Bill Mastro's upcoming sentencing

[poorlydrawncat]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I guess how I would come out then would depend a lot on the exact words used when the card was returned.

But without knowing that, if the FBI took a card from me, and then gave it back to me without requiring further evaluation, that would give me some comfort. I'm not sure I would then feel obliged to conduct my own forensic examination, if the FBI itself did not feel one was warranted, or could yield any evidence relevant to the issue.

With hindsight, we can see that more could have been done. But it's hindsight.

I can imagine the FBI could have a million reasons to do this. Remember the FBI is not concerned with matters of truth but of law. You can be 100 percent sure something is stolen, but even if you witnessed the theft yourself it doesn't mean there's anything you can do legally without proof that would hold up in a court of law. The truth and the determination of the law are two very different things.

But at the end of the day the FBI's opinion doesn't matter that much to me. This community knows more about baseball cards and their history than any FBI agent. We know the card has an NYPL stamp, we know the NYPL has reported that exact card stolen, of which there are two known copies in the world. There are no records that I know of of the library selling that card (if there were, it would be a different story). The card was altered to remove the stamp (by the way, the fact that it's holdered with a number grade should be enough to take the auction down right this second...) and there's no mention of the library in its supposedly extensive provenance records.

I think this is a pretty open and shut case. If it looks, quacks, then duck, etc.

And honestly for Leon to classify this as a witch hunt I think is ultra-hypocritical. There have been so many auction busting threads in the past, but suddenly when it's one of Leon's items, Leon's response is that the community is out to get him. The very community with all his supporters and the people who consider him to be one of the pillars of the hobby. I mean honestly, give me a break.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by poorlydrawncat

I can imagine the FBI could have a million reasons to do this. Remember the FBI is not concerned with matters of truth but of law. You can be 100 percent sure something is stolen, but even if you witnessed the theft yourself it doesn't mean there's anything you can do legally without proof that would hold up in a court of law. The truth and the determination of the law are two very different things.

But at the end of the day the FBI's opinion doesn't matter that much to me. This community knows more about baseball cards and their history than any FBI agent. We know the card has an NYPL stamp, we know the NYPL has reported that exact card stolen, of which there are two known copies in the world. There are no records that I know of of the library selling that card (if there were, it would be a different story). The card was altered to remove the stamp (by the way, the fact that it's holdered with a number grade should be enough to take the auction down right this second...) and there's no mention of the library in its supposedly extensive provenance records.

I think this is a pretty open and shut case. If it looks, quacks, then duck, etc.

And honestly for Leon to classify this as a witch hunt I think is ultra-hypocritical. There have been so many auction busting threads in the past, but suddenly when it's one of Leon's items, Leon's response is that the community is out to get him. The very community with all his supporters and the people who consider him to be one of the pillars of the hobby. I mean honestly, give me a break.

We have known SINCE YESTERDAY of the NYPL stamp. Show me where "the community" knew this before yesterday.

[poorlydrawncat]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

We have known SINCE YESTERDAY of the NYPL stamp. Show me where "the community" knew this before yesterday.

That's kinda my point...

FBI didn't notice the stamp, community did. And the FBI were the ones actively investigating it. Wouldn't you think the FBI would think to check for the stamp from the institution where it was reported stolen? It took the community to figure that out, not the FBI. And yea it took some time but it still happened before the FBI, which doesn't do much for my confidence in them. That's all I'm saying.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by poorlydrawncat

That's kinda my point...

FBI didn't notice the stamp, community did. And the FBI were the ones actively investigating it. Wouldn't you think the FBI would think to check for the stamp from the institution where it was reported stolen? It took the community to figure that out, not the FBI. And yea it took some time but it still happened before the FBI, which doesn't do much for my confidence in them. That's all I'm saying.

You may well be right in hindsight that the FBI did not do its homework, I don't know. But again, at the time in question, I am not sure Leon was on notice of that, such that he should have (as John is claiming) undertaken an independent forensic investigation to "clear" the card.

[poorlydrawncat]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

You may well be right in hindsight that the FBI did not do its homework, I don't know. But again, at the time in question, I am not sure Leon was on notice of that, such that he should have (as John is claiming) undertaken an independent forensic investigation to "clear" the card.

Oh I totally agree with you there. I think Leon did all the due diligence with the card in regards to the FBI. I probably would have done the same thing. That being said, I don't have all the evidence and a lot of people are accusing Leon of knowing more than he let on. Again, I'm not really entrenched enough in the hobby to make that determination myself, but if it's true it would be really disheartening.

I was just kinda concerned about the way Leon was reacting to the evidence of the NYPL stamp, but I also understand why he's defensive about it considering he spent so much money on it and is probably reluctant to part with it. I just hope he's as morally rigorous when it comes to himself as when it comes to others. But it's too early to tell that, we'll know by the end of the auction.

[Exhibitman]

Nice post Joann. Hate to sound all lawyerly here but has anyone considered that Leon might be the lawful owner of the card? A minority of states (and I believe Texas is one) allow a thief or his successor to convey good title to a bona fide purchaser. Before we bust out the tar and feathers I think we need an answer to that question.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Nice post Joann. Hate to sound all lawyerly here but has anyone considered that Leon might be the lawful owner of the card? A minority of states (and I believe Texas is one) allow a thief or his successor to convey good title to a bona fide purchaser. Before we bust out the tar and feathers I think we need an answer to that question.

I find that hard to believe, I thought the rule throughout the US was nemo dat quod non habet -- a thief cannot convey good title, therefore a subsequent purchaser cannot acquire good title. Always happy to learn though.

EDIT TO ADD I suppose there could be some variance in state statutes of limitation, but again, I would be surprised if any state allowed a subsequent purchaser's rights to prevail over an original owner whose goods were stolen. As the common law doctrine says, nobody can give what he doesn't have.

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I find that hard to believe, I thought the rule throughout the US was nemo dat quod non habet -- a thief cannot convey good title, therefore a subsequent purchaser cannot acquire good title. Always happy to learn though.

You and your damn French.

Tom C

[nolemmings]

Interesting full faith and credit implications, or at least issues concerning interstate commerce. If seller is lawful owner under his State's law, does buyer's State have to recognize the sale as valid if it would otherwise not be? If any buyer in the chain of title after thief lived in a State that recognizes a BFP as having a valid interest, are all subsequent States where buyers reside bound to that same determination? I've actually got to go bill some time now, but crackerjack researcher and scholar Peter_Spaeth no doubt will have an informed response upon my return

[wonkaticket]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

We have known SINCE YESTERDAY of the NYPL stamp. Show me where "the community" knew this before yesterday.

Peter, I can't speak for everyone but I knew about it that's why I brought it up (post #195) to Leon before it ever hit Nash's website.

Many people knew of Leon's visit about this this card from the Feds it's a small hobby. Most figured he would work it out or get the questions on this item cleared up before hit ever hit an auction block or was sold privately. Seems that didn't happen....and it seems from the auction description some folks were aware and were covering all the angles.

Look owning a stolen item doesn't make you a crook not in the collectibles world that's for sure it could happen to any of us. In that way I have sympathy for Leon. To me it's how you handle the item and the choices you make after you're made clearly aware of issues that defines the situation. That's my issue with Leon in this situation. Not the stolen or potentially stolen card, but the way he handled the situation with this item and letting it hit the auction block. To play naive, innocent, call people names and play the victim of a witch hunt afterwards just further frustrates me. Get over yourself you're not so important that myself and others are out to get you. What I did here with Leon is nothing I haven't done with other folks Leland's, Chan, Paragon, Allen, Goldin etc. in those cases it was good work kudos or silence from Leon. Now that he's in the hot seat I'm an idiot, Jeff has a shady law practice and we all can pound sand,

Cheers,

John

P.S. I just got your email I would agree a bit it could be a good thing to talk about over beers at the national if you're heading out. At the very least give us a reason to drink.

[Peter_Spaeth]

John, yes to be sure his is not the first time questions were raised about the card, but I am wondering why you think Leon was obligated to conduct his own investigation after the FBI gave him back the card rather than keeping it to do further forensic analysis. If the federal agency investigating the theft that obviously has sophisticated crime labs tells him there isn't anything further that can be done to trace it to the NYPL because they will never be able to read the stamp, why isn't that a clean enough bill of health? And what's the burden of proof here -- does one have to be certain beyond a reasonable doubt that a card is not stolen in order to be able to sell it?