SS zivilabzeichen pin: real or fake?

[Gary Symonds]

Let`s hope you can get your money back Gary.

Said it before i`ll say it again, beware of old men with steel wool and small badges, that combo`s a no-no.

Jo, funny thing is, the guy who sold it to me was an "old" guy.

I can assure you and the WAF membership, that I did no touchups to the stickpin that I sent to you in Switzerland in 12/14.

It was the "old" guy.

Sure hope he has a table at the May show.

I would ask fellow member Val, to please post the name of the dealer who originally sold this stickpin to him in 2014.

More than a few WAF members will be attending the Pomona show, and it would certainly help if we knew who he was and watch out for him.

Valsente, please post this dealer's name.

[Jo Rivett]

Gary, i wouldn't be surprised really, i guess that "old man" will not be alone. He also learned his trade from someone and others have learned from him.

The example i posted, together with "yours", stamped J.F.S, yet done using the identical obverse die, should be enough to show that this "hanky panky" has gone on since 1945. Or, as i posted on another thread a while back, in the USA as far back as the late 1930`s with German stuff.

But let`s not discriminate here and get this thread locked, there are two kinds of "old man". The nice one who will sell you a vet fable and a smile, and the bad one who will get his "sand-on" with a small badge.

[valsente]

I would ask fellow member Val, to please post the name of the dealer who originally sold this stickpin to him in 2014.

More than a few WAF members will be attending the Pomona show, and it would certainly help if we knew who he was and watch out for him.

Valsente, please post this dealer's name.

Gary, I was fully refunded by this guy so I think that it could be not very honest to post his name here. If you really need to know his name I'll send you a pm.

[Gary Symonds]

Gary, I was fully refunded by this guy so I think that it could be not very honest to post his name here. If you really need to know his name I'll send you a pm.

Va, I fully understand, please send me a pm as to this man.

Gary

[Matthew]

Congrats! Someone deserves an award here..

So let me get this straight: there was a guy, selling a reproduction badge. When sold, the buyer had his doubts and decided to send it back for a refund. The seller issued a refund and took the badge back. One way or the other the reproduction lost some of its finish, and allegedly some of its enamel, thus diminishing its historical and monetary value from zero to zero.
Later on, it sold again.

In the words of Al Pacino: I am over-*****ng-whelmed!

[Jo Rivett]

I can assure you and the WAF membership, that I did no touchups to the stickpin that I sent to you in Switzerland in 12/14.

Well, i had a sleep over it, and i`ve had another think about it this morning.

A jolly good thing as well, otherwise yesterdays posts would have been erased by now, and the few trolls who have been following me around the net the past few years trying to get my goat up, would be clapping their little handies no-end by now.

At the end of the day, Gary, it cost me 2 x postage to examine the badges you sent me. About 50 bucks i guess, which is nothing really if you consider the images i got out of the tests i did. Normally i would have to buy these kinds of fakes to examine, and i do, but it is really great when you get "so much" for 50 bucks!

I am getting ahead of myself here, not the end of the day, just yet, just before sunset - thats where we are now, just before the sun goes down.

Thank you Lord, that you received both packages back from me, and confirmed that as well. Also, there was no mail with a: "Jo - what have you done to my badge? i sent it to you fully silver washed to examine for micro-patina, and you send it back ruined!! explain your actions!" So that takes me out of the game, as far as the "tampering" goes.

And so the sun sets, a day comes to pass, and the little man and his microscope walks off into the distance, into - the future. He leaves behind him the filthy forum lies, the forum dishonestly, corruption, the forum hate and the forum fraud. I owe you a Thank-you once more, Gary, for trusting me enough to send me the badges you did.

You, do not owe me a thing, not even the 50 bucks postage. You may, though, well owe the WAF membership, Moderators and Admins an explanation as to why you have lied on this thread.

Val, certainly do not post the details of the "old man", as, it should be clear to see, that when Gary purchased this stickpin, it was in the same condition as it was when you sent it back to the old man, fully silver washed.

Posts 3 and 4 of this thread, shows the condition it was in when Gary bought it - fully silver washed.
Gary, when certain stunts are pulled, there is no coming back. There is no explanation. This is one such stunt. Congratulations.

[Gary Symonds]

8.

[Gary Symonds]

Reverse and obverse, 5/14.

[Gary Symonds]

13376, on 3/29/15

[Gary Symonds]

11376-3/29/15

[Jo Rivett]

Exactly, when you posted it in 2014, after you got it, the obverse was silver, like it was when the original poster posted it. Look at it now. Why did you buff it up, before you sent it to me?

This is a close-up of the obverse, of your badge, this badge - the silver wash has been... well, it`s pretty clear.



Even though the badge in the 2014 posts by you are small, you can still, clearly, see that the obverse was still silver. Now, it is gone 99%.

[Gary Symonds]

Jo, and to the WAF Membership. I deny Mr. Rivett's accusations that I sanded down and removed the silver wash from the reverse of SS civil stickpin 13376, and sent it off to as a touched up piece to Jo Rivett, to show a patina proving use, as opposed to a reproduction. This is unfounded and untrue.

Here are pictures of 11376 taken shortly after I purchased the stickpin in May 2014. Posted are pictures of 11376 taken today, 3/29. As can be seen, notwithstanding Jo's picture of the reverse of 11376 in gold, without any silver wash, as can be seen in today's pictures of the reverse, and in the 5/14 pictures, there is a significant amount of silver wash remaining. Maybe it was the lighting in Jo's picture that showed only gold. Unlike Jo's attribution to me of malfeasance, hopefully his picture was not photoshoped.

Yesterday, Jo tells us about the "old man" and his "sandpaper." 'What a difference a day makes. Now Jo puts the "sandpaper" in my hands! If the membership will go to Jo's picture of the obverse of 11376, you will notice that there appears to be a smudge of some sort on the left side of the left rune, that indeed looks as if it were sanded off. As can be seen in the pictures taken last year and today, this smudge is absent. Again, lighting, or worse, photoshoped?

What Jo has possibly mixed up because he was in his cups last night, is stickpin 13185, that I sent him along with 11376. As can be seen very clearly, there is no silver wash on the reverse of 13185. I showed both pins to my jeweler who assured me neither pin show evidence of anything but normal use. No abrasives were used. Jo has yet to make an evaluation how 13185 lost all of its silver wash.

I sent these stickpins to Jo Rivett in good faith. For him to make such a libel and defamation of my character, when the evidence of the pictures clearly does not support his slanderous accusation, that I attempted to defraud him is outrageous.

Asd most of you know I am a criminal trial lawyer and I deal with forensics all the time. That I would actually send a doctored stickpin to a man who has the microscopic tools to prove such a fraud immediately and conclusively if such were the fact, would be madness on my part.

I did not touch 13376, nor 13185. http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...Collector+Show. 13185, no silver wash on the reverse.

The evidence is in these pictures that I posted.

[Jo Rivett]

Gary, "the lighting"? have i not just provided you with a microscope image of the messing, with only a few spots of silver left?

I am sure there are people who can pull an image and see in an instant if it has been tampered with.

I would use the first posters images, as they are larger and better, especially the line on the reverse, the specks on the pin plate that are no more, and of course you can compare his, to yours taken today., of the reverse, and see that it has been tampered with.

That, though, brings us back to the old man, as the images you posted after you acquired it from "the old man" are not as good as the first. Although i am very sure that, at least the obverse, looks the same as in post 1, with all it`s silver wash.

[J. Wraith]

Jo, and to the WAF Membership. I deny Mr. Rivett's accusations that I sanded down and removed the silver wash from the reverse of SS civil stickpin 13376, and sent it off to as a touched up piece to Jo Rivett, to show a patina proving use, as opposed to a reproduction. This is unfounded and untrue.

Here are pictures of 11376 taken shortly after I purchased the stickpin in May 2014. Posted are pictures of 11376 taken today, 3/29. As can be seen, notwithstanding Jo's picture of the reverse of 11376 in gold, without any silver wash, as can be seen in today's pictures of the reverse, and in the 5/14 pictures, there is a significant amount of silver wash remaining. Maybe it was the lighting in Jo's picture that showed only gold. Unlike Jo's attribution to me of malfeasance, hopefully his picture was not photoshoped.

Yesterday, Jo tells us about the "old man" and his "sandpaper." 'What a difference a day makes. Now Jo puts the "sandpaper" in my hands! If the membership will go to Jo's picture of the obverse of 11376, you will notice that there appears to be a smudge of some sort on the left side of the left rune, that indeed looks as if it were sanded off. As can be seen in the pictures taken last year and today, this smudge is absent. Again, lighting, or worse, photoshoped?

What Jo has possibly mixed up because he was in his cups last night, is stickpin 13185, that I sent him along with 11376. As can be seen very clearly, there is no silver wash on the reverse of 13185. I showed both pins to my jeweler who assured me neither pin show evidence of anything but normal use. No abrasives were used. Jo has yet to make an evaluation how 13185 lost all of its silver wash.

I sent these stickpins to Jo Rivett in good faith. For him to make such a libel and defamation of my character, when the evidence of the pictures clearly does not support his slanderous accusation, that I attempted to defraud him is outrageous.

Asd most of you know I am a criminal trial lawyer and I deal with forensics all the time. That I would actually send a doctored stickpin to a man who has the microscopic tools to prove such a fraud immediately and conclusively if such were the fact, would be madness on my part.

I did not touch 13376, nor 13185.

The evidence is in these pictures that I posted.

Libelous and slanderous!. I love attorney talk and its so warm and fuzzy. That being said I had the original photos that have seemed to disappear up on my computer yesterday on a split screen. All flaws to perimeter rim and enamel were identical and back plate was not subject to any sanding or chemical alteration. It was in fact lighting and permanent flaws were the same while some various speckles remained and couple were either washed out with the light in the first set or more prominent in the second set. The badge was untouched and there was certainly no evidence of sanding. These black enamel pins can be more deceptive than others when lighting and photos come into play.

[Jo Rivett]

What Jo has possibly mixed up because he was in his cups last night, is stickpin 13185, that I sent him along with 11376. As can be seen very clearly, there is no silver wash on the reverse of 13185.

No, Jo did not get this mixed up. 13185 is even more shocking, especially the obverse. I did not even bother to take any more images of it, it was really only the other one that "evolved" that i wanted to look at.

And now, sit down for a moment, stop having a jab, and look at it from my point.

This is what your letter said.



This is what we agreed. I said i would do it for free, and send them back on my costs.

I know, and the older threads prove this, that you cannot accept that these are fakes. So i am now receiving badges, in a box with ATTORNEY GENERAL stamped all over it, knowing i have my work cut out for me, trying to persuade you of any "findings" (which has yet to happen, but will later as we agreed), trying to reason with someone who accepts a long known fake, as original.
Then, i realize that the badge i am looking at was not in the same condition as the one shown here, with the same number, a year or so ago. So i rub my chin, and i ask myself, "Who has cause, to add wear and tear" to this?

So you see. Well a jury would also be going Hmmmmm.

And about the old man, well, why would he? Does he even exist? I have not called for any name & shame, and wont, but does he? why rope magic into this, because thats all the "old man" is at this point.