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

Originally Posted by nickolasanastasiou

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 agree.

Remember how Brunner has constantly made constant legal threats throughout the entire situation.(Yes, the threats here were laughable and idiotic, but it is possible that he might have sent a valid appearing threat out to others) I'd bet that we were not the only ones threatened.
I'm wondering if he tried to strongarm Webslave into removing content (not that Rich would be coerced, he would not, I'm just talking about the attempt) and likewise I'm wondering if the person possessing the tortoise was leaned on.
I have, myself, stood up to some unpleasant people here in different threads and fairly recently too, for what I thought was right, and it is not always easy to do so.
Sometimes, not doing something to help another is wrong (Kitty Genovese). But that is not true here, a life is not in the balance. I too would like to hear from the owner, but like Nick, I understand that disclosure can be a difficult choice.

Originally Posted by nickolasanastasiou

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.

Which is fine. Ike I said, we all have to come to our own conclusions since the parties involved refuse to provide further information.

I choose to stay away from people that aren't forthcoming with the truth. How you choose to deal with people like that is up to you.

~Beau

Originally Posted by BeauBoi

Which is fine. Ike I said, we all have to come to our own conclusions since the parties involved refuse to provide further information.

I choose to stay away from people that aren't forthcoming with the truth. How you choose to deal with people like that is up to you.

~Beau

One of my points is that no, we do not have to conclude. We have the ability to realize we may not know enough to fully understand the situation and that that is acceptable reality despite not being desirable reality. It does not excuse accusations, either.

That has always been up to me, but dealing with people (especially the people involved in this conflict) has not been the matter I have addressed (a factor for consideration based on displayed behavior, but not what I have "spoken" to).

Originally Posted by nickolasanastasiou

One of my points is that no, we do not have to conclude. We have the ability to realize we may not know enough to fully understand the situation and that that is acceptable reality despite not being desirable reality. It does not excuse accusations, either.

That has always been up to me, but dealing with people (especially the people involved in this conflict) has not been the matter I have addressed (a factor for consideration based on displayed behavior, but not what I have "spoken" to).

Fine, don't come to a conclusion if you don't want to. Do what you like. Meanwhile, I choose to remain suspicious of the motives and actions of these people. Free country, remember?
~Beau

All I see in this is all 3 that could help clear this mess keep lying..

Icy: why would he not disclose who he got the tort from to begin with, one would think that giving out that info would help follow the lineage of it as being a son of #443 . my conclusion is that it's not and it's the only reason why he will not disclose the info..

Dr. soo much wrong in everything he did , I don't even know where to start.. if everything it true, false vet reports, dead tort that's alive and well, refusing to pay is due and the attitude in general which goes for Icy too.

then Tuan: why in hell would he simply refuse to answer a simple question , yes I have the tort and yes it's alive and well. it's or isn't from #443 which might be why he refuses to talk about it. it isn't and he will try to breed or sell it later, so by avoiding the answer , in time his involvement will be forgotten..

sooo much sneakiness in this that I would personally avoid all 3 and if possible all who have had dealing with anyone of them..

easy to fix, ONE person can clear this but refuses to with IMHO a bogus response.

they all have something to hide, that's what I think

Originally Posted by yeloowtang

All I see in this is all 3 that could help clear this mess keep lying..

Icy: why would he not disclose who he got the tort from to begin with, one would think that giving out that info would help follow the lineage of it as being a son of #443 . my conclusion is that it's not and it's the only reason why he will not disclose the info..

Dr. soo much wrong in everything he did , I don't even know where to start.. if everything it true, false vet reports, dead tort that's alive and well, refusing to pay is due and the attitude in general which goes for Icy too.

then Tuan: why in hell would he simply refuse to answer a simple question , yes I have the tort and yes it's alive and well. it's or isn't from #443 which might be why he refuses to talk about it. it isn't and he will try to breed or sell it later, so by avoiding the answer , in time his involvement will be forgotten..

sooo much sneakiness in this that I would personally avoid all 3 and if possible all who have had dealing with anyone of them..

easy to fix, ONE person can clear this but refuses to with IMHO a bogus response.

they all have something to hide, that's what I think

Thank You! That is exactly what I was trying to say, and it is nice to know someone else sees it that way too!
~Beau

Originally Posted by Lucille

I'm wondering if he tried to strongarm Webslave into removing content (not that Rich would be coerced, he would not, I'm just talking about the attempt) and likewise I'm wondering if the person possessing the tortoise was leaned on.

Just for the record, since the question has been asked, no, I have not been threatened by anyone in order to try to have this thread closed or deleted. I was asked, however, and the threat of legal action made against the OP if the thread could not be closed. But no, no such legal threats (nor any other kind of threats) were ever made towards me nor this site.

Originally Posted by yeloowtang

All I see in this is all 3 that could help clear this mess keep lying..

Icy: why would he not disclose who he got the tort from to begin with, one would think that giving out that info would help follow the lineage of it as being a son of #443 . my conclusion is that it's not and it's the only reason why he will not disclose the info..

Dr. soo much wrong in everything he did , I don't even know where to start.. if everything it true, false vet reports, dead tort that's alive and well, refusing to pay is due and the attitude in general which goes for Icy too.

then Tuan: why in hell would he simply refuse to answer a simple question , yes I have the tort and yes it's alive and well. it's or isn't from #443 which might be why he refuses to talk about it. it isn't and he will try to breed or sell it later, so by avoiding the answer , in time his involvement will be forgotten..

sooo much sneakiness in this that I would personally avoid all 3 and if possible all who have had dealing with anyone of them..

easy to fix, ONE person can clear this but refuses to with IMHO a bogus response.

they all have something to hide, that's what I think

Another possibility is that he does not want to provide the benefit of that information to a person who has deprived him of his own respective benefit within the context of the conflict by not sharing the account of the matter central to his dispute. In other words, the animal was no longer in his possession and assistance he could have received from the possessor was not furnished, so he would have motivation to not ease any subsequent transaction beyond his own. Either could be the case. He could also have some other reason beyond your conclusion you stated as "the only reason" or the alternative possibility that I suggested.

I believe I can see the possible perspectives of two out of the three persons mentioned below.

Originally Posted by yeloowtang

All I see in this is all 3 that could help clear this mess keep lying..

Icy: why would he not disclose who he got the tort from to begin with, one would think that giving out that info would help follow the lineage of it as being a son of #443 . my conclusion is that it's not and it's the only reason why he will not disclose the info..

Up until the point where the issue between the OP and Dr. Brunner was allegedly resolved, Icy had no incentive to provide heritage information that would only have been beneficial to either Dr. Brunner or Tuan. But since the issue is claimed to have beem resolved, that excuse no longer holds any water. Not unless there is still some bad blood here, and the information is being withheld simply out of nothing more than spite.

Originally Posted by yeloowtang

Dr. soo much wrong in everything he did , I don't even know where to start.. if everything it true, false vet reports, dead tort that's alive and well, refusing to pay is due and the attitude in general which goes for Icy too.

Originally Posted by yeloowtang

then Tuan: why in hell would he simply refuse to answer a simple question , yes I have the tort and yes it's alive and well. it's or isn't from #443 which might be why he refuses to talk about it. it isn't and he will try to breed or sell it later, so by avoiding the answer , in time his involvement will be forgotten..

Again, up until the issue was allegedly resolved, Tuan possibly felt he was in possession of what might be construed as stolen goods. In the interest of self interest (and if speculation in the particulars of this situation are true), he quite likely just decided to button his lips rather than admitting that he had become involved in receiving property that the seller (Dr. Brunner) really had no right to dispose of. But since the situation has allegedly been resolved, then this should no longer be a concern, and the only logical conclusion to come to is that Tuan does not want to help clear the air with any facts he may have simply because he just does not care to be of assistance to anyone else other than himself. IMHO, of course.

I have to say that this certainly has been an interesting read..

I am of the same thoughts as Evvonne .. I have asked those questions multiple times .. and no answers from any of three people who may know the answers ... but I suppose that is a theory not fact without any hard evidence in support of it ... so I do see Nick's points ... but does seem odd that simple proof of lineage and value of tortoise would be quite simple ... at this point only Ici has indicated it was of that lineage ... I see this as two scammers and an uncooperative associate ... again my feeling and intuition .. everybody should be free to their own interpretation of the facts or lack thereof :-)