Bizarre Weiss Thread on Moneta-L

.
Collectors of ancient dugup coins are bizarre folk. Witness an ongoing thread on Moneta-L where New York dugup antiquity dealer Alfredo De La Fe is is going to try to defend the innocence of fellow dealer Anrnlod-Peter Weiss, who inconveniently pleaded guilty to attempted possession of stolen goods and selling fakes. Coineys are attempting to explain away what little they know of why three coins were condemned as fakes, from what little they know of the science behind the analyses. Like supporters of the Turin Shroud they stubbornly insist on the possibility that scientists had made erroneous observations.

I was a bit taken aback to see this comment from a Florida dealer that I will (with difficulty) refrain from naming  other than observe that he is an ANA Life Member and a 'Member of VCoins':

If the coins are fake, what did he plead to? What crime would there be if they are fake?

So this dealer does not see the selling of fake coins as authentic a crime? Caveat emptor.  Likewise  Dealer Alfie apparently does not like the charges. He feels awkward in New York perhaps preferring his native Cuba: "New York is a strange beast. It is illegal to THINK about doing something illegal here under certain circumstances...". He perhaps hankers for places where planning to kill, rob or cheat somebody is not a crime.  He seems to believe that Weiss has "flipped" (cooperating the authorities and testifying against others) while plea bargaining to avoid a prison sentence in some kind of a "deal":

His choices were to fight a good fight while spending hundreds of thousands on a legal defense and still risk losing, becoming a felon and potentially losing his license to practice medicine, job and teaching position or plead guilty to a misdemeanor, pay a fine, do some community service and lose a million bucks.

(I note that in response to that first part of the quote, collector Kyrie replies "no, his choices were not to deal in such material". That went down like a tonne of bricks with the coineys).  Dealer Alfie objects to comments that Weiss was a dealer ("Weiss is/was a collector, not a dealer"). I suppose being a partner in a major auction house and putting coins up for auction is not enough to qualify one as a dealer any more. He also suggests that the report of a recorded admission that one of the coins was freshly dug might not represent the whole truth. After all, who would admit it to a client? ("I seriously doubt that a serious dealer would brag that the coin was dug up yesterday"- most of them have a professional practice of not stating anything about what they know of the origins of the material they sell, Mr De La Fe is describing the essence of no-questions-asked antiquities dealing, admit nothing):

The dealer he allegedly purchased the coins from [...] I really doubt he would make a statement that he knew the coin had been dug up recently, etc. If HE would not say this, how could Weiss have this knowledge? [...]  There is often more to a story than what we hear.

Which is precisely why this investigation needs to be continued. Where did those coins surface, and how did they enter the US? Meanwhile,  most dealers are just ignoring the whole thing and pretending that it had never happened.

Vignette:  Puzzled look