Gastro3003 aka Dr. Robert Brunner -- Scam Artist, Forger, Beware!

Originally Posted by zovick

Here is a theory which I find rather plausible: Dr. Brunner received the tortoise from Ici Li back in May. He then traded it to Tuan for some other animals. Tuan then offered to trade the tortoise to my friend Jerry Carucci in July. Jerry was wise enough to ask Tuan for some kind of proof that the tortoise really is a son of legendary dam #443 before agreeing to any deals involving it. Hence, both Tuan and Jerry contacted me within about 36 hours of each other asking me to verify that Ici Li had indeed ever owned a son of that dam.

I told both of them that Ici Li had never bought one of her offspring from anyone who has owned her but that did not rule out the possibility that he could have bought the tortoise from its original buyer and that knowing the person from whom Ici obtained him might allow me to verify that that person had bought one or more offspring of dam #443 making it possible that Ici did have such a son.

Tuan asked this question of Ici Li at some point, possibly even before he decided to ask me, which tipped Ici off to the fact that the tortoise was not dead. Upon learning that Tuan had the tortoise, Ici started the bad guy thread about Dr. Brunner and refused to name the source of the animal in order to make it more difficult for anyone to sell it.

Facts: Jerry Carucci told me that Tuan had the tortoise when he first made his inquiry of me. Tuan told me he did not buy the tortoise from Ici because the price was too high, but was "interested" in the tortoise from the original ad (April). When I asked him if he had gotten it from someone else and why he only became interested in its backgroundr 2-3 months after it was advertised and when someone to whom he had offered it wanted to verify the background, he reiterated "I did not buy it" in several emails and then stopped communicating.

I believe semantics are in play here. He did not "buy" it, but with all the deals he does, he could very easily have traded something to Dr. Brunner for it, which I suppose means he didn't "buy" it. That doesn't mean he doesn't have it, though, a question which he won't answer in spite of being asked repeatedly via email.

Ici steadfastly refuses to name the source of the tortoise, telling me it is irrelevant to the bad guy thread. I told him that it could only help him and his credibility to get that information out in the open, but he still refuses.

Well now if this isn't an interesting post.

Ici, your ATTITUDE (Damn that word seems to pop up every time someone's acting a fool.) makes all of us sick. No matter how you try to explain your attitude away you're still coming across as an

The fact that you're still being flippant about the whole thing makes you look just as bad as Dr. Brunner. Go sell your "high end" watches and grow up.

Originally Posted by JButera

You have every right not disclose info, yet others will draw their own conclusion, here's mine:
1.) Tuan has nothing to do with your decision of non-disclosure.
2.) The tortoise is alive and well.
3.) Dr. Brunner paid you the full amount and some extra to keep quiet.
4.) You and Dr. Brunner's credibility flew out the window.

Sorry, to disclose.

Let us not forget, there remains the issue if Forged Documents to be discussed....
~Beau

Originally Posted by zovick

That doesn't mean he doesn't have it, though, a question which he won't answer in spite of being asked repeatedly via email.

Not that it matters, I just completed a sale with Tuan, and in one of my emails to him, I asked, do you have the tortoise in question?

His answer (copied & pasted): yes Lynn i saw the post on fauna BOI , as it is their problems , not my problems so i dont care for whatever they were saying or talking in that ad ,,,, also i called both of them and talked. clearly to. them that there are their problems , do not bring my name inside their problems, and do not get. me involve in any of their argument, dont give me any headache ........

i do not need to explain or say anything to those 2 guys problem , that's all

As with everyone else, he avoided my question like the plague.

I don't know if he's a player in this tortoise deal or not, as far as my deal with him, he was on the up & up and straight forward, did everything he said he would.

Lynn Peterson
Big Time Reptiles

Thank you, Lynn. So basically....

1) Ici is a scammer, who sold a tortoise as being from a particular blood line and the originator of that bold line has no record of ever selling to Ici

2) the Dr. is a scammer, who bought the tortoise and then forged documents so he could claim it had died in an attempt to avoid payment

3) the guy who now has the tortoise doesn't care if it is really descended from the valued blood line, nor does he care to expose scammers in the community

Got it!

Lesson if this BOI? Avoid these people like the plague!

~Beau

Originally Posted by BeauBoi

Thank you, Lynn. So basically....

1) Ici is a scammer, who sold a tortoise as being from a particular blood line and the originator of that bold line has no record of ever selling to Ici

2) the Dr. is a scammer, who bought the tortoise and then forged documents so he could claim it had died in an attempt to avoid payment

3) the guy who now has the tortoise doesn't care if it is really descended from the valued blood line, nor does he care to expose scammers in the community

Got it!

Lesson if this BOI? Avoid these people like the plague!

~Beau

I am not sure how you are concluding #1 and #3 (and #2 is not fully confirmed with respect to the forgery, although it looks...not so wonderful).

Re: #1 - If I produce a tortoise of bloodline X from parent A and sell it to person one and that person one sells it without my knowledge to person two, that does not mean the animal suddenly loses its heritage if sold by person two to a third buyer. Whether that information is revealed to me or anyone else, the animal is still the animal. I have a particular male tortoise that produces especially robust offspring with impressive fertility. If his offspring change hands and I am not told, that does not mean those offspring were not sired by him and it does not necessarily mean the person reselling them as his offspring without my knowledge is a scammer in any fashion. As for not revealing it, I can imagine some reasons why. A lot of people protect their buyers and sources for multiple reasons (some want to prevent badgering of those people, some want to conceal the financial details, and some want to keep sources for their own future "exclusive" use). Do I want to know the answers to some of the questions in this thread? I do. Is it knowledge that I am owed or that I deserve? Not at all.

Re: #3 - I do not see any evidence here indicating that the person possessing the tortoise does not care about the bloodline. As for the scammer exposure, that is a personal call on the balance between service and headache. The act of exposure does not come without blowback at times, so some people may value their involvement according to differing tolerances. Would I prefer that such a person weigh in here? I would. Do I understand reasons why they might not? I do.

Originally Posted by worldismarble

Beau, I'm confused about your insistence that I somehow wronged the community. Can you clarify?

Is there anything you feel I did wrong besides not wishing to disclose the studbook number of the tortoise I sold? I'm confused about how and why this detail is relevant to the entirety of this case.

I'm not sure I'm following your logic.

Oh so NOW you don't want to disclose but we're putting it in your ads. Could it be because it was a lie to sell quicker and for a higher price?

Also you were very adamant in having us believe the tort was alive and well but now don't want us to know where it is? Hmm.

Sent from my N9132 using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by nickolasanastasiou

I am not sure how you are concluding #1 and #3 (and #2 is not fully confirmed with respect to the forgery, although it looks...not so wonderful).

Re: #1 - If I produce a tortoise of bloodline X from parent A and sell it to person one and that person one sells it without my knowledge to person two, that does not mean the animal suddenly loses its heritage if sold by person two to a third buyer. Whether that information is revealed to me or anyone else, the animal is still the animal. I have a particular male tortoise that produces especially robust offspring with impressive fertility. If his offspring change hands and I am not told, that does not mean those offspring were not sired by him and it does not necessarily mean the person reselling them as his offspring without my knowledge is a scammer in any fashion. As for not revealing it, I can imagine some reasons why. A lot of people protect their buyers and sources for multiple reasons (some want to prevent badgering of those people, some want to conceal the financial details, and some want to keep sources for their own future "exclusive" use). Do I want to know the answers to some of the questions in this thread? I do. Is it knowledge that I am owed or that I deserve? Not at all.

Re: #3 - I do not see any evidence here indicating that the person possessing the tortoise does not care about the bloodline. As for the scammer exposure, that is a personal call on the balance between service and headache. The act of exposure does not come without blowback at times, so some people may value their involvement according to differing tolerances. Would I prefer that such a person weigh in here? I would. Do I understand reasons why they might not? I do.

I think you missed my point. Without any of the three involved willing to tell us what as tulle transpired, they leave us with no chOnce bit to come to our own conclusions. Those are the conclusions I came to for myself, and others can come to whatever conclusion they want, but without any actual information from the people involved, none of us really know the truth. High is apparently tha way they want it.

~Beau

Dang phone!

* Whish is apparently the way they want it.

~Beau

Originally Posted by BeauBoi

I think you missed my point. Without any of the three involved willing to tell us what as tulle transpired, they leave us with no chOnce bit to come to our own conclusions. Those are the conclusions I came to for myself, and others can come to whatever conclusion they want, but without any actual information from the people involved, none of us really know the truth. High is apparently tha way they want it.

~Beau

I do not think I missed your point. I simply disagree with it.

Lacking the additional details, forming a conclusion would require filling those gaps with assumptions. Those assumptions may not reflect the truth and alternative possibilities may exist based on what evidence is present. Stating someone is a scammer as a conclusion with an absence of evidence of a scam is unjustified and unfair to the person being prematurely judged.

Sometimes it is perfectly fine to admit that there is nothing more to the story that one is going to be permitted to learn and then let it exist as it is without a curiosity-satisfying conclusion.