PWCC Huigens Now Has a Criminal Defense Attorney

[CMIZ5290]

Originally Posted by CuriousGeorge

Yes this will all be Exhibit A in United States vs Brent Mastro. Leon, seriously you’re kidding right?

This is where I'm confused....If Jeff is defending Brent then he is arguing Brent's knowledge to these crimes, correct? So if that's the case, why couldn't these posts and threads be a concern where he is blasting his credibility?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Fuddjcal

I just want the cheater effer to come out and say HE targeted the cards that were to be trimmed and altered, HE ran a shill bidding operation, he cheated e-bay, HE didn't pay his taxes on ill gotten gains. HE put stupid stickers on cards he knew were his and trimmed. HE was Eddie Embelisher in his descriptions. HE was the Maestro. How fitting his name is Brent Mastro, pun intended.

Don't leave out chemical cleaning as long as you're making a list.

[guy3050]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sA0glbG6c-8

[CuriousGeorge]

Originally Posted by guy3050

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sA0glbG6c-8

Love it!!

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by Leon

What is said here can absolutely be used as evidence in a trial, no?

Sure, but Jeff isn't on trial.

EDIT: Actually nobody is! Yet.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by CuriousGeorge

Yes this will all be Exhibit A in United States vs Brent Mastro. Leon, seriously you’re kidding right?

It is sort of hard to get a feel for sarcasm sometimes, over the internet. I guess it is common knowledge you can be held accountable for what you say on a public chat board. Or do you not think so?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

Sure, but Jeff isn't on trial.

My comments are not pertaining to Jeff, sorry for the miscommunication on my part. They are in general.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Leon

It is sort of hard to get a feel for sarcasm sometimes, over the internet. I guess it is common knowledge you can be held accountable for what you say on a public chat board. Or do you not think so?

What posts are we talking about here?

I thought this started in the context of this particular thread. I was responding to post 189.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

What posts are we talking about here?

I thought this started in the context of this particular thread. I was responding to post 189.

I was only talking in general context as I just stated. Sorry about that. As far as Jeff posting anything, or representing Brent, again, you guys and girls can talk about that stuff. I have my own thoughts. sorry about that.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Leon

I was only talking in general context as I just stated. Sorry about that. As far as Jeff posting anything, or representing Brent, again, you guys and girls can talk about that stuff. I have my own thoughts. sorry about that.

Oh ok well sure in theory if something said here was relevant and otherwise admissible.

[JeremyW]

Originally Posted by Leon

And that is at least enough to have your full name out here, I would think? I know you but most others probably don't.

Sorry, I thought I let it be known when necessary.
Jeremy Wa@oner.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by Leon

My comments are not pertaining to Jeff, sorry for the miscommunication on my part. They are in general.

I understand, it just seemed the thread had taken the turn to trying the lawyer. You know pretty unequivocally where I stand, but that doesn't mean I think it's OK to attack someone's entire life, that's all.

I guess it makes me look like I approve of everything he does. Accept where I point out repeatedly that I don't

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Who said he texted anyone during a trial?

man look what i missed.......why does everyone care about personal stuff.....i just go by what is said on the board....personal stuff is personal man....


hmm maybe ill pull a jeff and criticize Microsoft on many things and then they hire me....

[Kenny Cole]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Oh ok well sure in theory if something said here was relevant and otherwise admissible.

You mean, like it wasn't hearsay or subject to an exception? Not a FRE 403 issue? Not a 404 issue? It would be pretty easy to make several other arguments to keep all of this out as well. I think you would have to be pretty imaginative and have a pretty understanding judge to get most of this in.

[japhi]

Originally Posted by CuriousGeorge

Matt, you may be right but I hope you're wrong. He can't dictate how the FBI chooses to handle this but he can lay out the picture in a way few others can. My brother has very few things in life that mean a lot to him and this hobby is one of them. He has more business than hours in a year. He has no need for this case financially.

Fair enough, I can appreciate where you are coming from and respect your position

[Johnny630]

If this ever gets to court it would be cool if the judge presiding over the case was a vintage card collector :-)

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Kenny Cole

You mean, like it wasn't hearsay or subject to an exception? Not a FRE 403 issue? Not a 404 issue? It would be pretty easy to make several other arguments to keep all of this out as well. I think you would have to be pretty imaginative and have a pretty understanding judge to get most of this in.

I didn't mean anything on this thread, or in any other thread, I just meant in theory. That's how I took Leon's question.

[asphaltman]

Originally Posted by Johnny630

If this ever gets to court it would be cool if the judge presiding over the case was a vintage card collector :-)

I believe I read somewhere once that Judge Ito collected low grade filler Zeenuts.

[Kenny Cole]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I didn't mean anything on this thread, or in any other thread, I just meant in theory.

I am once again not disagreeing with you. I just think it would be extraordinarily difficult, verging on impossible, to get what Jeff said before he was retained, into evidence. Haven't really sat down and given it the thought I would if was an issue in one of my cases. But I'm not seeing it at first glance.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Kenny Cole

I am once again not disagreeing with you. I just think it would be extraordinarily difficult, verging on impossible, to get what Jeff said before he was retained, into evidence. Haven't really sat down and given it the thought I would if was an issue in one of my cases. But I'm not seeing it at first glance.

Impossible. Not his lawyer so not an admission. Inadmissible opinion. Irrelevant. Unduly prejudicial. Etc.

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by CuriousGeorge

All I can say to this is I’m sure 99% of you wish you were in the financial position he is. I’m not bragging because I’m sure he could care less what any of you think but again, he did not take this case for the fee. As hard as this may be to do, try and think through how this problem would have played out without his involvement. Like all of the others maybe? People are getting paid back for altered cards, stories are getting written in national papers, and so on. Do you think with any of your involvement this could have happened? Is it better nothing gets done or all of us just complaining on message boards?

I appreciated what you're saying. I think it just stings some of us because he is so passionate about cards and knows EXACTLY what Brent Mastro was up to. To have him on THAT side of this fiasco is a tough BITTER pill to swallow for me. It's total BS.

[Republicaninmass]

"Out dam spot"

Lady McHugiens

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

"Out dam spot"

Lady McHugiens

Bleach, to thy work.

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Don't leave out chemical cleaning as long as you're making a list.

How could I forget, the chemicals.

Especially as a hazardous waste specialist. I hope they are getting rid of their flammable liquids on a hazardous waste manifest. Those illegal dumping charges are tough to beat.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Fuddjcal

How could I forget, the chemicals.

Especially as a hazardous waste specialist. I hope the are getting rid of their flammable liquids on a hazardous waste manifest. Those illegal dumping charges are tough to beat.

The cards themselves are probably hazardous.

[CuriousGeorge]

Originally Posted by Fuddjcal

I appreciated what you're saying. I think it just stings some of us because he is so passionate about cards and knows EXACTLY what Brent Mastro was up to. To have him on THAT side of this fiasco is a tough BITTER pill to swallow for me. It's total BS.

Chuck, I totally understand that it feels very tough to accept but is the goal to punish Brent to the fullest extent the government wants to (and who knows what that is if anything?) or is it to try and solve the bigger problem and in addition try to get those affected their money back?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by CuriousGeorge

Chuck, I totally understand that it feels very tough to accept but is the goal to punish Brent to the fullest extent the government wants to (and who knows what that is if anything?) or is it to try and solve the bigger problem and in addition try to get those affected their money back?

How are you defining the bigger problem? And what do you suggest can possibly remediate it?

[Johnny630]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

The cards themselves are probably hazardous.

Cards will one day disintegrate in slab.....one will wonder .......its the Chemical Wizard

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

However, he loses just about every argument he says on net54 now with posters in the past given the hypocritical nature of all. Tough to know what he really believes

Not sure if the word "believe" applies to lawyers. It is a term that seems to be relative to them, when a client comes calling.

[Kenny Cole]

Originally Posted by Fuddjcal

I appreciated what you're saying. I think it just stings some of us because he is so passionate about cards and knows EXACTLY what Brent Mastro was up to. To have him on THAT side of this fiasco is a tough BITTER pill to swallow for me. It's total BS.

I think I will the go with the suggestion that we wait and see. I am also not happy that Jeff agreed to represent PWCC, and I very much hope that Brent goes down in flames. But, as has been said before, wish in one hand and shit in the other and see which one is filled first.

[Kenny Cole]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

"Out dam spot"

Lady McHugiens

Bleach is how they get the "damn spot" out, right?

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by CuriousGeorge

Chuck, I totally understand that it feels very tough to accept but is the goal to punish Brent to the fullest extent the government wants to (and who knows what that is if anything?) or is it to try and solve the bigger problem and in addition try to get those affected their money back?

Maybe you missed my earlier post. I'll ask again. Why is Jeff so concerned about getting restitution for those affected? Did he champion the cause for restitution for El Chapo's victims? Sure, many of them were from rival cartels, but many innocent people were killed too. What about restitution for the victims families?

Good ol' Jeff...always thinking about compensation for others. How selfless?

Edited to add: And, from what I understand, Brent was already refunding people even before being represented by Jeff. If I'm wrong, correct me on that. If I'm right, stop bullshitting that it's because of Jeff's involvement.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Maybe you missed my earlier post. I'll ask again. Why is Jeff so concerned about getting restitution for those affected? Did he champion the cause for restitution for El Chapo's victims? Sure, many of them were from rival cartels, but many innocent people were killed too. What about restitution for the victims families?

Good ol' Jeff...always thinking about compensation for others. How selfless?

Edited to add: And, from what I understand, Brent was already refunding people even before being represented by Jeff. If I'm wrong, correct me on that. If I'm right, stop bullshitting that it's because of Jeff's involvement.

El Chapo was not a cooperator. David, stick to what you know.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Kenny Cole

Bleach is how they get the "damn spot" out, right?

Hey I already said that.

[CuriousGeorge]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

How are you defining the bigger problem? And what do you suggest can possibly remediate it?

From my vantage point scammers like Brent and Moser will always exist especially in an industry that is not regulated and does not appear to be on any governmental radar to be regulated in the near future. That being said, getting rid of Brent and Moser just gives you personal satisfaction but next month you have Trent and Hoser doing the same thing so you’re back to square one.

To me the bigger question lies with how are these cards getting slabbed by TPG’s? Are they just incompetent, paid off, or what? Why isn’t every card scanned when graded so when it comes back in altered it quickly shows up as previously graded? What responsibility do TPG’s have to honor their guarantees? If they are not and instead are giving people the runaround is someone going to legally challenge them? Is that all in the works? Are attorneys already engaged and preparing lawsuits?

All I know is it’s probably unrealistic to expect that 100% of altered cards are going to get caught by the TPG’s but aren’t we at a point where obviously altered cards are getting through with no issue. Can Brent help shed light on how that is happening? Does he have information that it’s anything other than incompetence? I have no idea but I’d sure like to find out.

And even if it is just incompetence isn’t it time TPG’s shouldn’t be able to hide behind self serving statements? Is someone going to hold them accountable? If there are better mechanisms in place to detect fraud does it ultimately matter if a few cards get through? Does Macy’s know a couple percentage of their sales is going to be lost to various theft? Does that mean that they still don’t do everything they can to stop it? Are TPG’s?

As nauseating as Brent is, who is the bigger problem him or Steve Sloan who is putting out embarrassing statements. Do you think he’s trying to help you?

If in the end Brent can help shed some light on these topics and in return gets treated favorably isn’t that a better result than him going to jail forever and nothing else changing? And in no way am I insinuating any of things are happening or will happen but don’t you think if they could that would be a better result?

Feel free to shoot away.

[Kenny Cole]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Hey I already said that.

LOL, must have missed it. I absolutely HATE agreeing with you again. This is starting to become routine.

[japhi]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Maybe you missed my earlier post. I'll ask again. Why is Jeff so concerned about getting restitution for those affected? Did he champion the cause for restitution for El Chapo's victims? Sure, many of them were from rival cartels, but many innocent people were killed too. What about restitution for the victims families?

Good ol' Jeff...always thinking about compensation for others. How selfless?

Edited to add: And, from what I understand, Brent was already refunding people even before being represented by Jeff. If I'm wrong, correct me on that. If I'm right, stop bullshitting that it's because of Jeff's involvement.

Don’t post here a lot so please take this question at face value....

Why is this so personal for you? I see a lot of people disappointed with this
representation but it seems to bother you on a whole different level.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Kenny Cole

LOL, must have missed it. I absolutely HATE agreeing with you again. This is starting to become routine.

Maybe because we both despise fraudsters?

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

El Chapo was not a cooperator. David, stick to what you know.

The silence would be deafening

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

The silence would be deafening

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

LOL, Ted my friend you are killing me.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by CuriousGeorge

From my vantage point scammers like Brent and Moser will always exist especially in an industry that is not regulated and does not appear to be on any governmental radar to be regulated in the near future. That being said, getting rid of Brent and Moser just gives you personal satisfaction but next month you have Trent and Hoser doing the same thing so you’re back to square one.

To me the bigger question lies with how are these cards getting slabbed by TPG’s? Are they just incompetent, paid off, or what? Why isn’t every card scanned when graded so when it comes back in altered it quickly shows up as previously graded? What responsibility do TPG’s have to honor their guarantees? If they are not and instead are giving people the runaround is someone going to legally challenge them? Is that all in the works? Are attorneys already engaged and preparing lawsuits?

All I know is it’s probably unrealistic to expect that 100% of altered cards are going to get caught by the TPG’s but aren’t we at a point where obviously altered cards are getting through with no issue. Can Brent help shed light on how that is happening? Does he have information that it’s anything other than incompetence? I have no idea but I’d sure like to find out.

And even if it is just incompetence isn’t it time TPG’s shouldn’t be able to hide behind self serving statements? Is someone going to hold them accountable? If there are better mechanisms in place to detect fraud does it ultimately matter if a few cards get through? Does Macy’s know a couple percentage of their sales is going to be lost to various theft? Does that mean that they still don’t do everything they can to stop it? Are TPG’s?

As nauseating as Brent is, who is the bigger problem him or Steve Sloan who is putting out embarrassing statements. Do you think he’s trying to help you?

If in the end Brent can help shed some light on these topics and in return gets treated favorably isn’t that a better result than him going to jail forever and nothing else changing? And in no way am I insinuating any of things are happening or will happen but don’t you think if they could that would be a better result?

Feel free to shoot away.

Steven thank you for these observations. A couple of reactions. One, Brent's bad activities are so diverse and of such long duration that he is not just the fraudster du jour, he may well be the hobby fraudster of all time when all is said and done. So while yes to some extent my belief that he needs to be punished is colored by my personal disgust towards him, I think an important message needs to be sent to everyone else doing similar shit on a smaller scale. If he pays some restitution and walks, that will not send a message, IMO.

Two, that said, I obviously agree with you that PSA and to a lesser extent the other TPGs have been revealed to be a huge part of the problem. And something clearly needs to be done to bust through the veil of secrecy and denial and disingenuous bullshit they and their supporters keep spewing. But -- and obviously you may have insight where I don't -- do you really see Brent being able to take down PSA? I mean if he was buying graders and is going to confess, that would be one thing, but I would find that hard to believe. Interested in your thoughts on how he could do that otherwise.

[Kenny Cole]

Originally Posted by CuriousGeorge

From my vantage point scammers like Brent and Moser will always exist especially in an industry that is not regulated and does not appear to be on any governmental radar to be regulated in the near future. That being said, getting rid of Brent and Moser just gives you personal satisfaction but next month you have Trent and Hoser doing the same thing so you’re back to square one.

To me the bigger question lies with how are these cards getting slabbed by TPG’s? Are they just incompetent, paid off, or what? Why isn’t every card scanned when graded so when it comes back in altered it quickly shows up as previously graded? What responsibility do TPG’s have to honor their guarantees? If they are not and instead are giving people the runaround is someone going to legally challenge them? Is that all in the works? Are attorneys already engaged and preparing lawsuits?

All I know is it’s probably unrealistic to expect that 100% of altered cards are going to get caught by the TPG’s but aren’t we at a point where obviously altered cards are getting through with no issue. Can Brent help shed light on how that is happening? Does he have information that it’s anything other than incompetence? I have no idea but I’d sure like to find out.

And even if it is just incompetence isn’t it time TPG’s shouldn’t be able to hide behind self serving statements? Is someone going to hold them accountable? If there are better mechanisms in place to detect fraud does it ultimately matter if a few cards get through? Does Macy’s know a couple percentage of their sales is going to be lost to various theft? Does that mean that they still don’t do everything they can to stop it? Are TPG’s?

As nauseating as Brent is, who is the bigger problem him or Steve Sloan who is putting out embarrassing statements. Do you think he’s trying to help you?

If in the end Brent can help shed some light on these topics and in return gets treated favorably isn’t that a better result than him going to jail forever and nothing else changing? And in no way am I insinuating any of things are happening or will happen but don’t you think if they could that would be a better result?

Feel free to shoot away.

Interesting. My partners and I were eating lunch yesterday, and we were approached by a lawyer who we are sometimes against, who also sometimes sends us bad faith cases. I went to refill ice tea and when I came back, he asked me what I thought about Beckett. My partners had told him while I was gone that I collected cards. In any event, he asked me what I thought about Beckett and I gave him the short version of what I know was being currently alleged about Beckett's involvement in the scandal. He then told me he was getting ready to sue Beckett over some issues involving that issue. I we shall see if that actually occurs. Since Beckett is diverse, I am assuming that if the suit actually occurs that will be either filed in, or removed to, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma. Perfect venue.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

El Chapo was not a cooperator. David, stick to what you know.

Are you really a lawyer or are you bullshitting us? Last I read, El Chapo forfeited 14 Billion dollars upon convition.
Congress has always supported the idea that criminal proceeds go to the victims famalies.

I may not be a lawyer, but I obviously know a hell of a lot more than you on this subject. Now, stick to what you know!

[CuriousGeorge]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Are you really a lawyer or are you bullshitting us? Last I read, El Chapo forfeited 14 Billion dollars upon convition.
Congress has always supported the idea that criminal proceeds go to the victims famalies.

I may not be a lawyer, but I obviously know a hell of a lot more than you on this subject. Now, stick to what you know!

You are a complete and utter dope. I can certainly understand where an attorney might have enthusiasm to help the other side when his alternative would be to help you.

[Kenny Cole]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Are you really a lawyer or are you bullshitting us? Last I read, El Chapo forfeited 14 Billion dollars upon convition.
Congress has always supported the idea that criminal proceeds go to the victims famalies.

I may not be a lawyer, but I obviously know a hell of a lot more than you on this subject. Now, stick to what you know!

Seriously? There is a forfeiture order. Do you really think that is collectible? Come on. Even you should know better than that.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Are you really a lawyer or are you bullshitting us? Last I read, El Chapo forfeited 14 Billion dollars upon convition.
Congress has always supported the idea that criminal proceeds go to the victims famalies.

I may not be a lawyer, but I obviously know a hell of a lot more than you on this subject. Now, stick to what you know!

I am well aware of the forfeiture. So what? You were talking about Jeff. For a defense lawyer it's a completely different situation representing a cooperator where one of your bargaining chips might be restitution, and defending someone in a trial where it's completely adversarial. Now, back to where you came. Please.

[CuriousGeorge]

For whatever it’s worth there’s a forfeiture in place for $12.7B. Amount collected thus far after years of searching: 0.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by CuriousGeorge

For whatever it’s worth there’s a forfeiture in place for $12.7B. Amount collected thus far after years of searching: 0.

That's because Jeff didn't care about the victims and hid it.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Kenny Cole

Do you really think that is collectible?

Honestly, I don't know. It would seem one of the senators from my home state believes so, go check out the El Chapo Act. Maybe it dies in the senate, maybe not, but again I don't know.

[CuriousGeorge]

Jeffrey stole it and he’s now trying to corner the market on all Ty Cobb cards.