Heritage on a Witch Hunt - They Bully Dallas Observer to Name Names

Since many of us use Heritage, their actions both affect our collections and affect how we use Heritage. There are things to be learned from this thread. And, unlike other threads, no one here has yet gone on the personal side. There is every reason in the world why I, and I assume others, are interested in following this thread.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Well, I just believe Heritage should just keep their mouths shut through this because it could hamper the case. Just keep it private.. There's no need to be explaining yourselves to a public forum which Heritage seems to do a lot lately on Coin Talk.

 

Are you a lawyer? I am sure that the answer from Heritage was blessed, approved and possibly written by a lawyer.

The need for "explaining yourselves" should be rather obvious. Just to be sure, most of us would chose not to participate either with a company who shill bids not a company who tries to publicize anyone who speaks ill of them.

 

Without getting involved in the underlying discussion, I am troubled by your use of the word "bullying" to describe Heritage's action as it affects you.

Heritage is embroiled in litigation. As such, under the American system of justice it has an absolute right to "due process of law". That includes, among other rights, the right to compel persons not involved in the litigations, but in possession of relevant evidence, to produce that evidence in court.

By the same token, those affected by the production of that evidence have a right to obtain a court decision on its relevance before it is made public. The Observer has notified you of its receipt of a subpoena for information concerning you, and further made you aware of your right to contest the subpoena, including the date on which it proposes to comply absent a court order quashing it.

Heritage is not "bullying" anyone - it is exercising its rights under the U.S. (and virtually every State) Constitution. If you believe that such exercise conflicts with your own rights, you are free to challenge it and let the court perform its function of balancing rights and deciding conflicting claims.

The evidence sought clearly has potential relevance to the issues being litigated, and also clearly has a potentially adverse effect on you and your rights. A courtroom, and not a discussion forum about coins, is the proper venue for determination of whose rights should prevail.

 

No, are you?

I just think it's a bad idea and that's that. Explaining yourself to anyone lowers your value and I think Heritage should refrain from doing it.. Come on guys, why do we REALLY care so much? Yeah we can say it affects our future bidding over there but it's really not the place for Heritage to be answering up their quarrels. Sorry, my stance on this will not change.

 

Those of you whom may remember the unpleasantness with ACG/Accugrade a few years ago read the discussion above with a bitten tongue. Yes, you have a right to free speech, but that engenders that you are willing to pay for that right. The Bill of Rights and your right to free speech are really only as deep as your pockets and the veracity of your attorney.

 

I have read the thread, and I did so before I responded.

That said, I stand behind what I posted, and what Heritage is doing is not shilling, even by your revised definition. To put it bluntly shills have no intent of buying coins, Heritage's "phantom" bidders had every intent on buying the coin. That's the difference.

That doesn't change the issue related to Heritage's use of pseudonyms, which I believe to be disingenuous but perfectly legal (and not a shill).

Respectfully...Mike

 

Except, perhaps, to defend itself from sensational, misrepresented, and potentially libelous threads on CoinTalk. If I were in their shoes, I would have done precisely the same thing.

The only person who should have kept his mouth shut (or considered his words a bit more carefully) is the OP, IMO.

 

Total BS. And that's the nicest thing I can say.

People scream and protest all they want with zero fear. They don't need attorneys; they need some maturity.

 

I strongly agree.

It was obvious from the thread's title this was a stillborn thread. It should be ended. Now. We've seen this before. Nothing but sour grapes and hate mail. Oh, it has one more thing... whiners complaining their rights have been abridged.

 

ok, enough. This thread has run its course and seeing as the OP had his desire for information fulfilled and has said that the thread need not remain open I have closed it.