Not sure anyone has seen this? ESPN counterfeiters video Greg Marino

[orioles70]

Bump

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Mr. Zipper

I actually appreciated watching him execute the forgeries.

For anyone who has wondered what "deliberate and drawn" means, there ya go.

That was the part of the video that I found to be the most educational. Watching him sign 'Babe Ruth' and seeing the wavering results - just the final stroke of the 'R' was enough, but these balls still show up in the major auction houses repeatedly, with all the characteristics of a 'deliberate and drawn' autograph.

I don't know modern Mantles or Williams', but the 'B' in Ruth is horrible and the Gehrigs are also horrible. I have never understood why anyone bought either of these forgeries. The shellacked balls are equally horrible.

[SetBuilder]

Originally Posted by Leon

Just keep at it. Someone will listen. I believe that recently many FBI agents have probably been assigned to the Las Vegas shooting nightmare. Unfortunately for us collectors there are more important things in life than a fake autograph or card. We can only hope that our few FBI Agents, who do work in our area, are able to convince agents in other regions to take these hobby cases. I don't think that is an easy task, quite honestly.

Operation Bullpen was a success because of the immense amount of coordination and resources that were expended by law enforcement. Despite all of that, it all hinged on the confidential informants that wore wires and were able to catch the forgers discussing the crime on tape. Had there been no informants and no tapes, they might have walked.

Forgery of sports memorabilia is one of the more difficult criminal cases to prosecute, because autographs can never be authenticated with 100% certainty. Everything is an opinion. Yet, criminal cases are subject to the highest evidentiary burden. It has to be "beyond a reasonable doubt." Being 99% sure someone forged autographs isn't good enough.

These cases drain a lot of resources because of this.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by SetBuilder

Operation Bullpen was a success because of the immense amount of coordination and resources that were expended by law enforcement. Despite all of that, it all hinged on the confidential informants that wore wires and were able to catch the forgers discussing the crime on tape. Had there been no informants and no tapes, they might have walked.

Forgery of sports memorabilia is one of the more difficult criminal cases to prosecute, because autographs can never be authenticated with 100% certainty. Everything is an opinion. Yet, criminal cases are subject to the highest evidentiary burden. It has to be "beyond a reasonable doubt." Being 99% sure someone forged autographs isn't good enough.
These cases drain a lot of resources because of this.

Beyond a reasonable doubt-

I don't know about that but maybe a board lawyer will know. According to Google 98%-99% is good....
.

Whereas, in a civil trial, a party may prevail with as little as 51 percent probability (a preponderance), those legal authorities who venture to assign a numerical value to “beyond a reasonable doubt” place it in the certainty range of 98 or 99 percent.

.

[SetBuilder]

Originally Posted by Leon

Beyond a reasonable doubt-

I don't know about that but maybe a board lawyer will know. According to Google 98%-99% is good....
.

Whereas, in a civil trial, a party may prevail with as little as 51 percent probability (a preponderance), those legal authorities who venture to assign a numerical value to “beyond a reasonable doubt” place it in the certainty range of 98 or 99 percent.

.

Probably if they have a mountain of circumstantial evidence, I can see that being good enough for a jury. Also depends on how good the defense lawyers are (vs. just a public defender). From the perspective of the prosecutor, they want to be as close to 100% sure before they bring the case, to avoid flushing time and resources down the drain.

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by sycks22

Kind of amazing how good he was.

How good he was? He sucked. Only the uneducated were fooled by his crap.
(Of course there are sh*tloads of uneducated walking around,)

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by David Atkatz

How good he was? He sucked. Only the uneducated were fooled by his crap.
(Of course there are sh*tloads of uneducated walking around,)

+1

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by David Atkatz

How good he was? He sucked. Only the uneducated were fooled by his crap.
(Of course there are sh*tloads of uneducated walking around,)

+2

[Bestdj777]

Originally Posted by SetBuilder

Probably if they have a mountain of circumstantial evidence, I can see that being good enough for a jury. Also depends on how good the defense lawyers are (vs. just a public defender). From the perspective of the prosecutor, they want to be as close to 100% sure before they bring the case, to avoid flushing time and resources down the drain.

The "just a public defender" comment is absurd. Some of the best and brightest criminal defense attorneys are public defenders.


- a former, private criminal defense attorney

[Runscott]

I was discussing the green 27 Yankees forged ball with my gf and she was confused as to why anyone would buy something like that, given the expert resources on this forum.

The people who buy that stuff don't come here. The letters are enough for them.

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by Bestdj777

The "just a public defender" comment is absurd. Some of the best and brightest criminal defense attorneys are public defenders.


- a former, private criminal defense attorney

Sorry to disagree with you counselor. If you use a public defender....You are a MORON

[jgmp123]

Great video...I remember exchanging emails and eventually purchasing some authentic items from the undercover agent in this case (John Ferreira) after he retired and opened his own shop up in Oregon.

I decided to look him up after watching the video as it's been several years since we last spoke and was saddened to learn he passed away in February. I wanted to pass this along in case anyone else spoke or bought from John. He was a great man and did a ton for the hobby.

http://www.nmplimited.com/obituaries...A?obId=2978288

[drcy]

Originally Posted by SetBuilder

Operation Bullpen was a success because of the immense amount of coordination and resources that were expended by law enforcement. Despite all of that, it all hinged on the confidential informants that wore wires and were able to catch the forgers discussing the crime on tape. Had there been no informants and no tapes, they might have walked.

Forgery of sports memorabilia is one of the more difficult criminal cases to prosecute, because autographs can never be authenticated with 100% certainty. Everything is an opinion. Yet, criminal cases are subject to the highest evidentiary burden. It has to be "beyond a reasonable doubt." Being 99% sure someone forged autographs isn't good enough.

These cases drain a lot of resources because of this.

When you get to a court case, you can do such things as ink chemicals identification and dating that can scientifically and definitively prove forgery, but that are not done in normal hobby examination because of the time/cost.

It's worthy to side note that science is excellent at forgery detection, but has limits in authentication. For example, if the canvas and paint is scientifically shown to be from the 1900s, that in and of itself proves the Rembrandt painting is a fake. However, if the canvas and paint are shown to be from the correct period, that is important if not essential evidence but not proof in and of itself that the painting was by Rembrandt.

[Stampsfan]

I think what you are saying is, it's easier to prove something is not real than it is to prove something is real.

[SetBuilder]

Originally Posted by drcy

When you get to a court case, you can do such things as ink chemicals identification and dating that can scientifically and definitively prove forgery, but that are not done in normal hobby examination because of the time/cost.

It's worthy to side note that science is excellent at forgery detection, but has limits in authentication. For example, if the canvas and paint is scientifically shown to be from the 1900s, that in and of itself proves the Rembrandt painting is a fake. However, if the canvas and paint are shown to be from the correct period, that is important if not essential evidence but not proof in and of itself that the painting was by Rembrandt.

Even with all that, how do you prove intent? Assuming there is no smoking gun?

[SetBuilder]

Originally Posted by Bestdj777

The "just a public defender" comment is absurd. Some of the best and brightest criminal defense attorneys are public defenders.


- a former, private criminal defense attorney

I didn't mean to say that public defenders are bad lawyers. The problem with PD's is that their case loads are very large relative to their low pay and they don't have time to focus on each case fully compared to a private lawyer.

[mcgwirecom]

I was collecting McGwire for several years before Operation Bullpen started. I managed to get "hired" by several auction houses after the story broke to check out their McGwire signatures. What amazed me in the video is that while he was pretty good at forging a lot of different players, his McGwire was so bad I thought anyone could see it!

[thetruthisoutthere]

My favorite autograph in my collection.

A copy of the book Operation Bullpen signed by Tim Fitzsimmons.



TimFitzSignedOpBullpen-1.jpg

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by thetruthisoutthere

My favorite autograph in my collection.

A copy of the book Operation Bullpen signed by Tim Fitzsimmons.



Attachment 326947

Very nice my friend, very nice.

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by RichardSimon

Very nice my friend, very nice.

Thank you, Richard.