Playing the Victim of "Injustice"

"the idea that government bureaucracy is above the law that guides all others in America is certainly worth challenging and the ACCG has never complained about the considerable cost, time and effort required to do that".

It is laughable to read the ACCG Executive Director claiming his attention-seeking stunt illegally importing a handful of coins through Baltimore fell victim of "the Rubber Stamp of Injustice" ("Ancient Coin Collecting" 2013). He makes the grandiose claim that the case has "prompted genuine concern about the nature of justice in America today" and tests "one's faith in American government on a scale far wider than that covered by CCPIA". Ever willing to play the victim, Wayne Sayles claims to be speaking on behalf of all dugup ancient coin collectors [who'd love, it seems, to also get their hands on coins illegally imported in disregard of the CCPIA]. He objects to the assertation of United States Attorney Rod J. Rosenstein:

"Stated simply, Claimant has had its chance over the last three years to object to implementation of the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act on every ground it could think of." 

 He then candidly admits he really does not understand what this says. He complains: "the ACCG challenge in Baltimore was dismissed without an opportunity to depose witnesses or fully argue the points beyond the preliminary phase". In other words, the ACCG thrashing about ("on every ground it could think of") presenting a whole range of wild conspiracy theories backed up by the same sort of "evidence" that ACCG director Dave Welsh uses to construct a thesis showed itself inadequate to the task of putting together a case. That's why it was dismissed, not because of some dreadful Gubn'mint conspiracy.

There was never any litigation, only preliminary filings and dismissals. That can hardly be called justice.

Or maybe the courts decided that the "evidence" presented was, quite simply put, insufficient to support a case. The statement by attorney Rosenstein that ACCG "...had its chance over the last three years to object to implementation of the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act" is spot on.

Instead of going for a random handful of "every ground it could think of" wild assertions, it would have been more useful if from the welter of accusations and weasel-wording their lawyers had cut to the core of the matter - which they never did manage. They are not being "discriminated against", they simply failed to convince a court [to the measure that by their weasel-worded rhetoric they managed to persuade collectors] that there was a case to answer. They have wasted a lot of donor's money on a poorly-conceived plan which has backfired and now the Executive Director must carry the can for his failure, not only to make a case, but drag US ancient coin collectors through the mud.