Poll: Are Midas and the rest heroes for bringing attention to SGS despite violating..

not anymore, although I admit when he first showed up last week I had some hope of it. I was hoping he was just uninformed, but it is obvious that isn't the case.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

This is just not true. Ebay is a public company and is regulated by a whole slew of regulations. They certainly can not assist knowlengly in fraud. They have been told, so they aren't ignornat of the facts. They are clearly liable in civil and possible criminal court.

Ruben

 

there is enough factual evidence at this time to conclude intentional criminal fraud. At some point someone will finally take this to court, and based on facts, not ebay comments, you will lose.

Until then, fluster all you want.

Ruben

 

There is a ton of evidence to prove beyond question, acts of libel for making false statements of fact, defamatory language, and violations of the Sherman Antitrust Act, not to mention copyright infringement for posting copyrighted material without permission. The accusations you have made, are also violations of my 4th, 5th, 6th, and 12th amendments of the Constitution.

Yes, mrbrklyn, certain individuals are clearly exposing themselves to civil torts for libel. The thing is this: You are not worth the time or the energy.

 

You are conducting fraud. And by all means! Please SUE ME! SUE ME! SUE ME!

I've been sued by bigger fish than you. There is nothing more in the world that I'd love to have happen than having an operation which comits criminal fraud like yours to sue me.

And you know what, unlike the ebay dweebs that you fraud, I'm not some small time loser. Sue me, I have the time and the money to not only take you to court, and to sucessfully counter sue you, but I'll also get my press contacts, like NY Times Reporter Amy Harmon, to investigate your sorry ass and organize a protest on your door step.

So go right ahead, I'll put my Lawyer, Noel, on notice right now and I'll take every thing you own when the dust clears.

Come Get me

Ruben Safir
1600 East 17th Street
Brooklyn, NY 11230
1-718-715-1771

My secretary is awaiting your process server.

PS - Yes that last name is SAFIR

S*A*F*I*R

 

Steve - you might be interested to learn:

• The Fourth Amendment prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures by government respresentatives, and requires probable cause to be shown for the issuance of a warrant. I've seen nothing to suggest that Ruben is a government agent who has searched your property, seized your property, or executed an improperly issued warrant.
  
• The Fifth Amendment regulates the government in two aspects -multiple protections of the rights of persons accused of crime, and a requirement of due process and compensation for the taking of private property. Until and unless you are at least interviewed by law enforcement officers who suspect you of crime the first group of rights don't come into play, and Ruben doesn't have the power of eminent domain with or without compensation.
  
• The Sixth Amendment provides further rights - including right to counsel, speedy trial and jury trial - to criminal defendants. Have I missed the part where Ruben became a US Attorney or a local District/States Attorney and after charging you formally with crime, denied you counsel, or one of the other Sixth Amendment rights?
  
• The Twelfth Amendment is entirely devoted to procedures for the election of the President and Vice President. Is your real name Al Gore, and are you complaining that Ruben is responsible for your loss of the election?

I've tried to avoid responding to your many, many misstatements of the law in multiple posts, but this last post was just too off the wall to ignore.

BTW I have been a member of the California State Bar since 1965, and admitted to practice before the US Supreme Court since 1971. What law school did you flunk out of.

In all fairness, I must point out that Ruben's views of the law are not completely accurate either. He fails to recognize that not every violation of good ethics is a violation of law, and he has overstated EBay's legal obligations and liabilities to some extent.

 

I'm glad Rubin isn't vexed with me.

OTOH, I laugh that Steve is.

 

Actually libel is defamation that can be seen, such as in writing, printing, effigy or a movie. Spoken defamatory statements are slander.

It's almost like you're trying to scare someone. Ohhhhh! I'm afraid. Bring it on tough guy and stop blowing smoke up everyone's a****!

And besides, he has no idea what he's talking about.

 

SGA has made clear statements about the methodology and independence of their grading services. Those statements are untrue, and when they sell the coins under another alias, then they are perpetrating fraud, wire fraud at that.


Ebat has been made aware, and has taken actions which intentionally favor a know fraudulent business practice. In any civil case, they will be sued along with SGA, and do you have any doubts that they will be found negligent if not compliant?

Ruben

 

For complex reasons based on decades of experience, I certainly do.

 

Just remember, a civil case means you have to pass the "50-yard-line" and have the scale of justice tilt in your favor (which is more easier to do) than a criminal case where you have to take the football and cross the goal line (guilty beyond reasonable doubt...not ALL doubt, just reasonable doubt).

If you had a jury, you would have to use the analogy that was posted in a precious thread...advertise a mansion, receive a manufactured home. Technically, it still is a home, but it is NO mansion. Any jury would understand that analogy but may find the Sheldon scale (70) difficult to grasp.

Anyways, I have testified before in depositions and other court cases and the one thing I enjoy is DESTROYING a "slip-n-fall" attornies' case. To me, these people that advertise, "have you been hurt or injured?" rank right there with SGS coin sellers and their SGS MS70 "labeled" coins!

 

Well I have **no** doubt. In fact, i just was in a similar case where the on-line dealer was sued and lost and had to pay up when a vendor was selling something fraudelently (in this case real-estate) and the Jury awarded claims from both to the plaintif when it was established that there was an email trail warning the site owner of his clients fruadulent activities.

The Seller was ordered to pay up 25 million - PLUS a fine in instead of jail time and the site owner was ownered to pay up an additional 25 million.

Ebay will be sued eventually, and they will lose once the jury sees the written complaints.

Ruben

 

Love Satootoko's post lol... was wondering if Steve was also going to accuse Ruben of quartering troops in his house without his consent.

 

Or if he was going to ban the sale of alcohol.
And then repeal it.

 

Hi,
Just a quick note on my part. I didn't violate any of Ebays rules
Bill

 

Nor have I, but I certainly understand why Midas did.

 

I was just thinking, tounge in cheek, that I'm not a lawyer, I just buy one when I need them, and the Judge and Jury as well if it is profitable

Ruben

Brooklyn - you have ta luv it