With respect to Peter's suggestion that its difficult to write a letter if you don't know that you've been defrauded (in part because Mastro destroyed bidding records), isn't concealment sort of the quintessential essence of fraud? Concealment, non-disclosure, false representation, deceit. Failure to disclose material facts when you have a duty to speak is fraud. Half-truths can be fraud, because there is a duty to tell the actual truth, not part of it. I don't know that I would suggest he was a fiduciary, but he damn sure told people that they could submit max bids and that those bids would be held in confidence and not utilized unless/until another bidder (who I think most people would have fairly inferred was not the auction house) topped the existing bid. That apparently didn't happen on a relatively frequent basis.
Also, at least where I'm from, destruction of relevant evidence in and of itself creates an inference that the evidence which was destroyed would have been adverse to the party who destroyed it. The fact that occurred is fairly damning IMO, and is indicative of fraud and shilling on a far more widespread basis than indicated in the plea agreement IMO.
Even apart from the damage to the hobby and the fact that people are most likely paying inflated prices due to the shilling of cards someone else was unfortunate enough to win, I think there is plenty of reason for everyone who bid in Mastro's auctions to assert that they were likely defrauded. I guess I also need to write a letter....
|