I'm sorry to hear about this and hope this goes well.
I'm with Steve aka Winp. on this - try to keep this guy from going nuts.
First - I think contacted Mr Bednarik would be nice - and then take it from there.
If the card is the same one and it goes up on ebay - ya might be able to contact ebay and tell them the card was stolen/missent - and see what happens.
Consider going to your local police and see if they can contact the cops at his town to put some pressure on him?
I would disagree with the people that think you should involve Bednarik in this. The guy is in his mid 80's and he flubbed. I would HIGHLY doubt that he keeps a record of who writes to him - PLUS, if he sees there is a problem he may stop signing because he doesn't want to mess up. I would seriously doubt he'll be able to help you.
<< <i>lol Mike I agree, we should keep it civil, however the person ADMITTED to the crime.
Steve >>
I can't believe you agree.
But, to clarify, a person admitted to the crime. Not necessarily the one we are looking for. >>
Mike,
The pig in your avatar is really freaking me out...
Greg M. >>
Why would the pig in the avatar freak you out? I just like pigs. That's all. I've liked pigs all my life, ever since I was born. So, I found the pig avatar worthwhile for me.
Seriously though, I wish you the best in getting your cards and whatever else (I'm not sure what else that you're supposed to get) back speedily. But this is not the time for vigilante justice by people here.
I agree with Mike here...contacting Bednarik with regard to all this would be a mistake, IMO...he obviously is as gracious as you can expect to even be signing all these autos at his age...he doesn't deserve to be involved in this mess on top of it, even if he did screw up...
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 would disagree with the people that think you should involve Bednarik in this. The guy is in his mid 80's and he flubbed. I would HIGHLY doubt that he keeps a record of who writes to him - PLUS, if he sees there is a problem he may stop signing because he doesn't want to mess up. I would seriously doubt he'll be able to help you. >>
Well said. I'm not mad at CB - the guy is an absolute hero to me and a great guy to boot. Mistakes happen.
Rgs,
Greg M.
Collecting vintage auto'd fb cards and Dan Marino cards!!
<< <i>I would disagree with the people that think you should involve Bednarik in this. The guy is in his mid 80's and he flubbed. I would HIGHLY doubt that he keeps a record of who writes to him - PLUS, if he sees there is a problem he may stop signing because he doesn't want to mess up. I would seriously doubt he'll be able to help you. >>
////////////////////////////////
Under NO circumstances should Bednarik be contacted.
He can do nothing to solve the problem. And, it would very likely be upsetting to him.
Folks Who Bite Get Bitten. Folks Who Don't Bite Get Eaten.
That's a really nice program. I'm surprised it's as cheap as it is. That took a lot of work to compile everything like they did. I wonder how often they update their catalogues.
<< <i>....On the "possession" thing? I'm clueless. Good luck mike >>
////////////////
For interested folks.
When I learned it, it was taught the same way as it is today.
Possession is an element of force, NOT an element of law.
If you look up "possession," you find that it has almost nothing at all to do with "ownership." The phrase is most relevant to a lawful owner of property deciding who can and cannot use it. The phrase does NOT operate well in matters of ownership disputes.
The phrase does NOT mean that any person who holds any property is the lawful owner. It means that a person in possession of his own lawfully owned property, controls the property and can do with it as he chooses, regardless of the will of any other person.
Arrogant punks who think they can bamboozle folks often quote the meaningless phrase to deter unsophisticated folks who contemplate civil actions for return of STOLEN property.
spelling edit
Folks Who Bite Get Bitten. Folks Who Don't Bite Get Eaten.
<< <i>....On the "possession" thing? I'm clueless. Good luck mike >>
////////////////
For interested folks.
When I learned it, it was taught the same way as it is today.
Possession is an element of force, NOT an element of law.
If you look up "possession," you find that it has almost nothing at all to do with "ownership." The phrase is most relevant to a lawful owner of property deciding who can and cannot use it. The phrase does NOT operate well in matters of ownership disputes.
The phrase does NOT mean that any person who holds any property is the lawful owner. It means that a person in possession of his own lawfully owned property, controls the property and can do with it as he chooses, regardless of the will of any other person.
Arrogant punks who think they can bamboozle folks often quote the meaningless phrase to deter unsophistictaed folks who contemplate civil actions for return of STOLEN property. >>
Of course. But you can't still have the lynch mob to get your items back.
<< <i>I would disagree with the people that think you should involve Bednarik in this. The guy is in his mid 80's and he flubbed. I would HIGHLY doubt that he keeps a record of who writes to him - PLUS, if he sees there is a problem he may stop signing because he doesn't want to mess up. I would seriously doubt he'll be able to help you. >>
Well said. I'm not mad at CB - the guy is an absolute hero to me and a great guy to boot. Mistakes happen.
Rgs,
Greg M. >>
I agree with respect to any accusation or complaint which may appear insulting.
But, it may be that he has someone helping him with the mail - and they may log in what is sent by each person to keep track. That would be good ammo if needed to help get the card back
<< <i>That's a really nice program. I'm surprised it's as cheap as it is. That took a lot of work to compile everything like they did. I wonder how often they update their catalogues. >>
/////////////////
You can buy it for $20, if you do so the first day you load the trial version.
You get any updates free for at least a year.
Folks Who Bite Get Bitten. Folks Who Don't Bite Get Eaten.
"But, it may be that he has someone helping him with the mail - and they may log in what is sent by each person to keep track. That would be good ammo if needed to help get the card back
Just a thought. mike "
////////////////////////////
I agree, but unless he DOES have somebody working for him - which I am not sure how we could find that out - he would be sad and upset to hear there was a problem.
If he has a secretary that can be contacted, that would be fine. If she/he has a log, that would be good for a court case but it's not absolutely necessary.
In court, the guy would be hung by the words he wrote in the emails.
Folks Who Bite Get Bitten. Folks Who Don't Bite Get Eaten.
<< <i>Out of curiosity, GregM13, did you contact Mr. Bednarik again? Maybe the cards are still with him and he never shipped them out? >>
I sent a letter to CB on Friday morning (right after I arrived at work) along with printed out scans of the cards asking if the cards were still in his possession. It wasn't until later in the morning that the other member posted that he received my cards with his index card.
I simply asked CB whether my cards were inadvertantly set aside and somehow separated from the card and photo that I received. I wasn't accusatory and even included $5 to cover postage if he was able to locate the cards.
We'll see how this train wreck plays out.
Rgs,
Greg M.
Collecting vintage auto'd fb cards and Dan Marino cards!!
WOW, I have been out of the loop lately due to moving and some major work projects going on, but most importantly, I have just gotten sick and tired of all the stories of fraud and deceit that have found their way to these boards. I am really sorry to hear about your Bednarik cards, and hope somehow, some way, your able to get them back and this all works out for the best. I think I will go back into my hole now.
1.) If you sent something to Chuck Bednarik or anyone in question, you take your chances your items are going to get lost [especially if you send something of value]. That is one of the through the mail rules. This isn't a private signing or even a public one done through a promoter, so things can get completely random.
2.) If Chuck Bednarik kept the cards in question, then sent it out because he didn't know any better, then it was his fault. However he was just being a nice guy to someone who didn't have anything but an index card to send him.
3.) How can you prove the cards Bednarik sent as 'extras' were really yours?
This was posted on the SGC board and thought it should be posted here as well:
<< <i>I sincerely hope he gets his cards back as well. But its pretty irresponsible to send $500 worth of cards TTM to a guy you have sent 30+ cards to already over the past 9 months. You never send anything TTM that you cant afford to lose, I know I have sent out cards upwards of $50 bucks to players that I have never received back, But that is the chance you take.
I have always thought if you sent something to someone in the mail it was theirs. So in this case if he sent Mr Bednarik cards to sign they would have become Mr. Bednarik's. And he could have done what he wanted to with the cards after he received them. So, it's not like someone stole the cards, If someone else did receive them in the mail I would think lawfully they have every right to keep them,However,it would be very un-ethical to keep something you know isnt yours. Really, if someone else did get his cards they have very low morals to keep something after the person clearly owned them and lost them, But I dont think anything illegal has been done here. >>
A legal suit at for a situation such as this one is really a stretch, IMO...I know we live in a litiguous society, but I'm not sure there is a case really worth pursuing here..Just my 2 cents..
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.
"...So, it's not like someone stole the cards, If someone else did receive them in the mail I would think lawfully they have every right to keep them..."
//////////////////////////
Back to law school with that poster.
IF you find my lost dog that I am advertising to find, do you get to keep the dog?
........... .................................
IF the emailer is actually the guy who received the cards, he is a THIEF.
If he pulled that carp on me, I would spend what ever it cost to nail him in court.
SCUM like that need to be drummed out of the hobby/biznez.
Would anybody really feel safe doing a buy/sell deal with that kind of SCUM?
..............................
Folks Who Bite Get Bitten. Folks Who Don't Bite Get Eaten.
<< <i>A legal suit at for a situation such as this one is really a stretch, IMO...I know we live in a litiguous society, but I'm not sure there is a case really worth pursuing here..Just my 2 cents.. >>
/////////////////////
Small Claims filings are cheap.
Even if you have to travel a little.
There is no way in heck I would let a known thief off the hook.
Folks Who Bite Get Bitten. Folks Who Don't Bite Get Eaten.
< A legal suit at for a situation such as this one is really a stretch, IMO...I know we live in a litiguous society, but I'm not sure there is a case really worth pursuing here..Just my 2 cents.. >>
/////////////////////
Small Claims filings are cheap.
Even if you have to travel a little.
I guess if you lived realtively close to the person in question, it could be worth your while...otherwise, the expenses incurred by traveling really wouldn't make fiscal sense...and do we even know for sure who the person in question is in this case, since it's apparently not someone named Brett Turcotte?
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.
We don't really know what happened - we can assume the cards received by someone else were the OP's cards, but who really knows? It sounds like the OP is stomping his feet, trying to rally a mob, but there was a risk by sending the cards in the first place and it backfired.
Maybe it gets complicated from here, but is it the person's responsibility to return the supposed cards?
Once it came into Chuck Bednarik's possession, Bednarik was free to do what he wanted with them since it wasn't solicited.
<< <i>big27 /////////////////////////////////
IF the contents of the emails that were sent by the person who claims to have received the cards, ALL of your questions are answered therein.
The OP posted a notice of "lost/stolen" property.
Somebody answered the notice and SAID they had received the property.
That recipient, against public policy and law, decided he would keep the property.
The OP must now move to reclaim his property in court. I sure hope he proceeds with legal action.
//////////////////////////
And, the perp is NOT the famous athlete, mr. turcotte. >>
I'm not making any judgements on what has happened, but stuff like this is what makes athletes wary about signing stuff through the mail or at least doing it without some kind of promoter/company behind them.
The guy who maybe signing $5 freely TTM will now be a $35 an item guy through some promoter just to avoid the hassle of having people mail him stuff and complaining if he or she hasn't received a particular item, wasn't signed with the right ink, et al.
It seems some posters advocate not getting Chuck Bednarik involved in any of this mess, but he is the middle of it now, right or wrong.
"...It sounds like the OP is stomping his feet, trying to rally a mob, but there was a risk by sending the cards in the first place and it backfired...."
//////////////////////
It only "backfired" when a THIEF refused to return the lost/stolen property.
I guess you could argue that there is always a "risk" that some low-life piece of garbage will pull that kind of carp, but that is not the kind of risk that TTM folks usually believe is acceptable to visit upon each other.
Folks Who Bite Get Bitten. Folks Who Don't Bite Get Eaten.
Just because someone sends you something in the mail by mistake doesn't mean you now own it especially if someone can prove it is their missing property. I didn't see anything in this thread where Bednerik said "here are some extras, enjoy!" He thought he was giving the cards back to the original owner. The intent by Chuck was to give the cards back to Greg not to a scumbag thief.
Also, anyone with any sense of morality at all would give the cards back once Greg proved they were his and in this case it is very hard to think someone else sent excactly those 2 cards to Chuck in the same timeframe for all of this to happen. I don't put much credence in the scans don't exactly match, the new "owner" could ding a corner or slightly alter the card a little to show it isn't "exactly" the same. There is WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY to much circumstantial evidence suggesting if the emailer is for real, those are Gregs cards.
Currently completing the following registry sets: Cardinal HOF's, 1961 Pittsburgh Pirates Team, 1972 Pittsburgh Pirates Team, 1980 Pittsburgh Pirates Team, Bill Mazeroski Master & Basic Sets, Roberto Clemente Master & Basic Sets, Willie Stargell Master & Basic Sets and Terry Bradshaw Basic Set
"...The intent by Chuck was to give the cards back to Greg not to a scumbag thief. ...................There is WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY to much circumstantial evidence suggesting if the emailer is for real, those are Gregs cards."
/////////////////////////////
Even Judge Judy would see it that way.
Folks Who Bite Get Bitten. Folks Who Don't Bite Get Eaten.
<< <i>"...It seems some posters advocate not getting Chuck Bednarik involved in any of this mess, but he is the middle of it now, right or wrong. ..."
////////////////////
He's not in the "middle" of anything.
The THIEF is very likely about to be, though. >>
If the thief is lucky, it's a courtroom. He's very lucky that the cards belong to a true gentleman like GregM. It's very hard to hide these days (as you've already shown) and some people would ask questions later.
I can't imagine a card being worth more to me than my life or the lives of my friends or family members. We really have no idea who we're dealing with every day on the internet, and it only takes one motivated crazy to ruin things.
Just returned from a weekend getaway and saw this thread. Wow.
And as for the concept of "ownership/possession" ... equally, if not more so, countermanded by the concept of Specific Performance. Of course, this is in addition to any damages and recovery of attorneys' fees, if applicable.
<< <i>Has this guy provided scans of the cards he says he has yet? >>
///////////////
They were requested, but as far as we know from this thread, they have not been provided.
The amateur THIEF would likely make damaging alterations to such cards in order to disguise their appearance.
Such alterations mean that the OP should not seek specific performance remedies - return of the stolen property - but should ask the court for money damages in a retail amount.
Folks Who Bite Get Bitten. Folks Who Don't Bite Get Eaten.
I had a similar situation with a Hall of Famer who is up there in years recently, and after getting his phone number from a mutual industry friend, he said he'd take a look for it and two weeks later the items were on my doorstep with some bonus items apologizing for misplacing my item. A class act! The item had a deceased players signature on it, and that is when I decided that I'm not going to send anything in the mail with a decease player's signature on it. Too much can go wrong, and I'll just have to live with having the piece without their signature on it unless they come to NY.
Unless the OP's state has some kind of long-arm statute that might apply - doubtful in the instant circumstance -, he would need to file in the THIEF's jurisdiction.
Comments
I'm sorry to hear about this and hope this goes well.
I'm with Steve aka Winp. on this - try to keep this guy from going nuts.
First - I think contacted Mr Bednarik would be nice - and then take it from there.
If the card is the same one and it goes up on ebay - ya might be able to contact ebay and tell them the card was stolen/missent - and see what happens.
Consider going to your local police and see if they can contact the cops at his town to put some pressure on him?
On the "possession" thing? I'm clueless.
Good luck
mike
My Podcast - Now FEATURED on iTunes
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>lol Mike I agree, we should keep it civil, however the person ADMITTED to the crime.
Steve >>
I can't believe you agree.
But, to clarify, a person admitted to the crime. Not necessarily the one we are looking for. >>
Mike,
The pig in your avatar is really freaking me out...
Greg M.
Why would the pig in the avatar freak you out? I just like pigs. That's all. I've liked pigs all my life, ever since I was born. So, I found the pig avatar worthwhile for me.
Seriously though, I wish you the best in getting your cards and whatever else (I'm not sure what else that you're supposed to get) back speedily. But this is not the time for vigilante justice by people here.
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 would disagree with the people that think you should involve Bednarik in this. The guy is in his mid 80's and he flubbed. I would HIGHLY doubt that he keeps a record of who writes to him - PLUS, if he sees there is a problem he may stop signing because he doesn't want to mess up. I would seriously doubt he'll be able to help you. >>
Well said. I'm not mad at CB - the guy is an absolute hero to me and a great guy to boot. Mistakes happen.
Rgs,
Greg M.
References:
Onlychild, Ahmanfan, fabfrank, wufdude, jradke, Reese, Jasp, thenavarro
E-Bay id: greg_n_meg
<< <i>I would disagree with the people that think you should involve Bednarik in this. The guy is in his mid 80's and he flubbed. I would HIGHLY doubt that he keeps a record of who writes to him - PLUS, if he sees there is a problem he may stop signing because he doesn't want to mess up. I would seriously doubt he'll be able to help you. >>
////////////////////////////////
Under NO circumstances should Bednarik be contacted.
He can do nothing to solve the problem. And, it would very likely be upsetting to him.
appears likely that the emailer is genuine.
His name, addy, phone number has been sent to the OP.
..........
I would sue his sorry filthy carcass back to the stone age.
<< <i>I would sue his sorry filthy carcass back to the stone age. >>
And then pay someone to beat him up with the settlement.
<< <i>....On the "possession" thing? I'm clueless. Good luck mike >>
////////////////
For interested folks.
When I learned it, it was taught the same way as it is today.
Possession is an element of force, NOT an element of law.
If you look up "possession," you find that it has almost nothing
at all to do with "ownership." The phrase is most relevant to
a lawful owner of property deciding who can and cannot use
it. The phrase does NOT operate well in matters of ownership
disputes.
The phrase does NOT mean that any person who holds any property is
the lawful owner. It means that a person in possession of his own lawfully
owned property, controls the property and can do with it as he chooses,
regardless of the will of any other person.
Arrogant punks who think they can bamboozle folks often quote the
meaningless phrase to deter unsophisticated folks who contemplate
civil actions for return of STOLEN property.
spelling edit
<< <i>
<< <i>....On the "possession" thing? I'm clueless. Good luck mike >>
////////////////
For interested folks.
When I learned it, it was taught the same way as it is today.
Possession is an element of force, NOT an element of law.
If you look up "possession," you find that it has almost nothing
at all to do with "ownership." The phrase is most relevant to
a lawful owner of property deciding who can and cannot use
it. The phrase does NOT operate well in matters of ownership
disputes.
The phrase does NOT mean that any person who holds any property is
the lawful owner. It means that a person in possession of his own lawfully
owned property, controls the property and can do with it as he chooses,
regardless of the will of any other person.
Arrogant punks who think they can bamboozle folks often quote the
meaningless phrase to deter unsophistictaed folks who contemplate
civil actions for return of STOLEN property. >>
Of course. But you can't still have the lynch mob to get your items back.
<< <i>
<< <i>I would disagree with the people that think you should involve Bednarik in this. The guy is in his mid 80's and he flubbed. I would HIGHLY doubt that he keeps a record of who writes to him - PLUS, if he sees there is a problem he may stop signing because he doesn't want to mess up. I would seriously doubt he'll be able to help you. >>
Well said. I'm not mad at CB - the guy is an absolute hero to me and a great guy to boot. Mistakes happen.
Rgs,
Greg M. >>
I agree with respect to any accusation or complaint which may appear insulting.
But, it may be that he has someone helping him with the mail - and they may log in what is sent by each person to keep track. That would be good ammo if needed to help get the card back
Just a thought.
mike
<< <i>That's a really nice program. I'm surprised it's as cheap as it is. That took a lot of work to compile everything like they did. I wonder how often they update their catalogues. >>
/////////////////
You can buy it for $20, if you do so the first day you load the trial version.
You get any updates free for at least a year.
///////////////////
That's why we have such EASY access to courts.
No need for a mob, when the judge will do what needs to be done.
<< <i>"Of course. But you can't still have the lynch mob to get your items back."
///////////////////
That's why we have such EASY access to courts.
No need for a mob, when the judge will do what needs to be done. >>
Yes. But I feel that some of us over here will try to harass this person, which will lead to even more problems.
Just a thought.
mike "
////////////////////////////
I agree, but unless he DOES have somebody working for him - which I
am not sure how we could find that out - he would be sad and upset to
hear there was a problem.
If he has a secretary that can be contacted, that would be fine. If she/he
has a log, that would be good for a court case but it's not absolutely
necessary.
In court, the guy would be hung by the words he wrote in the emails.
//////////////////////
I am not getting the same feeling.
But, obviously, it is never good to harass somebody you want to file suit against.
<< <i>Why would the pig in the avatar freak you out? >>
You ain't freakin me out Little Piggy.
<< <i>there are 3 brett turcottes on myspace, but none from vermont.. >>
Forget MySpace, check Facebook -- I found 7.
I just happen to be in Burlington Mon-Fri.
LMK if I can help.
<< <i>
<< <i>there are 3 brett turcottes on myspace, but none from vermont.. >>
Forget MySpace, check Facebook -- I found 7. >>
That's not his real name folks. No need to harass Brett Turcotte's from around the globe.
<< <i>Out of curiosity, GregM13, did you contact Mr. Bednarik again? Maybe the cards are still with him and he never shipped them out? >>
I sent a letter to CB on Friday morning (right after I arrived at work) along with printed out scans of the cards asking if the cards were still in his possession. It wasn't until later in the morning that the other member posted that he received my cards with his index card.
I simply asked CB whether my cards were inadvertantly set aside and somehow separated from the card and photo that I received. I wasn't accusatory and even included $5 to cover postage if he was able to locate the cards.
We'll see how this train wreck plays out.
Rgs,
Greg M.
References:
Onlychild, Ahmanfan, fabfrank, wufdude, jradke, Reese, Jasp, thenavarro
E-Bay id: greg_n_meg
That was perfect and exactly what i suggested you do.
Steve
...............................
I cannot get into the legal websites at this moment, but the general view
in such controversies is approximately as follows:
In United States v. HELMS No. 96-1167 Crim. App. No. 31250 the appeals court issued this opinion:
"The mistaken delivery of property to an individual who realizes the
mistake and simultaneously forms the intent to steal the property at
the moment of receipt constitutes larceny at common law.
W. LaFave & A. Scott, 2 Substantive Criminal Law 8.2(g) at 342-43 (1986).
Furthermore, where the individual does not realize the mistake at the
time of receipt but realizes it later and then forms the requisite
intent, there is a larceny as well."
http://www.armfor.uscourts.gov/opinions/1996Term/96-1167.htm
1.) If you sent something to Chuck Bednarik or anyone in question, you take your chances your items are going to get lost [especially if you send something of value]. That is one of the through the mail rules. This isn't a private signing or even a public one done through a promoter, so things can get completely random.
2.) If Chuck Bednarik kept the cards in question, then sent it out because he didn't know any better, then it was his fault. However he was just being a nice guy to someone who didn't have anything but an index card to send him.
3.) How can you prove the cards Bednarik sent as 'extras' were really yours?
<< <i>I sincerely hope he gets his cards back as well.
But its pretty irresponsible to send $500 worth of cards TTM to a guy you have sent 30+ cards to already over the past 9 months.
You never send anything TTM that you cant afford to lose, I know I have sent out cards upwards of $50 bucks to players that I have never received back, But that is the chance you take.
I have always thought if you sent something to someone in the mail it was theirs. So in this case if he sent Mr Bednarik cards to sign they would have become Mr. Bednarik's. And he could have done what he wanted to with the cards after he received them.
So, it's not like someone stole the cards, If someone else did receive them in the mail I would think lawfully they have every right to keep them,However,it would be very un-ethical to keep something you know isnt yours.
Really, if someone else did get his cards they have very low morals to keep something after the person clearly owned them and lost them, But I dont think anything illegal has been done here. >>
big27
/////////////////////////////////
IF the contents of the emails that were sent by the person
who claims to have received the cards, ALL of your questions
are answered therein.
The OP posted a notice of "lost/stolen" property.
Somebody answered the notice and SAID they had received
the property.
That recipient, against public policy and law, decided he would
keep the property.
The OP must now move to reclaim his property in court. I sure
hope he proceeds with legal action.
//////////////////////////
And, the perp is NOT the famous athlete, mr. turcotte.
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.
//////////////////////////
Back to law school with that poster.
IF you find my lost dog that I am advertising to find, do you get to keep the dog?
...........
.................................
IF the emailer is actually the guy who received the cards, he is a THIEF.
If he pulled that carp on me, I would spend what ever it cost to nail him in court.
SCUM like that need to be drummed out of the hobby/biznez.
Would anybody really feel safe doing a buy/sell deal with that kind of SCUM?
..............................
<< <i>A legal suit at for a situation such as this one is really a stretch, IMO...I know we live in a litiguous society, but I'm not sure there is a case really worth pursuing here..Just my 2 cents.. >>
/////////////////////
Small Claims filings are cheap.
Even if you have to travel a little.
There is no way in heck I would let a known thief off the hook.
/////////////////////
Small Claims filings are cheap.
Even if you have to travel a little.
I guess if you lived realtively close to the person in question, it could be worth your while...otherwise, the expenses incurred by traveling really wouldn't make fiscal sense...and do we even know for sure who the person in question is in this case, since it's apparently not someone named Brett Turcotte?
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.
Maybe it gets complicated from here, but is it the person's responsibility to return the supposed cards?
Once it came into Chuck Bednarik's possession, Bednarik was free to do what he wanted with them since it wasn't solicited.
<< <i>big27
/////////////////////////////////
IF the contents of the emails that were sent by the person
who claims to have received the cards, ALL of your questions
are answered therein.
The OP posted a notice of "lost/stolen" property.
Somebody answered the notice and SAID they had received
the property.
That recipient, against public policy and law, decided he would
keep the property.
The OP must now move to reclaim his property in court. I sure
hope he proceeds with legal action.
//////////////////////////
And, the perp is NOT the famous athlete, mr. turcotte. >>
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
I believe I know the true identity of the person who sent the emails claiming to have
received the cards.
It is not currently "proven" that his claims are true. He could be a scummy spoofer;
if so, that kind of conduct also needs to be addressed.
Based on the total circumstance, I believe the emails are likely from the person who
received the mistakenly packaged cards.
The guy who maybe signing $5 freely TTM will now be a $35 an item guy through some promoter just to avoid the hassle of having people mail him stuff and complaining if he or she hasn't received a particular item, wasn't signed with the right ink, et al.
It seems some posters advocate not getting Chuck Bednarik involved in any of this mess, but he is the middle of it now, right or wrong.
//////////////////////
It only "backfired" when a THIEF refused to return the lost/stolen property.
I guess you could argue that there is always a "risk" that some low-life
piece of garbage will pull that kind of carp, but that is not the kind of risk
that TTM folks usually believe is acceptable to visit upon each other.
////////////////////
He's not in the "middle" of anything.
The THIEF is very likely about to be, though.
Also, anyone with any sense of morality at all would give the cards back once Greg proved they were his and in this case it is very hard to think someone else sent excactly those 2 cards to Chuck in the same timeframe for all of this to happen. I don't put much credence in the scans don't exactly match, the new "owner" could ding a corner or slightly alter the card a little to show it isn't "exactly" the same. There is WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY to much circumstantial evidence suggesting if the emailer is for real, those are Gregs cards.
/////////////////////////////
Even Judge Judy would see it that way.
<< <i>"...It seems some posters advocate not getting Chuck Bednarik involved in any of this mess, but he is the middle of it now, right or wrong. ..."
////////////////////
He's not in the "middle" of anything.
The THIEF is very likely about to be, though. >>
If the thief is lucky, it's a courtroom. He's very lucky that the cards belong to a true gentleman like GregM. It's very hard to hide these days (as you've already shown) and some people would ask questions later.
I can't imagine a card being worth more to me than my life or the lives of my friends or family members. We really have no idea who we're dealing with every day on the internet, and it only takes one motivated crazy to ruin things.
And as for the concept of "ownership/possession" ... equally, if not more so, countermanded by the concept of Specific Performance. Of course, this is in addition to any damages and recovery of attorneys' fees, if applicable.
/s/ JackWESQ
<< <i>Has this guy provided scans of the cards he says he has yet? >>
///////////////
They were requested, but as far as we know from this thread, they
have not been provided.
The amateur THIEF would likely make damaging alterations to such
cards in order to disguise their appearance.
Such alterations mean that the OP should not seek specific performance
remedies - return of the stolen property - but should ask the court for
money damages in a retail amount.
Unless the OP's state has some kind of long-arm statute that
might apply - doubtful in the instant circumstance -, he would
need to file in the THIEF's jurisdiction.
Vermont Small Claims
the process