*POLL* Dagget verdict in -- GUILTY AS SIN!
blindflyer
Posts: 758
An overwhelming amount of evidence has surfaced regarding Gary and the 5 group pack rips he orchestrated.
The evidence appears to show *some* tampering of packs sent to participants.
What happened?
EDITED TO ADD:
F. Still undecided.
--- Personally, I voted C.
*****
EDITED:
Sat 3/3 --- Verdict in: GUILTY!
burn scammer, burn!
The evidence appears to show *some* tampering of packs sent to participants.
What happened?
EDITED TO ADD:
F. Still undecided.
--- Personally, I voted C.
*****
EDITED:
Sat 3/3 --- Verdict in: GUILTY!
burn scammer, burn!
- Building these sets:
------- 1960 Topps Baseball PSA 8+
------- 1985 Topps Hockey PSA 9+
------- 1960 Topps Baseball PSA 8+
------- 1985 Topps Hockey PSA 9+
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Im sick of the people who are actually defending this guy as well. Anyone who is defending him, look at the facts and get a clue. Its not rocket science!
1994 Pro Line Live
TheDallasCowboyBackfieldProject
GARY = CROOK
Bob C.
EDIT:
Gary clear the air on the charity BS. Who did you deal with when you donated the cards? Got a scan of the receipt you kept for tax purposes?
I'd be answering ALL questions if I were innocent and in your shoes pal. Not whining about how you're being victimized.
Thank you for giving the hobby yet another black eye!
61 Topps (100%) 7.96
62 Parkhurst (100%) 8.70
63 Topps (100%) 7.96
63 York WB's (50%) 8.52
68 Topps (39%) 8.54
69 Topps (3%) 9.00
69 OPC (83%) 8.21
71 Topps (100%) 9.21 #1 A.T.F.
72 Topps (100%) 9.39
73 Topps (13%) 9.35
74 OPC WHA (95%) 8.57
75 Topps (50%) 9.23
77 OPC WHA (86%) 8.62 #1 A.T.F.
88 Topps (5%) 10.00
<< <i>card-laundering >>
<< <i>
<< <i>card-laundering >>
isn't that "doctoring"?
1994 Pro Line Live
TheDallasCowboyBackfieldProject
A smart crook would not have posted his Ebay id with 17 negs about resealed packs on a message board where organizing a wax case rip that was going through him?
A smart crook would have multiple id's on Ebay to prevent such a disaster? After all if it wasn't for a Bobby Jenks card he would have been in the clear. Kind of reminds me of WIWAG and serialed numbered Basketball rookie of some loser , can't remember who, that got them caught .
ON ITS WAY TO NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658
Did Gary actually "know" that some/all of the "non-BBCE" packs were resealed/not-legit.
Given his proclaimed title as "80's Junkie" and grand statements of buying $40k in unopened vintage during recent buying sprees --- one would have to assume that he knew his wax. Furthering the thought --- he probably knew his wax so well that he bought knowingly re-sealed stuff at bargain prices with the idea that he could launder it through our rips.
It was almost too easy to get away with really --- especially given our given respect for BBCE. Why would we question the origin of the packs if we're under the assumption all along that they're from BBCE?
Secondly --- what percentage did Gary launder? quarter box? half box? full box?
how many boxes in any given rip? a couple? all the key boxes?
so many questions ---- I wish we could somehow learn the truth.
Maybe Gary will sign a book deal so that we can all find out.
-t
------- 1960 Topps Baseball PSA 8+
------- 1985 Topps Hockey PSA 9+
2 votes INNOCENT!
-t
------- 1960 Topps Baseball PSA 8+
------- 1985 Topps Hockey PSA 9+
or an alt!
It was almost too easy to get away with really --- especially given our given respect for BBCE. Why would we question the origin of the packs
Bingo!
Excuse me while I go vomit again. Bob C.
61 Topps (100%) 7.96
62 Parkhurst (100%) 8.70
63 Topps (100%) 7.96
63 York WB's (50%) 8.52
68 Topps (39%) 8.54
69 Topps (3%) 9.00
69 OPC (83%) 8.21
71 Topps (100%) 9.21 #1 A.T.F.
72 Topps (100%) 9.39
73 Topps (13%) 9.35
74 OPC WHA (95%) 8.57
75 Topps (50%) 9.23
77 OPC WHA (86%) 8.62 #1 A.T.F.
88 Topps (5%) 10.00
Steve
if he is not guilty: good gary
julen
tgif
RIP GURU
resealed packs on a message board where organizing a wax case rip
that was going through him?"
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////
And, smart/cautious consumers would never have done pack-biznez with
somebody whose EBAY FB says what the subject's says about resealed
packs.
No "blame" for the victims, just a reminder about cautious buying habits
and due diligence.
Go Phillies
Give em fifty lashes and throw him in with the blue fishes
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>card-laundering >>
From the sounds of it, given their musty smell, some of these cards were laundered - literally.
Oh by the way, guilty as sin.
Since we paid with paypal can we fight this?
Did anyone send in some packs to be graded? If so what was the outcome?
What goes around comes around. If he is guilty he has some pretty bad karma coming his way!!!!
Apparently that is not the case, as according to Gary they shipped the day after the "news" broke. If he did swap and reseal I would think that he would have corrected that before he shipped them, knowing that guys are looking for it.
Hopefully the packs will arrive tomorrow or Monday. Time will tell.
My daughter was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes at the age of 2 (2003). My son was diagnosed with Type 1 when he was 17 on December 31, 2009. We were stunned that another child of ours had been diagnosed. Please, if you don't have a favorite charity, consider giving to the JDRF (Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation)
JDRF Donation
<< <i>I have ripped enough to know that the odds of that happening are slim to none! >>
Just look at the 78's that shipped direct from BBCE. There has been a lot of star cards posted. One guy, I think Bosox, pulled 2 Murray RC's, 2 Ryan's, a Rose and a Brett all out of one box.
My daughter was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes at the age of 2 (2003). My son was diagnosed with Type 1 when he was 17 on December 31, 2009. We were stunned that another child of ours had been diagnosed. Please, if you don't have a favorite charity, consider giving to the JDRF (Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation)
JDRF Donation
<< <i>I have not posted here since the rip because I knew something was wrong, I even stopped posting scans during the rip because I was so annoyed. Out of all those packs I did not get one star card! I have ripped enough to know that the odds of that happening are slim to none! I couldn't wait to get involved with a rip, I finally do and this happens. In my opinion his is guilty.
Since we paid with paypal can we fight this?
Did anyone send in some packs to be graded? If so what was the outcome?
What goes around comes around. If he is guilty he has some pretty bad karma coming his way!!!! >>
<<< Since we paid with paypal can we fight this? >>>
With PayPal the buyer has 45 days, I believe it's from the date of the payment, to file a complaint, otherwise I believe PayPal will not honor requests to get money back.
There is always the legal system as an option such as small claims court.
-
If all of the respondents were in a jury pool,
the accused would have almost a slam-dunk
at a hung jury.
Even though I requested it to go further because items were not as described.
Thinking about doing a chargeback, but honestly its not worth that hassle of the CC company for me..Its $155 I wish I had given to anyone else but this guy.
BBCE exclusive from now on. I should have known better, but when the boxes were coming from BBCE, I thought it would be a great rip.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>Just look at the 78's that shipped direct from BBCE. There has been a lot of star cards posted. One guy, I think Bosox, pulled 2 Murray RC's, 2 Ryan's, a Rose and a Brett all out of one box. >>
That's my point!
I was involved with the 77-85 rip.
I'm not ready to string him up because I got crappy packs, my gut feeling tells me that something stinks.
I do think that this site should put a red flag on his IP address to make sure he doesn't try to pull this stuff as someone else.
<< <i>The poll results are pretty interesting.
If all of the respondents were in a jury pool,
the accused would have almost a slam-dunk
at a hung jury. >>
Well the numbers show that 80%+ believe in some form of guilt. Take away the 2 innocents figuring they are gary and MrG, and the 2 uneducated votes on the quality of Steves material, and it looks slam dunk. The 18 'undecided' would eventually come to a decision, the poll just doesnt show when that happens.
If all of the respondents were in a jury pool,
the accused would have almost a slam-dunk
at a hung jury.
I don't think there's any question that he tampered with the packs, just that there are varying opinions on how he tampered with the packs. Bottom line is still tampered packs.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>There is always the legal system as an option such as small claims court. >>
I'm not ready to take it that far. What's done is done. This guy will be an outcast from here and ebay from now on. That might be punishment enough.
I guess I will have to buy my unopened packs and beer bongs from someone else.
<< <i>PayPal only refunds you if the item was never shipped..I filed and Gary responded with the tracking number..PayPal closed the case...
Even though I requested it to go further because items were not as described.
Thinking about doing a chargeback, but honestly its not worth that hassle of the CC company for me..Its $155 I wish I had given to anyone else but this guy.
BBCE exclusive from now on. I should have known better, but when the boxes were coming from BBCE, I thought it would be a great rip.
Jason >>
<<<PayPal only refunds you if the item was never shipped..I filed and Gary responded with the tracking number..PayPal closed the case...
Even though I requested it to go further because items were not as described. >>>
I thought PayPal would also respond if the item is "Significantly Not as Described" so I think you may be incorrect about that. I've never had a claim as a buyer or seller so perhaps I'm incorrect. No doubt in my mind that based on the posts, these items discussed should fit the definition of "Significantly Not as Described"
Another option is a class action suit which would have to be filed by an attorney, starting with someone who was ripped off. For this amount of money though, it might be unlikely to find an attorney "out of the phonebook" who would take this case without an expensive retainer up front, which nobody here is going to do. Perhaps an attorney in California who reads these boards and is sympathetic to this situation, or who knows a California attorney, would take the case on a pro bono or contingency basis.
-
"U.S. Postal Inspectors investigate any crime in which the U.S. Mail is used to further a scheme--whether it originated in the mail, by telephone, or on the Internet. The use of the U.S. Mail is what makes it mail fraud.
If evidence of a postal violation exists, Postal Inspectors may seek prosecutive or administrative action against the violator. However, if money is lost through a fraudulent scheme conducted via the mail, Inspectors lack the authority to ensure you receive a refund and can’t require that products, services, or advertisements--on the Internet or elsewhere--be altered.
Postal Inspectors base investigations of mail fraud on the number, pattern, and substance of complaints received from the public. The Postal Inspection Service will carefully review the information you provide. We may share the information with other agencies when there is a possible violation within their jurisdiction."
For the record, I am not saying this is the route you should take and I am not saying Gary is guilty.
Ripken in the Minors * Ripken in the Minors Facebook Page
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
When nearly 20% of a potential jury pool are undecided after hearing
the evidence, the chances are great that any one of them would come
to a not guilty conclusion.
<< <i>
When nearly 20% of a potential jury pool are undecided after hearing
the evidence, the chances are great that any one of them would come
to a not guilty conclusion. >>
Actually right now it would suggest that .4% of 1 person would come to a not guilty plea
/////////////////////////////////////////////
How'd you get there?
Here is how I got where I'm at:
Rounding Up to include future respondents.
Using 10-person juries, I get 12-panels.
Using 12-person juries, I get 10-panels.
At 20% undecided, I have about a 1 in 5 chance
of putting at least one undecided on any single panel.
It looks like I have a 1 in 20 chance of putting at
least 2 undecideds on more than one panel.
Knowing that these undecideds have heard exactly
what the decided-voters heard, my chances of
moving any one of them to "guilty" is probably far
less than 50%.
So, how/where is the confidence derived to come to
the .4%?
*Keep in mind we are talking about a chat board, with anonymous nics, and the 'jury' is actually made of any and every person that decides to vote. I wasnt trying to go too in depth with my previosly reply, just doing the figures
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>
<< <i>PayPal only refunds you if the item was never shipped..I filed and Gary responded with the tracking number..PayPal closed the case...
I thought PayPal would also respond if the item is "Significantly Not as Described" so I think you may be incorrect about that. I've never had a claim as a buyer or seller so perhaps I'm incorrect. No doubt in my mind that based on the posts, these items discussed should fit the definition of "Significantly Not as Described"
Another option is a class action suit which would have to be filed by an attorney, starting with someone who was ripped off. For this amount of money though, it might be unlikely to find an attorney "out of the phonebook" who would take this case without an expensive retainer up front, which nobody here is going to do. Perhaps an attorney in California who reads these boards and is sympathetic to this situation, or who knows a California attorney, would take the case on a pro bono or contingency basis.
- >>
These paypal payments were outside of ebay. buying thru ebay and using paypal is where the buyer has protection. just using paypal as a payment source (without ebay) provides very little, if any protection.
going back to your credit card, if used, is the best chance of getting a refund.
FBI
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
I see that, on the numbers side.
But, all of the people have been exposed to the same evidence,
and considered it prior to their first vote.
"Undecided" does not mean the same thing before/after the
evidence is presented. Pre-trial they are all truly undecided.
Now, our respondents' "undecided" vote is a considered-input
product; it essentially gets counted as "not guilty," and that is
how I put most of the panels into the likely-hung category.
But, you are correct; if we assume that all folks will eventually
likely decide the same way. I think most/many/all of the undecideds
have to be heavily leaning toward not guilty.
Just proves to me that you guys are blinded by your vintage prejudice.
Just proves to me that you guys are blinded by your vintage prejudice.
You're obviously an absolute MORON, too, so why even post here, d!ckhead?
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>But, all of the people have been exposed to the same evidence,
and considered it prior to their first vote.
"Undecided" does not mean the same thing before/after the
evidence is presented. Pre-trial they are all truly undecided.
Now, our respondents' "undecided" vote is a considered-input
product; >>
I see where you are basing your side, and I agree with the reasoning. But we in no way whatsoever can conclude what I have left in quotes is an accurate statement. We have no way of knowing who has read or seen any/all of the evidence, unlike a real jury.
I came to the conclusion that anybody that had seen all of the evidence had decided he was guilty, and those that hadn't had voted undecided (for the time being) until they had done more research.
Just proves to me that you guys are blinded by your
vintage prejudice."
////////////////////////////////////////
On its face, that may not be an unreasonable conclusion.
But, reports of fraud in either modern or vintage actually hurts both
groups. In fact, it probably hurts modern a bit more because that is
where the traditional gateway for newbies with money is.
<< <i>I am so glad you stupid sheep lost your money.
Just proves to me that you guys are blinded by your vintage prejudice. >>
jgarci
Don't inflame this. You must have something better to do with your time?
Just proves to me that you guys are blinded by your
vintage prejudice."
////////////////////////////////////////
On its face, that may not be an unreasonable conclusion.
Come again, storm???
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>I am so glad you stupid sheep lost your money.
Just proves to me that you guys are blinded by your vintage prejudice. >>
jgarci11, I am ashamed that another fellow card collector could ever make a statement like that. ever. I dont care how much abuse you've encountered on these boards. shame on you. I hope you will apologize and see what an ignorant and insensitive remark that was.
had decided he was guilty, and those that hadn't had voted undecided
(for the time being) until they had done more research. "
////////////////////////////////////////
That is VERY good.
It NEVER dawned on me that folks were voting, before they read the
threads. But, based on the count, that must be the case.
I mean I have been burned before, too..
But on ebay, not over an internet board..I mean come on people.
I'm sorry, though.
The same goes for my other posts where I gloaded in you guys' failure.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Come again, storm???
/////////////////////////////////////
My dancing man,
in this instance, was an indication of charitable sarcasm.