John Rogers Home and Business Searched by the FBI

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Leon

Sure, all you have to do is prove it's a fraudulent opinion, no problem.

And how is that any harder or easier than proving a statement of fact was made with knowledge it was false?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

And how is that any harder or easier than proving a statement of fact was made with knowledge it was false?

You're the one saying how easy it is, not me. And I am telling you that I have been told by the people actually doing the work that it's not easy. If it was then CC would be in hot water....(and maybe they are, I don't know)

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Leon

You're the one saying how easy it is, not me. And I am telling you that I have been told by the people actually doing the work that it's not easy. If it was then CC would be in hot water....

I never said it was easy. I am saying that the language they use is not the reason it's hard, but rather that it's hard to prove a fraudulent state of mind.

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I never said it was easy. I am saying that the language they use is not the reason it's hard, but rather that it's hard to prove a fraudulent state of mind.

Plus, the odds of getting a jury that knows anything at all about autographs is not good...Mr Morales taking the stand with his "FBI background in forensics" would probably make the average jury member star struck.

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

Plus, the odds of getting a jury that knows anything at all about autographs is not good...Mr Morales taking the stand with his "FBI background in forensics" would probably make the average jury member star struck.

A thread I did on Chris "I Never Saw An Autograph I Didn't Like" Morales.

http://live.autographmagazine.com/pr...pears-in-court

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

Originally Posted by thetruthisoutthere

A thread I did on Chris "I Never Saw An Autograph I Didn't Like" Morales.

http://live.autographmagazine.com/pr...pears-in-court

Wow. Interesting article. Also, great name. I have the X-files poster up in my office.

[atx840]

WTF...Jeff & the fine lawyers on Net54, do I have any "rights" to have this clown remove my photo from his site?

http://haulsofshame.com/blog/?p=26290#more-26290

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I never said it was easy. I am saying that the language they use is not the reason it's hard, but rather that it's hard to prove a fraudulent state of mind.

I don't know about that. I think if you read one of CC's LOA's you would find a lot of verbiage making them not liable for their opinion. I haven't read one but I would bet they are pretty good at denying culpability.....

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by Leon

I don't know about that. I think if you read one of CC's LOA's you would find a lot of verbiage making them not liable for their opinion. I haven't read one but I would bet they are pretty good at denying culpability.....

I think it's quite obvious that as long as they've been running their bogus operation and the FBI hasn't already shut them down that it's been deemed not an easy task.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

I think it's quite obvious that as long as they've been running their bogus operation and the FBI hasn't already shut them down that it's been deemed not an easy task.

Given the amount of fraud that goes on in this world, it's obviously not an easy task to build a case that will hold up on a beyond a reasonable doubt standard. Some get busted but most do not. And prosecutorial resources are scarce relative to the number of fraudsters.

[barrysloate]

Peter- here is something I don't understand, and maybe you can explain it: if I rendered an opinion on an autograph, and I got it wrong (I called a bogus autograph genuine) I agree that I could have simply given an erroneous opinion.

But if you gave me a thousand bogus autographs to authenticate, and I said all thousand were genuine, isn't there a tipping point where nobody would believe me? Wouldn't it at some point become obvious that I was committing fraud?

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Given the amount of fraud that goes on in this world, it's obviously not an easy task to build a case that will hold up on a beyond a reasonable doubt standard. Some get busted but most do not. And prosecutorial resources are scarce relative to the number of fraudsters.

CC and Morales are the most obvious fraudsters in the hobby at this time...I would think if what they were doing was easy to prosecute it would have been done by now. They're gaming the system.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Leon

I don't know about that. I think if you read one of CC's LOA's you would find a lot of verbiage making them not liable for their opinion. I haven't read one but I would bet they are pretty good at denying culpability.....

That's another issue. I haven't seen one either so can't comment.