Latest Scandal! Comic Book Dealer Disbarred As Lawyer!!!!

[VintageComics]

We live in a tough society. If you slip up in a great way it can cost you your job and potentially bar you from any other solid career. This is a fact but it is also a frikkin' darn shame. Doug made a serious big slip a while back that cost him his law career. That is one harsh penality. He paid it. So now what do we do? Should he be forever barred from a decent career with no chance in hell to redeem himself? Some of you knuckleheads seem to infer this. I hope your a$$$ never makes a big err cause then you will understand.

Now Doug has without question run a dam successful comic business since he started it. Pedigree competes for a market share with Comic-Link, eBay, Heritage, and others. Who here can dare say that Doug hasn't come through for them? Either you didn't get your comic or you didn't get your selling check? If you can then say it. If not then Doug has been doing a dam good job. Should we lop his frikkin' head off now after the fact. I'm telling you that he paid for the previous err by getting his law career yanked. Now he is moving forward and has already proven himself. Are some of you suggesting that we turn back the clock and retry his a$$$ for the law problem? If you are saying that then joined Dooku you have.

 

Well said.

 

BTW, Egyptian Chicken Shwarma is on the menu today!

[THE_BEYONDER]

We live in a tough society. If you slip up in a great way it can cost you your job and potentially bar you from any other solid career. This is a fact but it is also a frikkin' darn shame. Doug made a serious big slip a while back that cost him his law career. That is one harsh penality. He paid it. So now what do we do? Should he be forever barred from a decent career with no chance in hell to redeem himself? Some of you knuckleheads seem to infer this. I hope your a$$$ never makes a big err cause then you will understand.

Now Doug has without question run a dam successful comic business since he started it. Pedigree competes for a market share with Comic-Link, eBay, Heritage, and others. Who here can dare say that Doug hasn't come through for them? Either you didn't get your comic or you didn't get your selling check? If you can then say it. If not then Doug has been doing a dam good job. Should we lop his frikkin' head off now after the fact. I'm telling you that he paid for the previous err by getting his law career yanked. Now he is moving forward and has already proven himself. Are some of you suggesting that we turn back the clock and retry his a$$$ for the law problem? If you are saying that then joined Dooku you have.

 

All I'm saying is I won't buy from people who crack, improve, resubmit, don't disclose and then sell.I think dealers who do this should be known to the buying public. It's a personal choice whether we choose to do business with them. I don't want to play twenty questions with a dealer to find out if this (scam) has been played on a book I'm buying. Everyone else can choose to support or not support any of these dealers who engage in these tactics. As far as retrying an old case...I think it's information that should be known so buyers and sellers can make an informed decision.

I've been working on an ATL(Auction Tag Logo) to help identify the 'good guys'. Here's the prelim:

 

100% UNRESTORED & MANIPULATION-FREE GUARANTEED

 

 

[THE_BEYONDER]

Went back & noticed the word "improve"...did ja?

[batman_fan]

I am thinking of a Super burrito for lunch. This thread has been interesting and informative. I don't buy from Pedigree because it is mostly silver and bronze Marvels, but I have looked often just in case something shows up that I am looking for. In light of this information, it definitely cast some shadows over Doug's site, but I am going to remain nuetral until I see more information come to light (info could be positive or negative for Doug). I persoanlly don't like the pressing stuff and would not be willing to pay as much for a book that had been pressed and I also have that you have to ask for this information to be disclosed. If it isn't an issue, why not put it in the description. It is because pressing does have a negative meaning to many collectors which means the price you realize may not reach the heights it could have.

[namisgr]

I've been working on an ATL(Auction Tag Logo) to help identify the 'good guys'. Here's the prelim:

 

<TABLE BGCOLOR="#000000" BORDER="10"><TR><TD>

<P ALIGN=CENTER>

<FONT FACE="Times" SIZE="7" COLOR="#0000FF">

<B>

100% UNRESTORED & MANIPULATION-FREE

</B>

</FONT>

</ALIGN>

<P ALIGN=CENTER>

<FONT FACE="" SIZE="" COLOR="">

</FONT>

</ALIGN>

<P ALIGN=CENTER>

<FONT FACE="Times" SIZE="7" COLOR="#FFFF00">

<B>

GUARANTEED

</B>

</FONT>

</ALIGN>

</TD></TR>

</TABLE>

 

 

 

[BlackHeartedDwarf-migratio]

Jesus shouldn't be used to pimp comics.

 

[namisgr]

BTW, Egyptian Chicken Shwarma is on the menu today!

 

Sides of hummus and tabouli with mine please, Roy!

[Ze-man]

Went back & noticed the word "improve"...did ja?

 

 

It is what I deserve for eating and talking on the phone whilst reading these important matters!

Ze-

 

But I still like my word "potentializing" alot better then improve!

[THE_BEYONDER]

Jesus shouldn't be used to pimp comics.

 

That's 'Buddy Christ'. What...you don't think the Son of God enjoys comic books?

[Ze-man]

Jesus shouldn't be used to pimp comics.

 

That's 'Buddy Christ'. What...you don't think the Son of God enjoys comic books?

 

Comics are the work of the devil..or at least that is what one of my old school friends mom told him.

 

Ze-

[THE_BEYONDER]

Jesus shouldn't be used to pimp comics.

 

That's 'Buddy Christ'. What...you don't think the Son of God enjoys comic books?

 

Comics are the work of the devil..or at least that is what one of my old school friends mom told him.

 

Ze-

 

I wonder what she would have called the manipulation of these devil works for increased profits.....

[nik]

She might have been right

[Ze-man]

Jesus shouldn't be used to pimp comics.

 

That's 'Buddy Christ'. What...you don't think the Son of God enjoys comic books?

 

Comics are the work of the devil..or at least that is what one of my old school friends mom told him.

 

Ze-

 

I wonder what she would have called the manipulation of these devil works for increased profits.....

 

 

lawyers?

[BlackHeartedDwarf-migratio]

 

 

[adamstrange]

We reject the Hearing Panel's conclusion that a three-year suspension is warranted because respondent's misconduct was partially due to inexperience in, and ignorance of, escrow account rules. That rationale is unacceptable as justification for respondent's misconduct after 16 years as a practicing attorney (see Matter of Britton, 232 AD2d 17 [1997] [attorney disbarred who was only admitted four years at time of misconduct and did not understand the proper use of an escrow account]). Moreover, respondent's misconduct was not an isolated incident as evidenced by the 48 sustained charges of misconduct ranging from conversion to commingling of personal funds with funds of 22 other clients to assisting clients to evade liens. Respondent himself did not offer any mitigating circumstances at the hearing before the Referee. The evidence on which he relies to support his motion for a lesser sanction does not include the type of unusual or uniquely compelling circumstances which would persuade us to mitigate the sanction of disbarment.

 

I went back read the original statement and this paragraph stuck out to me. It seems to me that the initial review took a very lenient position on Doug's actions and that it was only rectified in the final decision. My past impression has been that professional societies are generally too easy on their members and that this almost happened in Doug's case. I'm interested in hearing from the lawyers on the board with their reaction to the initial review as there were clearly lawyers evaluating Doug's actions who were willing to accept a pretty lame excuse that wouldn't work in criminal court (gee, I didn't know I needed to pay taxes etc.).

[FFB]

But I'm still waiting to see any evidence of a pattern of fraud with relation to his comic dealing business. Frankly, I wouldn't want to hire any of you fast shooting attornies if this is the way you conduct business. Brian and Mark (and Scottie)....give Doug a friggin' call. Then post away.

 

I don't need to give Doug a call. I understand perfectly well what the allegations against him were in his disbarment opinion and don't have the stomach for whatever cockamamie bullsheet excuses he'd give me to justify stealing client monies to buy his comics. I also have read the new revelations in the TRIM JIM thread and am satisfied that his initial explanation was just more of his charming BS lies.

 

Doug has my name, address, email address, and phone number. He can contact me at his leisure if he has something to say to me, but I don't have any need or desire to get his side of the story to satisfy my own curiosity. Like Brian K said early on, there is no other side to the story. The guy is a thief and now you have basically proved that he lied to you all about the TRIM JIM. I think it's safe to say my mind is made up. As for your comment about my "way of conducting business," I've had about enough of the personal attacks from you on this subject. If you want to get back on the flame war track, I have some comments about your head-spinning backflipping position changes here that I'd like to make.

 

Anyway, in view of the new revelations in the TRIM JIM thread, I think Doug's goose is cooked. Next scumbag, please.

[FFB]

We reject the Hearing Panel's conclusion that a three-year suspension is warranted because respondent's misconduct was partially due to inexperience in, and ignorance of, escrow account rules. That rationale is unacceptable as justification for respondent's misconduct after 16 years as a practicing attorney (see Matter of Britton, 232 AD2d 17 [1997] [attorney disbarred who was only admitted four years at time of misconduct and did not understand the proper use of an escrow account]). Moreover, respondent's misconduct was not an isolated incident as evidenced by the 48 sustained charges of misconduct ranging from conversion to commingling of personal funds with funds of 22 other clients to assisting clients to evade liens. Respondent himself did not offer any mitigating circumstances at the hearing before the Referee. The evidence on which he relies to support his motion for a lesser sanction does not include the type of unusual or uniquely compelling circumstances which would persuade us to mitigate the sanction of disbarment.

 

I went back read the original statement and this paragraph stuck out to me. It seems to me that the initial review took a very lenient position on Doug's actions and that it was only rectified in the final decision. My past impression has been that professional societies are generally too easy on their members and that this almost happened in Doug's case. I'm interested in hearing from the lawyers on the board with their reaction to the initial review as there were clearly lawyers evaluating Doug's actions who were willing to accept a pretty lame excuse that wouldn't work in criminal court (gee, I didn't know I needed to pay taxes etc.).

 

They leaned toward leniency due to "first offense." That's the only thing I can think of.

[COI]

As for your comment about my "way of conducting business," I've had about enough of the personal attacks from you on this subject. If you want to get back on the flame war track, I have some comments about your head-spinning backflipping position changes here that I'd like to make.

 

Don't bother Scott.

[esquirecomics]

But I'm still waiting to see any evidence of a pattern of fraud with relation to his comic dealing business. Frankly, I wouldn't want to hire any of you fast shooting attornies if this is the way you conduct business. Brian and Mark (and Scottie)....give Doug a friggin' call. Then post away.

 

I don't need to give Doug a call. I understand perfectly well what the allegations against him were in his disbarment opinion and don't have the stomach for whatever cockamamie bullsheet excuses he'd give me to justify stealing client monies to buy his comics. I also have read the new revelations in the TRIM JIM thread and am satisfied that his initial explanation was just more of his charming BS lies.

 

Doug has my name, address, email address, and phone number. He can contact me at his leisure if he has something to say to me, but I don't have any need or desire to get his side of the story to satisfy my own curiosity. Like Brian K said early on, there is no other side to the story.

 

I agree.

[Foolkiller]

There is no point in answering this question Brad, because it doesn't go to the issue at hand.

 

1) Would any of the allegations regarding the JIM 92 stand up? Quite possibly. Circumstantial evidence plus evidence of past dishonesty may get a fact finder to convict, so the answer is yes.

 

2) Of course I would. That's when I'd be acting as THE DEFENSE ATTORNEY so my job is not to advocate for the TRUTH, but rather the best interests of my client.

 

And Brian, you still ducked this question. Just answer it please.

 

Would any of this stand up in courtroom? If you were defending a client would you not, in the issue of fairness seek to have one issue separated from another?