Chris Morales appears in court for an autograph case, read about the results.

[GrayGhost]

this just seems like a losing battle. I hope not tho, but terrible indeed. Keep fighting, one person turned away from these scum is good. Plus, certs being banned in places is a good start to what hopefully is a final long term goal.

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by GrayGhost

this just seems like a losing battle. I hope not tho, but terrible indeed. Keep fighting, one person turned away from these scum is good. Plus, certs being banned in places is a good start to what hopefully is a final long term goal.

I hope not either, Scott. But I, for one, am not going away.

Yes, Christopher L. Morales, Forensic Investigator, on Ebay's banned list.

I read on a website a few weeks ago where someone was blaming a certain person for Morales being placed on Ebay's banned list.

Only one person got Morales on Ebay's banned list and that person is Chris Morales, Forensic Investigator.

[benjulmag]

The merits of licensing is not so much to ensure that competent practioneers ply the trade. I agree with the concerns that the licensing requirements may as a practical matter do little to keep out imcompetent practioneers. Rather the advantage to such a requirement is that it would give the the licensing authority the right to ban those whom by their subsequent actions have been shown to be incompetent and/or unscrupulous. So once it has been shown that a person clearly doesn't know or doesn't care what he is doing, at that point he could be banned. Granted that won't help those adversely impacted by the initial incorrect certifications. But it could materially reduce the number of future victims.

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by benjulmag

The merits of licensing is not so much to ensure that competent practioneers ply the trade. I agree with the concerns that the licensing requirements may as a practical matter do little to keep out imcompetent practioneers. Rather the advantage to such a requirement is that it would give the the licensing authority the right to ban those whom by their subsequent actions have been shown to be incompetent and/or unscrupulous. So once it has been shown that a person clearly doesn't know or doesn't care what he is doing, at that point he could be banned. Granted that won't help those adversely impacted by the initial incorrect certifications. But it could materially reduce the number of future victims.

Excellent point, Corey.

Think about this; none of the major auctions will not accept anything on consignment that has a COA from Morales and Ted Taylor (TTA/Stat Authentic). Ted Taylor and Morales are both on Ebay's banned list.

The only auction houses that accept COAs from Morales and Ted Taylor all list and sell horrific forgeries. That pretty much sums it up.

[thetruthisoutthere]

I won't include the link to the below item that sold as I will not give them any free advertising, but look at this horrific Mantle forgery certed by Chris Morales, Forensic Investigator. The winning bid was $8.00. Yes, $8.00.

WWW-1.jpg

WWW-2.jpg

[GrayGhost]

As you have said in your videos Chris, people should REALIZE that 8.00 sales of Mantle signed photos are RIDICULOUS. People themselves are morons. When something sells THAT Cheap or like in the Roach's, signed Hoss Radbourne and Lincoln "cuts" and the like go so cheap, don't they ask why? People are too lazy to get proper QUALIFIED opinions.

The crooks still buy and flip, but now, more people are hopefully going to realize if it walks like Chris Morales, talks like Chris Morales, it sure is most likely A FAKE!!

[mdschulze]

Let's see if I understand this correctly.... If I purchased a certified autographed item from an auction house that was later deemed a forgery, would I have any legal ramifications as a buyer? If so, who would be held accountable... the auction house or the authenticator? I'm no attorney but I would think that since the auction house is listing the item as authentic, they should be on the hook on behalf of the duped buyer Once they refund my $$, then the auction house would have to get their money back from the item's original owner.... then the owner would have to pursue the authenticator for a refund. At this time, the authenticator can use the line, "Well, it was my expert opinion" and get off free and clear without issuing a refund or face any criminal charges.

Is this how these situations typically play out or does the auction house use verbage like "buyer beware" and the initial request for a refund never makes it down the chain to the authenticator. I've never purchased anything from an auction house so I apologize for all of the questions.

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by mdschulze

Let's see if I understand this correctly.... If I purchased a certified autographed item from an auction house that was later deemed a forgery, would I have any legal ramifications as a buyer? If so, who would be held accountable... the auction house or the authenticator? I'm no attorney but I would think that since the auction house is listing the item as authentic, they should be on the hook on behalf of the duped buyer Once they refund my $$, then the auction house would have to get their money back from the item's original owner.... then the owner would have to pursue the authenticator for a refund. At this time, the authenticator can use the line, "Well, it was my expert opinion" and get off free and clear without issuing a refund or face any criminal charges.

Is this how these situations typically play out or does the auction house use verbage like "buyer beware" and the initial request for a refund never makes it down the chain to the authenticator. I've never purchased anything from an auction house so I apologize for all of the questions.

I've never purchased from an auction house either, but I would think if an item was discovered not to be authentic, then the auction house would have to issue you a refund, and then deal with the authenticator. That, to me, would be the proper and correct way of handling a situation like that.