The only prayer this restorer has in court is to get TWELVE "Francs" on his jury!
On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 6:56 AM, Franc <[email protected]> wrote: > Luckily in our courts you need evidence and proof. Fantasy and conjecture > doesn't suffice. FRANC > > -----Original Message----- > *From:* MoPo List [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *James > Richard > *Sent:* Saturday, December 05, 2009 5:26 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [MOPO] BIG News in Universal Horror Fraud Case > > Bruce, > > Perhaps I'm being overly critical, but it seems to me that what Jaime did > was actually "worse" than what Kerry did. Jaime enabled Kerry. After all, > if Jaime had not made the forgeries for him, then Kerry wouldn't have had > any practically perfect fakes to sell to his victims. To say Jaime didn't do > anything "wrong" is like saying the guy who engraves the plates to make > counterfeit $100 bills didn't do anything wrong because he didn't actually > pass out any of the fake money himself. > > But we're just being mean and small-minded, I guess. It's clear now that > Jaime was merely an innocent dupe, just another victim of the silver-tongued > devil. Apparently we need to understand that what really happened was > something like this: > > "Kerry: Hi, Jaime. Listen.. I need you to produce another "highly accurate > reproduction" of the Black Cat for me, just like the one you did 6 months > ago. Naturally I'll pay you the same as last time. > > Jaime: Gee, Kerry what happened to the first one I made? You told me to > make you a virtually indistinguishable-from-the-original duplicate so that > you could sell your authentic Black Cat and keep my expert copy to hang on > your wall. > > Kerry: Yeah... and that's what I did. But then, see, we had this earthquake > and the poster fell off my wall and my dog ate it. So now I need you to make > me another one. > > Jaime: Oh...well, OK then.... since it is only for your own personal use." > > -- JR > > Bruce Hershenson wrote: > > JR > > Obviously we are very wrong here. The restorer in question is not a > perpetrator of any crime, he is actually a *VICTIM*. After all, he was > just "following orders". How sad that people are now persecuting him. They > should be showering him with sympathy (and apparently, restoration > consignments) instead. > > Bruce > > On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 2:41 AM, James Richard > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Steve, >> >> I'm simply echoing "Bruce's logic" as Franc called it: Given what Jamie >> now admits he did, if you send him a poster to work on how can you trust him >> not to do something he shouldn't with it? Like use it to make a near-perfect >> forgery that would go to someone else... or maybe send you back the forgery >> while your original stays with him or goes who knows where? >> >> His total disregard and disrespect for the community of movie poster >> collectors -- demonstrated his admitted part in this massive 2-year forgery >> scam -- clearly disqualifies him from any future position of trust in that >> community as far as I'm concerned. >> >> What, we should say, "Well, he's been caught and will pay (whatever) price >> the law lays on him for his part (not much, likely, since he is now a >> cooperating witness in the case against Haggard) -- so now he's learned his >> lesson, he's sorry (that he got caught), and will promise never ever to do >> something like that again... so everything's cool."? >> >> No, I might go for something like that if Jamie had been the one to first >> come forward and break the scandal instead of Grey Smith. Or if Jamie had >> gone to some of the people who were sold his forgeries and said "Hey, guys, >> I think I may have unknowingly been involved in something that was done to >> you." Or gone to Heritage, his biggest customer, and said "Um, Grey, I think >> I screwed up... here's what I did, but now I realize I was duped and >> shouldn't have done it and here's a list of the posters I forged." >> >> Or he could have simply stepped up to the plate like Diane Jefferies did >> in regards to the fake DRACULA poster when she publicly told her story on >> this list about how a client pressed her to do things to that poster which >> she had serious doubts about. Although she did it -- because that's what the >> paying client insisted on -- when she saw her work put up for auction under >> false pretenses, she quickly decided she needed to publicly tell this list >> what she knew about the situation and so was instrumental in bringing to >> light the true nature of that poster. >> >> But no. Jamie did none of those things. He just kept on cranking out the >> forgeries until the shit was about to hit the fan (or maybe until Kerry >> stopped paying him?). And when the scam was made public even then he lied, >> denying for months that he had anything to do with it. He's only admitting >> it now in order to cut himself a deal with the prosecutors. >> >> Sorry. Not someone I will ever send my posters to. Other individuals may >> be feel differently and can do what they wish of course, but I don't see how >> an operation like Heritage -- which takes extremely valuable posters from >> people on consignment (in trust) can run the risk of continuing to do >> business with him. >> >> As ever, just my humble opinion. >> >> -- JR >> >> Steven F. Poole wrote: >> >> Gosh.....That's a pretty strong statement, JR. To say that Jaime should >> never be trusted with posters again. >> Help me to understand your point here. Because of being a possibly >> unknowing accessory to this crime? Because he may send a dupe your way on >> returning work? Because he will always be suspect of making forgeries of >> any real posters one sends his way? Or just on general principle of being >> an admitted expert at reproducing the real deal by way of vintage posters? >> I'm not trying to be dense here. I just would like yourself or Bruce to >> go into more detailed reasons why you guys are holding these tough (but >> maybe valid) reasons. I have been a client of Jaime's in the past and I >> would appreciate any discussions on the topic. >> ~Steve >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> *From:* James Richard <[email protected]> >> *To:* [email protected] >> *Sent:* Thursday, December 03, 2009 11:41 PM >> *Subject:* Re: [MOPO] BIG News in Universal Horror Fraud Case >> >> No one is that naive. When Jamie was asked to create a duplicate of the >> same poster more than once -- a duplicate which would be virtually >> indistinguishable from the real poster -- there was no possibility he did >> not understand what he was being asked to do or fail to realize what Haggard >> would do with them. No doubt Jamie had what he considered good reasons for >> going along with scam. I'm sure Kerry has his own reasons, as well. Doesn't >> change the fact that Bruce is right: No one should ever send Jamie Mendez >> another poster now that there is no longer any doubt about what he did. >> >> There is no excuse for what he did and he can never be trusted with >> posters again. >> >> -- JR >> >> Franc wrote: >> >> Bruce --- I'm not taking sides in this one but your logic is flawed. A >> forgery is defined as "the process of making, adapting, or imitating objects >> with the intent to deceive." If Jaime Mendez's claim is actually true in >> that he didn't know that is was the intent of Kerry Haggard to sell these >> works as originals, then Jaime had no intent to deceive. Hence Jaime is not >> guilty of forging movie posters irrespective of the fact that it is his work >> that was ultimately used in Haggard's forgery. >> >> Franc >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> *From:* MoPo List >> [mailto:[email protected]<[email protected]>] >> *On Behalf Of *Bruce Hershenson >> *Sent:* Thursday, December 03, 2009 7:27 AM >> *To:* [email protected] >> *Subject:* Re: [MOPO] BIG News in Universal Horror Fraud Case >> >> I guess those who said that we have to give this restorer the "benefit of >> the doubt" will now accept that he is *GUILTY* of forging movie posters >> (whether or not he was "aware" of what purpose they would be used for), >> since he admits to it himself. >> >> Given this news, are there still people here who think they should send >> their posters to this person for restoration? How can you know that >> *YOU*won't receive a reproduction in return? And what of the many, many >> posters >> he restored for many dealers and auction houses over the past three years? >> Don't they all need to be checked over closely. >> >> I applaud this person for "doing the right thing", but I certainly would >> advise him to find a new line of work. >> >> Bruce >> >> On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 3:29 AM, Sean Linkenback >> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> Sue is probably waiting until their regular newsletter to make an >>> announcement, but there is BIG, HUGE, GIGANTIC news in the ongoing civil >>> lawsuits (which will definitely affect the upcoming criminal suit) in the >>> Haggard fake case. >>> >>> Jaime Mendez has entered a sworn affidavit in the Gresham v. Haggard case >>> for the plaintiff and is testifying that he DID indeed make the fake posters >>> on behalf of Kerry Haggard, but did not realize the true motives behind >>> Haggard's request. >>> >>> There is also a partial list provided by Mendez of the posters he worked >>> on. >>> >>> You can read more about it at the LAMP website: >>> http://www.learnaboutmovieposters.com/newsite/INDEX/ARTICLES/Frauds-Update.htm >>> >>> >>> Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com >>> ___________________________________________________________________ How >>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: >>> [email protected] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF >>> MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content. >> >> >> Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com >> ___________________________________________________________________ How >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: >> [email protected] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF >> MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content. >> >> Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com >> ___________________________________________________________________ How >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: >> [email protected] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF >> MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content. >> >> Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com >> ___________________________________________________________________ How >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: >> [email protected] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF >> MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content. >> >> Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com >> ___________________________________________________________________ How >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: >> [email protected] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF >> MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content. >> > > Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com > ___________________________________________________________________ How to > UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: > [email protected] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF > MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content. > > Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com > ___________________________________________________________________ How to > UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: > [email protected] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF > MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content. > > Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com > ___________________________________________________________________ How to > UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: > [email protected] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF > MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content. > > Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___________________________________________________________________ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [email protected] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
