We went over this with you on NumisForums but based solely on information in the affidavit available, you're taking a *very* favourable view towards Roma by framing it this way. Let me quote the affidavit directly: So in summary this is what has happened: Beale and Vecchi listed the coin with the supposedly false provenance Informant #2 contacted Beale and Vecchi to inform them this provenance was false Beale and Vecchi then offered 100,000 Swiss francs for Informant #2 to sign documents attesting to the provenance. So my question for you, which I and others have also asked from you on NumisForums, is why would Beale and Vecchi try to pay someone 100,000 for a provenance that this very person that they are paying is telling them is false? I believe you've earlier said that maybe Beale and Vecchi was paying Informant #2 for "provenance research" but I'll offer the same reply as I did then. Why would they pay 100,000 Swiss francs to their "provenance researcher" when that researcher is telling them the provenance is fake and not to use it? Additionally, the very same "provenance researcher" (in this hypothetical) is refusing to sign documents attesting to this "research" they have provided to Beale and Vecchi and which they are actively telling them is fake and not a genuine provenance.