Washington Post article on the altered card scandal

[griffon512]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

Why would they answer that? It may even be unethical to answer.

If they are not giving legal services to these people/entities, why would it be privileged? If they are giving legal services to them, it's the determination of the lawyer whether it's privileged or unethical. If enough lawyers who regularly post respond and one doesn't that alone might reflect something. Not sure why you posted. It should be obvious to you why I did.

[Bicem]

Finally a decent article about all this, David Seideman at Forbes should take notes.

[Johnny630]

Why are they Picturing SGC Cards and Not PSA ????

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by Johnny630

Why are they Picturing SGC Cards and Not PSA ????

Likely an image they already had on file. There's another image from the 2010 National.

[Johnny630]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

Likely an image they already had on file. There's another image from the 2010 National.

Thanks Scott....hope they change it..

[Rich Klein]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

Likely an image they already had on file. There's another image from the 2010 National.

They probably covered the 2010 Baltimore National because of the proximity to Washington and had those photos on file. And because they don't have hobby knowledge we do, they used what they had.

Rich

[h2oya311]

Very good article. Well-written and explains the baseball card industry pretty well for those outside of the hobby. The comments after the article make me sad, but I guess it's to be expected. Many of us are fools with our money.

[AGuinness]

Originally Posted by Rich Klein

They probably covered the 2010 Baltimore National because of the proximity to Washington and had those photos on file. And because they don't have hobby knowledge we do, they used what they had.

Rich

Either that or because SGC slabs are just objectively more attractive and photogenic than the others... :P

[samosa4u]

Funniest part of the article:

“I look for cards that PSA rated 5s and 6s, crack them out and hopefully get a better answer,” he said. “I’ve been buying and selling cards for 20 years. If I’ve been doing this [altering] for that long, I’d be retired. If I was this master alterer, I’d be pretty bad at it. I’d be pretty stupid.”

Almost every single altered card that was posted on the Blowout forum was purchased by Gary Moser. How can he just flat out deny it with all that evidence against him? He's f*cked and he knows it.

[nolemmings]

Originally Posted by griffon512

If they are not giving legal services to these people/entities, why would it be privileged? If they are giving legal services to them, it's the determination of the lawyer whether it's privileged or unethical. If enough lawyers who regularly post respond and one doesn't that alone might reflect something. Not sure why you posted. It should be obvious to you why I did.

The question, at least as I read it, was whether disclosure would be unethical, which is not limited to whether the information is privileged. Confidential information, privileged or not, may not be disclosed without client consent, with very limited exceptions.

[Johnny630]

Originally Posted by nolemmings

The question, at least as I read it, was whether disclosure would be unethical, which is not limited to whether the information is privileged. Confidential information, privileged or not, may not be disclosed without client consent, with very limited exceptions.

As Much as it Pains me to say this....I despise it but believe to be truth....
I think it’s going to Very Very difficult to prove Anyone allegedly Altered Any Cards....

Sad long term all the facts and exposure being brought to like will be good for the Industry...temporary pain hurts be will get much better

[AGuinness]

Originally Posted by Johnny630

As Much as it Pains me to say this....I despise it but believe to be truth....
I think it’s going to Very Very difficult to prove Anyone allegedly Altered Any Cards....

Sad long term all the facts and exposure being brought to like will be good for the Industry...temporary pain hurts be will get much better

If there is an investigation, then I think whatever entity is in charge will have more tools in the toolbox to get at evidence than the BODA people do. And in that case, I believe that it won't be as difficult to prove the alterations/conspiracy/etc.

[Johnny630]

Originally Posted by AGuinness

If there is an investigation, then I think whatever entity is in charge will have more tools in the toolbox to get at evidence than the BODA people do. And in that case, I believe that it won't be as difficult to prove the alterations/conspiracy/etc.

I’m just addressing the altering of cards.....how are they going to able to prove that anyone did alleged alterations, meaning specific persons..... PSA can’t determine anything...that’s one thing that’s been shown by them, they’re good at not stopping them.. They’re laughing knowing They’re safe.....probably just not gonna be as bold about it...using same account to buy and same auction houses...it’s going to be more targeted and hidden....I take solace in knowing the more arrogant and brash they get the more likely they will be to get caught. Fingers crossed

[AGuinness]

Originally Posted by Johnny630

I’m just addressing the altering of cards.....how are they going to able to prove that anyone did anything, meaning specific persons..... PSA can’t determine anything...that’s one thing that’s been proven. They’re laughing knowing They’re safe.....probably just not gonna be as bold about it...using same account to buy and same auction houses...it’s going to be more targeted and hidden....I take solace in knowing the more arrogant and brash they get the more likely they will be to get caught. Fingers crossed

The way I believe it could work is that investigators could get warrants to obtain documents, etc. that would really pull back the curtain on what was going on.

[Johnny630]

Originally Posted by AGuinness

The way I believe it could work is that investigators could get warrants to obtain documents, etc. that would really pull back the curtain on what was going on.

Right I hear you man....but here is the thing.......what prof do you have to say specific person or persons did this? Did you see such and such trim bleach or re color a card? Where is the physical evidence? It’s all circumstantial.....still can hold same weight in court but I’m banking it won’t make it there...at least not to the specific alleged doctor or doctors...they’re gonna be very very difficult to pinch

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by griffon512

If they are not giving legal services to these people/entities, why would it be privileged? If they are giving legal services to them, it's the determination of the lawyer whether it's privileged or unethical. If enough lawyers who regularly post respond and one doesn't that alone might reflect something. Not sure why you posted. It should be obvious to you why I did.

Actually, there are certain circumstances where the fact of representation could be a client confidence that an attorney could not reveal without the client's permission, so some attorneys might not be able to answer the question.

I also want to make clear that I have no problems with any attorney who is asked to advise or defend an accused against potential criminal charges. It's part of the system. I don't happen to have the stomach for criminal defense, but that's my personality rather than anything else. I've defended some pretty sleazy people over the years in civil cases. Part of the job: you can pick your nose but you can't always pick your clients. Or their noses.

[Leon]

You can't choose not to take a client? Please help me understand how you have been forced to take a client?
If you were a criminal defense lawyer would you defend pwcc? I am sure I am just not understanding.

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Actually, there are certain circumstances where the fact of representation could be a client confidence that an attorney could not reveal without the client's permission, so some attorneys might not be able to answer the question.

I also want to make clear that I have no problems with any attorney who is asked to advise or defend an accused against potential criminal charges. It's part of the system. I don't happen to have the stomach for criminal defense, but that's my personality rather than anything else. I've defended some pretty sleazy people over the years in civil cases. Part of the job: you can pick your nose but you can't always pick your clients. Or their noses.