Two hour interview with.... Bill Mastro

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I seem to recall the claim made by myself and others wasn't that it had nothing to do with the case but rather that it had nothing to do with the sentencing. He wasn't charged for trimming the Wagner and he wasn't sentenced for it. It seems to have only come up because he was trying to propose a plea deal and/or as a way to demonstrate what sort of character he was.

I just quoted from the indictment, which IS the charge. We went through this at length before. I suggest that before you continue down the same wrong road, you reread the prior thread where virtually everything you thought was shown to be objectively wrong by reference to the case documents. He did not bring it up, the government did. And he responded. Now technically he was not charged with the actual trimming of the card, which of course is not a crime, he was charged with not disclosing the trimming in marketing materials where he touted Mastronet's prior sales of the Wagner. In other words, fraud. Again, it was not the focus of the case, shill bidding was. And I would presume shill bidding is what the judge was focused on in sentencing Mastro, although there was some discussion of the Wagner charge in the relevant sentencing documents, also referenced in the other thread.

https://www.net54baseball.com/showth...ght=memorandum

Dayenu.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I just quoted from the indictment, which IS the charge. We went through this at length before. I suggest that before you continue down the same wrong road, you reread the prior thread where virtually everything you thought was shown to be objectively wrong by reference to the case documents. He did not bring it up, the government did. And he responded. Now technically he was not charged with the actual trimming of the card, which of course is not a crime, he was charged with not disclosing the trimming in marketing materials where he touted Mastronet's prior sales of the Wagner. In other words, fraud. Again, it was not the focus of the case, shill bidding was. And I would presume shill bidding is what the judge was focused on in sentencing Mastro, although there was some discussion of the Wagner charge in the relevant sentencing documents, also referenced in the other thread.

https://www.net54baseball.com/showth...ght=memorandum

Dayenu.

LOLOLOL. So are you suggesting that this was not a good double down bet by Snowman?

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

LOLOLOL. So are you suggesting that this was not a good double down bet by Snowman?

I'll go one step further. I'm tripling down on my claim. Peter's take is bullshit. And there are numerous lawyers in the hobby that disagree with his take as well. Mastro was not charged or sentenced for trimming the Wagner or for not disclosing said trimming. Period.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I'll go one step further. I'm tripling down on my claim. Peter's take is bullshit. And there are numerous lawyers in the hobby that disagree with his take as well. Mastro was not charged or sentenced for trimming the Wagner. Period.

Not my "take" bro, read the indictment. Tell me which words you don't understand. Better yet, tell me what words support your position. As for sentencing, I already said clearly I didn't think it was much if any of a factor. You can bluster and BS all you want but it doesn't change the document. Once more, with feeling:

11. It was further part of the scheme that in marketing materials distributed
on behalf of Mastro Auctions, which were intended to portray Mastro Auctions to
potential bidders and consignors as a premier seller of valuable items for which a
strong market existed, defendant MASTRO represented that Mastro Auctions had sold
the most expensive baseball card in the world, a Honus Wagner T-206 card. In making
this representation, however, defendant MASTRO knowingly omitted the material fact
that defendant MASTRO had altered the baseball card by cutting the sides of the card
in a manner that, if disclosed, would have significantly reduced the value of the card.

Period.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Not my "take" bro, read the indictment. Tell me which words you don't understand. Better yet, tell me what words support your position. As for sentencing, I already said clearly I didn't think it was much if any of a factor. You can bluster and BS all you want but it doesn't change the document. Once more, with feeling:

11. It was further part of the scheme that in marketing materials distributed
on behalf of Mastro Auctions, which were intended to portray Mastro Auctions to
potential bidders and consignors as a premier seller of valuable items for which a
strong market existed, defendant MASTRO represented that Mastro Auctions had sold
the most expensive baseball card in the world, a Honus Wagner T-206 card. In making
this representation, however, defendant MASTRO knowingly omitted the material fact
that defendant MASTRO had altered the baseball card by cutting the sides of the card
in a manner that, if disclosed, would have significantly reduced the value of the card.

Period.

What does the indictment have to do with this conversation? You can put whatever you want in an indictment. What matters is what he was actually found guilty of and sentenced for. That's what we're talking about. Show me where I can find something along the lines of the jury saying "As to count #11, we the jury find the charge of the defendant trimming the Honus Wagner baseball card and failing to disclose said alteration upon selling it: GUILTY".

You can't because it didn't happen.

I'm not saying it wasn't brought up at trial. I'm saying he wasn't sentenced for it and he didn't go to prison for it.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snowman

What does the indictment have to do with this conversation? You can put whatever you want in an indictment. What matters is what he was actually found guilty of and sentenced for. That's what we're talking about. Show me where I can find something along the lines of the jury saying "As to count #11, we the jury find the charge of the defendant trimming the Honus Wagner baseball card and failing to disclose said alteration upon selling it: GUILTY".

You can't because it didn't happen.

I'm not saying it wasn't brought up at trial. I'm saying he wasn't sentenced for it and he didn't go to prison for it.

You have no clue Travis. Geez. Stop moving the goalposts. You claimed he wasn't CHARGED with it. Post 91 and many prior posts to the same effect. The indictment is precisely the document that sets out the CHARGES against him. So yes, he was CHARGED with it. The indictment has everything to do with this conversation. He then pleaded guilty to the one count indictment which included this CHARGE and was sentenced. There was no trial and no jury because he pleaded GUILTY. If you actually listened instead of just argued from ignorance and ego you might understand this better.

Recall that in the prior thread your ridiculous theory was that Mastro himself injected this into the case to win brownie points.

[Peter_Spaeth]

BTW, as to your statement that you can put anything you want in an indictment (you clearly know a lot about the law lol), the indictment was returned in this case by a federal grand jury after months of work and presentation of evidence. And lo and behold, the FBI press release describing the unsealed indictment also talks about the damn Wagner.

https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/ch...r-collectibles

[Lorewalker]

A definition of the word indictment:

a formal written statement prepared by a prosecuting authority charging a person with a crime and returned by a jury (such as a grand jury) upon finding that sufficient evidence to support it was presented.

Clearly it was part of the charges/accusations and no lawyer would say otherwise. As to his sentencing docs I have read...ok browsed...I did not see a breakdown of charges with the associated time he would serve so I (non lawyer) cannot speak to how much of his jail time was due to the Wagner but the trimming and the failure to disclose the trimming were part of the charges.

[calvindog]

Reading this is akin to listening to fingernails across a blackboard. Travis -- stop. Please. Bill was sentenced for any and all of his bad conduct in the indictment to which he pled guilty. He was a cooperator with the feds and ate the entire indictment. His PLEA AGREEMENT SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED HIS FRAUD IN CONNECTION WITH THE TRIMMED WAGNER ON PAGES 12-14. He was charged with it, he specifically pled guilty to the fraud re the Wagner. It is a public document. He had a 30 page plea agreement and 15.5 pages of it described his many frauds.

Most of his bad acts related to shill bidding -- in essence, creating hidden reserves to drive the prices of Mastro lots up. In that ridiculous, idiotic interview, I believe he was shaking his head and smiling with derision when the interviewer claimed that auction houses which LEGALLY bid on lots were bad -- Mastro did it ILLEGALLY. He used fake names as bidders, employees, dead people and even a priest if I recall.

He also ran up, along with his co-conspirators, a religious Jewish bidder who they knew couldn't bid at the auction close as he observed Shabbat. So they looked at his ceiling bids and ran them all to the top. Was the shill bidding worse than the Wagner fraud? Yes, no, maybe -- but the judge knew of all of it, along with Mastro's cooperation against his friends. Again, he paid $0 back to his victims. Unless you sued Mastro, you didn't get back any of the money he stole from you.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Geez, even the official U.S. Attorney's Office press release discussing the sentence talks about the Wagner.

https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndil/pr...l-bidding-scam