Yahoo Group Vindictively Wants to Influence US Court Decision

 In a sentencing memorandum filed

with the court the district attorney’s office

asked that Mr. Sadigh, who has no previous record

of arrests, be sentenced to five years’ probation

and banned from ever again being involved

in the sale of antiquities, “both genuine and fake.”

New York Times

 The UK based moderator of the ancient artifacts.groups forum, "Tuppenny Tim"  who I cannot answer there since threw me off the group for explaining why some unpapered artefacts they were discussing there were fakes comments on the Sadigh trial: 

tuppennyblueOct 14 #95825
That's an absurdly low sentence considering his two decade long reign as king of the antiquities fraudsters, taking the piss out of collectors all over the world. I think we should all write to the court, demanding that nothing less than a sentence of immediate and lengthy imprisonment is appropriate - in particular, it would be appropriate for out US members to do this. Does anyone know of an address we can write to to make our case?
Tim

I wonder what part of the phrase 'plea deal' he does not understand? Taking the piss out of collectors however is a fully justifiable activity while they as a group continue to behave in their traditional holier-than-thou manner. None of Sadigh's customers saw verifiable documentation of legal excavation or legal export. Most of them were caught-out by the layers of varnish and dirt and the generally 'clunky-nasty-tatty-gawky' aesthetic of many of the items he handled. Tuppenny Tim does not see that. And no, Sadigh is far from the "king of fraudsters" - there are other antiquities on the market as we write that would make their producers and marketers more eligable for that title. The no-questions-asked market in unpapered antiquities from-goodness-knows-where is FULL of them. Some of them have been sold by dealers on Tuppenny Tim's own list.

\

Of course the dealers' pretence that Sadigh is in some way worse than any other dealer that sells unpapered and misdescribed artefacts is behind this vindictive posing.  This is an application of the "two wrongs make a right" pseudo-argument. In this context, note what the Times article adds at the end:

Mr. Sadigh came to the attention of investigators, Mr. Bogdanos has said, when dealers being pursued for trafficking plundered antiquities complained about “the guy selling all the fakes.”

["yeah, OK, I admit I could have looked more carefully at the lack of paperwork, officer, but at least MY artefacts are real, not like that other guy over  there who sells the fakes, you REALLY should be going after him, not me"]