Something else I don't understand are the blanket assessments that EVERYTHING Nash is saying now is truth, or EVERYTHING he says should be thrown out. Like it somehow has to be ALL one or the other. Personally, just from what I've read of his writing, I don't think the man is capable of speaking straight black-and-white truth. Everything he writes is mixed with personal vendetta and hidden agendas, so that it all comes out muddied and gray and leaves you guessing where the lines between truth and fiction are crossed.

There is an old saying: "The best lies carry an element of truth," and I think the converse also holds true. Something like, "The purest truth is tainted by a little lie," which is akin to Jim's oft-quoted analogy involving a drop of urine in a glass of water. I'm sure the debate regarding Nash will continue for as long as he mixes at least some truth into what he writes, but I would caution anyone to carefully examine whatever he serves up rather than pinching your nose and swallowing it all down. Maybe he's turned over a new leaf, maybe not, but I would suggest using caution with anyone who has been caught pissing in the water cooler...

Dan who on here has said that he did nothing wrong. I have read a lot of remarks and outside of Travis everyone agrees that he did bad things. The only I I said if he did all these things why where they not felony"s. Every thing being said about him is over civil cases.
I dont beleive everyting I read and I sure as hell dont believe everything that is said

I do believe you are trying to downplay his past by bringing up civil vs criminal issues...why even bring it up? HE RIPPED PEOPLE OFF! And there are others here besides Travis who sit by silently even when questioned directly about Nash's past who just ignore the questions.

I have never down played his past. There is a HUGE difference between being a felon and someone being sued. If that is what you call defending him then I guess I am. You can not say he commited a crime when he has never been convicted of one. It is only your opinion that it should be a crime.
I will make this clear. I think what he has done in the past is terrible. If that means what he is doing now is wrong I would have to disagree.
Like I said about what he writes I believe half of what I read but it does make you think.

This civil/criminal dichotomy that some posters here are citing as having some exculpatory value is nonsense. Acts that are civil wrongs are also criminal acts and vice versa. Whether or not an act is prosecuted as a crime says nothing about whether the act satisfies the elements of a crime. It has more to do with whether there is a complaint made to the authorities by a victim, to which authority the complaint is made, how easy it is to prove the case, whether the case has sufficient public considerations and interests to justify the expense of prosecution, whether the case is part of a civil action already [I have heard prosecutors say that they do not like to be used as a collections agency by a civil litigant], and a bunch of other considerations I am certainly missing. I will give you two concrete examples:

1. I had a case with a client accused of defrauding a securities investor. I defended the civil case the investor filed against him. The alleged victim/plaintiff then decided to take the matter to the D.A. in Ventura. The D.A. decided to allocate the resources to investigate the case and then decided to prosecute it once the investigation was done. My client pleaded guilty to a lesser offense in return for a light, no-prison sentence, and then lost the civil trial.

2. Another client of mine was swindled out of a lot of money in a stock investment that was sold to him in violation of the state's securities laws. I turned the matter into the Los Angeles District Attorney's office and to the state Attorney General's securities division for investigation but they declined to prosecute. My client eventually received compensation via a civil action.

In each case the act did not change; the difference was how it was perceived and handled by the prosecuting authority.

Interesting...I guess stealing from the Hall of Fame and NYPL are not crimes either because I'm pretty sure that some of the people Peter Nash accuses of those crimes incidents were never convicted.

Excellent point. If all we are interested in reading/talking about is criminal activity as defined by conviction in a court of law, then everything on Nash's blog is moot.

Are we talking about cleaning up a hobby that we love? If so, any and all wrongdoing is game for discussion.

I for one don't pay money to TPAs, and I won't pay money if Nash starts selling a book. From what I've seen, neither is good for the hobby.

Lifson was caught red handed so what are you talking about?

Do you read posts, Travis? Did Lifson do anything listed in the post you quoted?

And why do you give a crap about Lifson, anyway? He isn't a TPA (who, unlike Lifson and Nash, are not currently the target of serious criminal or civil litigation).

someone said people werent convicted and i corrected him and pointed out lifson was caught red handed stealing baseball material out of the library.

quit changing the subject.

i am with shelly, if someone's got something on someone, let's hear it. the so-called saber rattling is getting old.

HOS posts evidence, eyewitness accounts, what's the holdup?

Travis, post #216 has some questions for you about the subject at hand. You are online right now, as I type this. Any chance you can respond??

Ken

PS: Also, I'm sure you are old enough to know the difference between "caught red handed" and "convicted," right?