Even the so called good guys...ugly hobby?

Peter_Spaeth · #1 05-16-2009, 04:24 PM

A commendable sentiment, but it ain't going to happen. We are all, myself included, too addicted. Stick it in a slab, with the right information on the flip, and unless it looks completely butchered we are going to buy it no matter where it came from or how little we know about the provenance. Will we catch people around the fringes like Chan? Sure. Will the mainstream card doctors pumping out a steady supply and feeding the auction houses be stopped? I seriously doubt it.

calvindog · #2 05-16-2009, 04:28 PM

Agreed. Fraud is rampant in this hobby and will be very tough to stop.

Potomac Yank · #3 05-16-2009, 05:05 PM

Gentlemen, I agree with what you're saying about fraud ... BUT!
If we continue the 1990 ostrich approach.
If we just get our satisfaction, and STOP after the outing.
If we let the slimeballs know that any number can play.
If we let them feel that we wont fight back.
They're going to continue, and grow in numbers.

Gentlemen, I admire, and respect the knowledge that you received at your Law schools.
Part of my knowledge was attained on the streets of Spanish Harlem.
One thing I learned, if you don't stand up, even if you stand alone ... you wont get any respect.

I'll be damned, if I'm going to allow a slimeball mess with my addiction.

Exhibitman · #4 05-16-2009, 06:10 PM

Potomac, I hardly consider the situation to be one of not fighting back. By outing the situation, John has placed everyone on notice of it. Until someone comes forward with a specific item that they suspect has been tampered by Kevin, it is all for discussion. If that person surfaces and decides to act on it, we have a whole different ballgame. As far as respect goes, it is irrelevant; validation by others is something craved only by people with insufficient self-esteem. Which is probably why you never hear highly educated, highly successful people whine about being disrespected yet you hear losers in prison who justify hacking someone to death by claiming they had been "dissed."

Todd, as far as whether Kevin's admission stands for anything, I may not have been clear but I did not want to be pedantic either. I assumed that it was understood that the context was one of a civil case being brought and going to trial. My point was that if I was representing someone in a case against a card seller who had stated that he doctored cards and foisted them on the public, the admission would be a very strong one, the sort of evidence that leads a jury to accept the opinion of the expert I retained to prove that the card in question had been doctored.

As far as fraud goes, yes, we have some in cards. As we do in most any other field where money matters. When we see it, we should try to correct it. Our best tool for that here is outing the scammer and letting everyone in on the dirty little secret.

Potomac Yank · #5 05-16-2009, 07:43 PM

Adam, I hear what you say, there is much validity in what you say ... But!
I think you've been away from NYC too long.
When I say respect, I'm not talking about respect towards one individual.
I'm talking about a potential scumbags mind set.
Right now, the potential slimeballs of the world know this.
They know that going after a score in cardboard land, is not that much of a gamble.
From past experience they know that if they give the money back, God will forgive them.

The respect of which I speak of is ... conveying to the lice that the people in cardboard land are NOT a forgiving lot, and that we will get their little asses.
Simply stated ... Tip Toeing Through the Tulips, never gets the job done.

If we succeed in getting through to a few scumbags ... It's a start.
When will we Start?

Stay well.

nolemmings · #6 05-16-2009, 09:40 PM

but, if not pedantic, then your comments were rather unncessary, were they not? I submit there is no legal scholarship needed to conclude that a civil or criminal case is stronger with a "confession" than without it. That's what we're talking about here, either a confession or nearly so.

You and Jeff wrap this situation up in legal terms and scenarios where a jury would be damning and the particular evidence of such strength that the case would be a lock. My point is there is no legal case and won't be when all you have is a so-called admission. IF the remaining 90% of your case were established--you know, tedious things like an actual victim, a specific card, and a connection with Kevin, then I agree the statement could be the final nail in the proverbial coffin. I think the non-legal term for that scenario is Duh. Without those other elements proved in the least, though, I think it's unfortunate to couch your comments in terms of how this would play out in court.

Peter_Spaeth · #7 05-16-2009, 09:52 PM

They may not have the coffin but at least they have the nail.

Potomac Yank · #8 05-16-2009, 09:52 PM

Adam, I hear what you say, there is much validity in what you say ... But!
I think you've been away from NYC too long.
When I say respect, I'm not talking about respect towards one individual.
I'm talking about a potential scumbags mind set.
Right now, the potential slimeballs of the world know this.
They know that going after a score in cardboard land, is not that much of a gamble.
From past experience they know that if they give the money back, God will forgive them.

The respect of which I speak of is ... conveying to the lice that the people in cardboard land are NOT a forgiving lot, and that we will get their little asses.
Simply stated ... Tip Toeing Through the Tulips, never gets the job done.

If we succeed in getting through to a few scumbags ... It's a start.
When will we Start?

Stay well.

daviddbreadman · #9 05-16-2009, 04:32 PM

Peter I am surprised at you. Why are you wasting your time on this?

Surely as an attorney you know that all the persuading in the world won't change anyone's opinion. Its just going to harden the respective positions. Same for you Calvindog. Neither side here is going to admit the other is correct and has the better argument. This is a total waste of time and I'm not going to read it anymore. In fact, I'm tired of this board.

There is alot of valuable knowledge here to be had but its a shame there are so many egos here. I've never seen anything like it. (This statement is not directed at anyone in particular but if you feel guilty, you probably are)

Peter_Spaeth · #10 05-16-2009, 04:49 PM

The adversarial process is the best route to the truth I know.

calvindog · #11 05-16-2009, 04:51 PM

...and lawyers spend their days (and nights) persuading people. That's most of what we do. I mean, other than buying vintage baseball cards.

Abravefan11 · #12 05-16-2009, 09:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by daviddbreadman

There is alot of valuable knowledge here to be had but its a shame there are so many egos here.

David-

While I agree with this statement one thing I have found to be true.

You can not get a room full of the most knowledgeable people on a particular subject and not have a room full of egos. It just doesn't happen.

calvindog · #13 05-16-2009, 10:03 PM

Todd, I disagree. I'm not wrapping this up in any kind of trial-ready scenario; my point about discussing admissions against penal interest are simply to note that normally such statements like Kevin's might not be admissible in a court because of the lack of reliability, i.e. hearsay. But because they are admissions against penal interest they have significant reliability because who would ever admit to the commission of a fraud in a private conversation? Traditionally, people do not lie when they admit to fraud. They lie to exculpate themselves from allegations of fraud.

And lastly, I'm curious about something. Have you ever discussed in a private email conversation the subject of altering cards and defrauding Net 54 members? And if not, do you know of anyone (besides Kevin and Elkins) who ever has? Anyone?

Peter_Spaeth · #14 05-16-2009, 10:15 PM

Jim Crandell - PSA Hall of Fame Collector with over 25,000 graded cards, most in PSA 8 or better.

"In my opinion, Kevin is one of the top three card experts in the world. I will not buy a high-valued card without him personally inspecting it and rendering an opinion. If he has the slightest doubt it has been altered, I will not buy it!"

calvindog · #15 05-16-2009, 10:18 PM

Ok, Peter, that does it for me. Case closed.

Oh wait -- I thought Jim never sent Kevin any of his cards?

Peter_Spaeth · #16 05-16-2009, 10:22 PM

I would only be speculating.

Adam · #17 05-16-2009, 11:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Jim Crandell - PSA Hall of Fame Collector with over 25,000 graded cards, most in PSA 8 or better.

"In my opinion, Kevin is one of the top three card experts in the world . . . "

Just curious -- who are the other two? Any guesses?

wonkaticket · #18 05-17-2009, 12:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adam

Just curious -- who are the other two? Any guesses?

Adam here are the top ten results according to a past Gallup Poll...

Chuck Norris
Barry Sloate
Kevin Sauicer
Bea Arthur
Jesus
Todd Bridges
The Guy from Mannix (Mike Conners)
Scott Baio
Santa Claus
Jeff Lichtman

Here's another Jim Crandall quote....

"You have a group of collectors on network 54 that do not like graded cards and in many cases the people that collect them. In their view, a fair amount of the cards are altered and those that buy them are buying plastic. On the flip side they believe they have the skills because they can feel the card outside the holder to detect alterations. Their knowledge next to Kevin is like a nursery schooler compared with someone who has a PHD."

nolemmings · #19 05-17-2009, 12:50 AM

Jeff, let me understand you. Your comments about admissibility of certain evidence--Kevin's statement--wasn't intended to suggest that any lawsuit should, would or could be filed here. It's just meant to show that the law will allow such statements because they are deemed reliable. OK.

So are you telling us that this initial statement of Kevin's, the one cut and pasted at the beginning of this thread, is inherently reliable? And that his subsequent disavowal and claim that he made it up is in fact the lie? We should or must believe the first and disregard the second? Because if so I do not believe many here see it that way--several are willing to give him the benefit of the doubt or chalk it up to poor judgment and bravado. Moreover, if you are right and the first statement is true:
"I have made sure that each already has or will have an altered card in their collection "
then I expect specific instances will surface--hell, everyone's on notice to go check their cards right now--and it will indeed blow back on or fall down on Kevin. My thought is let's wait and see if that in fact happens. I'm curious to know how anyone thinks that was done to them or even could have been done to them. I am certainly willing to eat crow if necessary, but right now I just think this thing is WAAAAAAAAAY overblown.

E93 · #20 05-17-2009, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adam

Just curious -- who are the other two? Any guesses?

I think Baker is one of them. He continually praised him, though I don't think he thought highly enough of him to cross his cards to GAI.

Mike Baker may be a good grader when he wants to be, but there are so many questionable cards in GAI holders, that he either is not good at it, or something fishy was going on there. Are they still in business? Re-opening Monday?
JimB