Bad Guy Craig Wyatt Scammer Bad Guy Selling Sick Animals

[Craig Wyatt]

This was nothing more than a friend coming over to another friends house. Period. And that might just be another big fat lie too. Only Chris and Jay know the truth about that. And they both have a big reason now to lie that the paper work was let's say less than convincing.
It only eventually turned into something more because Jay needed it to be something more. Without my intially post do you think Jay would have this paperwork. Is there even one single person that believes that crap paperwork was given without Jay later on asking Chris to type something up for him?
Notice letters state "on July 7 I looked at 8 animals or something like that. It should have never said "on July 7." That means he was speaking as if it was beyond July 7 and was referring back that date. Plus 100% I believe nothing happened on July 7 at all. Looks like it maybe happened eventually but I'm guessing it happened around the middle of August when everyone was saying "show me the vet report" and Jay kept saying just wait I'm getting ready to post it. Well at that point he obviously didn't have it because he kept threatening to post it but never did because he couldn't. He didn't have it to post.
Now look on sept 18 he magically has it.
None of the vet stuff makes any kind of since what so ever. That letter looks like something Jay typed up himself and has his good friend put a signature on the bottom. There is no way that letter was created by any vet. Those letters are primarily referring to me and it should only be referring to the animals. Since Jay refers to Chris as his partner at the least they are damn good friends. I whole heartedly believe Chris never imagined it would get this far and is prob regretting it very much right now.

 

[BLUAZUL1]

This whole thing sounds like a whole bunch of BS trying to discredit Craig because he stepped on somebodies toes I don't know about the others but Craig is an outstanding guy knows a lot about what he's doing and doesn't try to bust your butt with some off the wall price very fair prices. Just an idea you guys stay on your side Craig on his and don't buy from each other. Thanks for your time.

 

[nickolasanastasiou]

From here on out, Chris can come here if he wants to address anything in particular, although I doubt he will for reasons already paid mention to. I am not going to bother him with this again and my nose really does not belong in it (but here I am...).

A portion of our email conversation is below. Messages are last (top) to first
(bottom) and are not interrupted. I discussed other matters before and after this chain that are of a more personal nature (his private matters which do not relate to this topic) and have left them out accordingly. No words have been altered or omitted from these contiguous links in the chain.

I do not mind speculating about multiple avenues of maybes and what ifs, as I think thoughts of those kinds can provide good mental exercise and can be predictive from time to time if there is enough corroborating information, but an overly rapid transition from "this might be" to "this is" is off-putting to me and my thought process when committed to in premature fashion. There is much I do not know and do not expect to know about this situation, but that does not give me the right to just slap in mental spackling paste and call it real or complete. I believe it would probably be unfair of me.



----------------------------------------------------------------------

Nickolas Anastasiou <[email protected]>
Today at 1:58 AM

To

Chris Stancel

I appreciate that, Chris.

I will post the portion of our conversation that starts with my message with the request for clarity regarding the posts Craig made about your conversation and which ends at this response. Beyond that, I will leave things to be however they will be. None of the more private matters need to be involved since they are wholly unrelated aside from the large real life burden they represent. My thoughts and wishes are hopeful that the situation regarding that has as positive of an outcome as can be expected for the circumstances (with biological reality taken into account).

Thanks and try to get some rest if you can,

Nick

From: Chris Stancel <[email protected]>
To: Nickolas Anastasiou <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 1:45 AM
Subject: Re: BOI threads

Hello Nick,

That is fine if you wantto share it. I fully understand that me going on posting to the thread would be better but as I stated for my reasons I didnt want to, especially because of the public nature of it but also once I post a reply then I would have to keep up with it because Im sure further questions or statements will arise. I just dont have the time for that or the focus for all that for reasons you know of (busy career, my own personal animal situations etc). I wish it never became it a public battle that involved me at this point. I appreciate your need to make everything clear and staying on the outside of it all to keep any persuasion out of it. Im even more appreciative of your understanding on my own situation that I am going through as well.

Let me know if any other questions.

Chris


From: Nickolas Anastasiou <[email protected]>
To: Chris Stancel <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 11:15 PM
Subject: Re: BOI threads

Chris,

Received your response and I appreciate the clarification.
Would you mind if I shared this response on Fauna since you are not going to get involved in that thread? Of course, it would look much better if you did it yourself, but I feel like pertinent details have been getting shifted somewhat and those shifts can re-frame the situation into more something speculation-based than evidence-based as people might use an incorrect detail to serve as a premise for the next level of their thought process (which is normal if one does not know a detail to be incorrect). As a normal member, I mean. Not as a moderator. My moderator role and my member role are somewhat separate things, but I pay respect to both dimensions of my presence on the site (if that makes sense). My moderator role can be summarized by stewardship of site rules and related operational activities. My member role mostly consists of community engagement, buying, and selling (in order from greatest to least emphasis). Just to be clear on that.

After that, assuming you give me the okay, I would prefer to let things be in terms of inquiring further between you and I over this since I know that your other pressing matters we discussed are of greater priority (I would make them my greater priority, too, if I were dealing with the same challenges right now). I do not want to add to your stress.

Thanks,

Nick

From: Chris Stancel <[email protected]>
To: Nickolas Anastasiou <[email protected]>; Christopher Stancel <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 4:27 PM
Subject: Re: BOI threads

Hello Nick,

Ill start by clarifying some of the things he said which are incorrect....

"They even vend at reptile shows together. Chris stated this to me"....... Yes I said we vend at the same show but I wouldn't say "together" as we don't have anything to do with each other at the show. He sells his stuff and I have my incubators and stuff for the clinic there. Sometimes animals (geckos or snakes) if I have any. Otherwise we are not there together. I vend with 250 vendors at the show. Do some of them come over and ask me to look at animals or contact me outside of show to ask questions about animals they have, yes all the time. I get contacted through emails, facebook etc from breeders all over, even in other countries that have contacted me to ask me questions

The animals that I looked at had physical exams, I looked at their confirmation, their bones had visible deformities, walking abnormal etc. I don't need a blood test to tell me something physical that I can see by looking at him. I stated to Mr Wyatt, if these were not his animals Im only going by what I was told but that is in any situation where someone brings an animal to look at. Told him if they were not his animals then I was not told the truth and that's for them to resolve. I go by what is told to me.

I never said I left the office during my work day to go look at the chameleons. I told him I went after my regular hours were done as he lives in the same town from the clinic not very far and would take a look at them for him. Nick, you know how hard it is for me day by day to get things done, see my appointments, do any procedures that need to be done, make my phone calls with test results or to call clients back with questions, deal with emergencies let alone be able to leave the office to look at someone's animal during regular hours. Im lucky if I get a break to take care of something for myself. So back to the original statement I never said I left the office during hours I told him it was after. That is an incorrect statement by him.

Nick... this is a situation that I even told Mr Wyatt that we as veterinarians always hate to face, the animals are our priority, if there is a sick or unhealthy animal involved, we want what is best for the animal (s) but also want it resolved for the buyer and seller. If I wasn't told the truth about the animals coming from him I don't know that, if Mr Wyatt is not telling the truth either then again I don't know that. I just wrote what I saw that evening I looked at those animals. He complained that I mentioned his name and I told him if I was given a business name that would have to be written on there. Im only writing who I was told the animals came from. Again if that was a lie and Mr Wyatt stated he had evidence that is was, then that is in his favor and it should work out into his benefit. I told him I haven't been on the BOI (honestly don't even want to go on it as I have so much of my own stuff to take care of whether its work or personal and I don't need this stress over all this) but he said all the evidence is there. I wished him the best with the entire thing and told him if he needed to contact me again he could.

I would NEVER forge a document or chart that has anything to do with my career, not even for my family or myself. I worked very hard to get where I am. I wrote what I saw that evening on those animals and that was it. I have no idea who Mr Wyatt is and would not write a letter to hurt him in any way, again for no one would I do that not even for family or myself. Trust me over the last 12.5 yrs I have been asked to do things by clients, even write a prescription under the owners name not the pets so they can put it under health insurance but the answer has always been no.

As far as all the other stuff with Mr Ciccone on fauna, I have or had no idea about any of that. Again these are personal things about him that I do not know.


Let me know if you need me to clear anything up with this. This entire situation is getting turned on me when I didn't falsify anything. I wrote what I saw, if those animals didn't come from him then I was lied to also. But how am I supposed to know that.

Let me know you got this as I have had the issues with emails getting back like I said.

Chris




From: Nickolas Anastasiou <[email protected]>
To: Chris Stancel <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 2:35 PM
Subject: Re: BOI threads

"I just got off the phone with his "vet" Cristopher Stancel. Now I put vet in quotation marks for a reason. Cristopher Stancel is a real vet. But in the place of vet I wanted to put "friend" because that's exactly what he is. This is the same man that Jay referred to as his partner. Chris did say they are not partners and I do believe him. But I know this is Jay was referring to as his partner. They even vend at reptile shows together. Chris stated this to me.
Chris stated that Jay called him and asked him to come over and check out some panthers. So after work Chris stopped by his house. And at that time only looked them over. No equipment, no X-rays, no bloodworm just a visual look. Now maybe he really did. But I have no clue what animals he checked out and neither does Chris. Now is this one friend looking out for another you guys be the judge. Could be true could be totally false.
There was no follow ups at the actual vets office. I mean nothing. Is that Chris's fault? Heck no. They are not his animals. But if they were as sick as Jay is stating and his good buddy is a vet why not document this correctly. I'm sure it would have been prob right next to free. But even if it was full price Jay stated that he didn't want to send them back to me because he only cared about the animals at that point. Right Jay? Those are your words not mine. But then if they were really my animals then it would really be on the record."

"Correction on the timing part of the visit. Chris stated that he had an opening slot of time during that day with no appointments and he drove to Jays house during his work day. (Only an awesome friend would do this)
I don't want to put anything but the absolutely truth and I'm sorry I screwed up that little part. It is what it is and I will not twist anything.

Chris if you feel like something is wrong than you can post it here. But I'm positive with this little correction that I told only what was discussed between the 2 of us."


These are two posts from Craig Wyatt just now.

I am not sure if his narration of things is correct, but it is kind of rough if there were no diagnostics performed beyond visual observation. Especially with reputations on the line.

I do not know if you know this, but Jason Ciccone has been lying to our site staff for a long time now about his name/identity and claims about communications he did not have or attempt with us. He has also created at least one additional account with a false identity to push his personal agendas and vouch for himself and/or accuse others. He has demonstrably lied to me in our communications. Repeatedly.

Let me know if Craig's version of this does not capture things correctly. I am not going to be a mouthpiece on this, but I am curious to know. A house call tends to be exceptional.

Thanks,

Nick

 

[Lucille]

From: Chris Stancel <[email protected]>
To: Nickolas Anastasiou <[email protected]>; Christopher Stancel <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 4:27 PM
Subject: Re: BOI threads


I wrote what I saw, if those animals didn't come from him then I was lied to also. But how am I supposed to know that.

Chris


There was no need to include Craig's name in those letters. Dr. Stancel could have simply made veterinary observations.

He defends the conclusion about a refund in his letter by quoting and sent me a link to New Jersey's Pet Purchasing Protection Law. However, when I actually read the law he sent, I found that what he sent refers specifically and only to dogs and cats.
In addition, nowhere does it permit him to use the actual name of a seller in a contested transaction based only on the information given to him by a client to his veterinary clinic.

In my opinion, specifically mentioning Craig's name was unprofessional. And defending his letters with the inapplicable Pet Protection Law was more than unprofessional, it was an attempt to give those letters a weight they do not have.

The writing of these letter was unfortunate because Dr. Stancel's reputation up until this action has been good.
The problem with being pushed into such action is that it is not victimless. The letters were being used as evidence against Craig by Jay, in a venue (the BOI) that has actual effect on reputations and careers.
What saved this debacle from unfairly destroying Craig was a combination of his own strength and responses, and the close reading by the readers themselves who noted the discrepancies not only in the letters but the many discrepancies and lies from Jay himself throughout the transaction.
I do hope that this thread is read by anyone considering any sort of transaction or business endeavor with Jay.

 

[Snake-Queen]

Has Chris ever stated when he wrote those letters?

I'll concede that he saw them on the evening of the 7th, his emails with Nick have been forthcoming & I do not think he would intentionally misrepresent the date he saw the chams.

It is my opinion that Jay lied to Chris about the chams; where they came from. This is very unfortunate for Chris, as Jay's lies have put the Dr's ethics into question. We all know that Jay has no issue lying, so it's not a stretch to think that he also lied to Chris.

This is unfortunate for the Dr, as the old saying about the company you keep reflects upon you; although I don't believe they are anything more than fellow vendors.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[nickolasanastasiou]

Regarding the timing -

Not that I have seen, no.

 

[Craig Wyatt]

Take in mind the vet office closes at 7 on Thursdays and July 7 was on a Thursday. Me and Jay were texting up until about 6:00pm. So basically Chris said he had a couple empty slots in the day. He did not say he left work early. He insinuated that he left and came back to work. Well either Jays home is right next door to the vet or Chris is lying about July 7. There's only 60 mins in an hour and that what we are talking about. This is just a 1 hour window. If Chris is willing to tell one lie for his friend Jay well is it a far scretch to imagine Chris lying about more. Guarantee you guys Chris never anticipated this situation getting to this point.
Soley based on the content of the letters this looks like something Jay typed up and had his buddy put it on his letter head. Is there one single person that has seen paperwork like this from there vet before.
All the vet report did was put another person under the microscope. There was obviously very little thought put into this.

 

[Michael Brown]

I have seen individuals who are dodging repayment of large sums of money (perhaps private student loans) use multiple last names. More times than not, use their middle name as last name, and or their wife's (mothers) last name. Of course this is speculation, but it would certainly explain the reluctance to provide proof of identification coupled with the inability / struggle to get money to Craig originally. Often times these individuals have no credit themselves, and have to rely on others to pay in such methods (CC / PP).

Just my 0.02

 

[nickolasanastasiou]

Take in mind the vet office closes at 7 on Thursdays and July 7 was on a Thursday. Me and Jay were texting up until about 6:00pm. So basically Chris said he had a couple empty slots in the day. He did not say he left work early. He insinuated that he left and came back to work. Well either Jays home is right next door to the vet or Chris is lying about July 7. There's only 60 mins in an hour and that what we are talking about. This is just a 1 hour window. If Chris is willing to tell one lie for his friend Jay well is it a far scretch to imagine Chris lying about more. Guarantee you guys Chris never anticipated this situation getting to this point.
Soley based on the content of the letters this looks like something Jay typed up and had his buddy put it on his letter head. Is there one single person that has seen paperwork like this from there vet before.
All the vet report did was put another person under the microscope. There was obviously very little thought put into this.

Where are you getting this from?

I never said I left the office during my work day to go look at the chameleons. I told him I went after my regular hours were done as he lives in the same town from the clinic not very far and would take a look at them for him. Nick, you know how hard it is for me day by day to get things done, see my appointments, do any procedures that need to be done, make my phone calls with test results or to call clients back with questions, deal with emergencies let alone be able to leave the office to look at someone's animal during regular hours. Im lucky if I get a break to take care of something for myself. So back to the original statement I never said I left the office during hours I told him it was after. That is an incorrect statement by him.

Do you have text showing what you said that refutes what he said? Not basically and not insinuated, but something stated to that end?

 

[Craig Wyatt]

No I don't have a text. And you know I don't. I made it very clear that I called him. Nick I can see you guys are friends or atleast acquaintances and I'm sorry it looking like it's looking for Chris but it just is what it is.
I know he said he had a couple of slots open and went during his work day. (100% fact that he told this to me) Maybe he never returned to work.
Not that's an exact fact.
At this point what do I have to gain by telling a little tiny lie like that. I have told nothing but the 100% truth and I have backed it all up with texts, emails and what not. At this point I think I have more than proved and shown that I only tell the truth.
So either Chris didn't go back to work or he's flat out lying now.

 

[Craig Wyatt]

Hold up. I just re-read what Chris stated. He's a 100% liar saying that he went after hours. He specifically said he an opening during his work day.

 

[nickolasanastasiou]

No I don't have a text. And you know I don't. I made it very clear that I called him. Nick I can see you guys are friends or atleast acquaintances and I'm sorry it looking like it's looking for Chris but it just is what it is.
I know he said he had a couple of slots open and went during his work day. (100% fact that he told this to me) Maybe he never returned to work.
Not that's an exact fact.
At this point what do I have to gain by telling a little tiny lie like that. I have told nothing but the 100% truth and I have backed it all up with texts, emails and what not. At this point I think I have more than proved and shown that I only tell the truth.
So either Chris didn't go back to work or he's flat out lying now.

Okay, so you do not have text and no, I did not know what you have and do not have until you just told me. I asked you if you have it. Telling me what I know when I do not know it is not the best way to convince me of something.

We are acquaintances. Friendship, for me, is a very high bar.

I do not accept your false dichotomy ("didn't go back to work or he's flat out lying now") based on only your say-so of your retelling.

It is a fact that you said you were told that. It is a claim that you were told that. Not identical.

My problem with "basically" and "insinuated" is that it may be boiling stuff down to the extent that the meal has become not quite the same.

 

[Craig Wyatt]

Chris please respond and not by emailing Nick but come right here. Nick posting your words is no different than you posting this stuff yourself. If your breaking some kind of law by posting confidential stuff here you are certainly breaking that same law by emailing Nick. Because what does Nick have to do with your business with Jay. Nothing. Please come hear and tell me I'm lying.

 

[Craig Wyatt]

Basically means- I'm not quoting him but I'm saying what he said.

 

[nickolasanastasiou]

Chris please respond and not by emailing Nick but come right here. Nick posting your words is no different than you posting this stuff yourself. If your breaking some kind of law by posting confidential stuff here you are certainly breaking that same law by emailing Nick. Because what does Nick have to do with your business with Jay. Nothing. Please come hear and tell me I'm lying.

He has not responded at all to this thread by emailing me. I asked him about quoted text from a post you made to seek clarity on the accounting of the interaction. I responded here.

Craig, I have posted nothing confidential.

He is not breaking a law by emailing me with what he has emailed me.

 

[nickolasanastasiou]

Basically means- I'm not quoting him but I'm saying what he said.

I know what basically means. It is derivative and summarizes without an exact retelling. That means it is not necessarily what he actually said, but what you are saying the message was. Subject to data degradation.

If it is what he said, you could quote him justifiably.

 

[Fangthane]

Please come hear and tell me I'm lying.

Why didn't you just record the call to avoid all of the potential he-said-she-said drama? If Chris did give Nick a different story than he gave you, I have to doubt he's suddenly going to have a change of heart and come clean here in public just because you've asked nicely. Ugh .

 

[Craig Wyatt]

Since I didn't recall him saying he came back to work after he went to see Jay I used the word insinuating because it felt best. He told me he had an opening in his day. He did not say there were no more appointments at whatever time at the end of the day. So when he said I had an opening it felt right thinking he prob went back to work. I used insinuating because I couldn't say it to be a fact. But it makes since.
I don't fill in the blanks when there empty.

 

[Craig Wyatt]

Why didn't you just record the call to avoid all of the potential he-said-she-said drama? If Chris did give Nick a different story than he gave you, I have to doubt he's suddenly going to have a change of heart and come clean here in public just because you've asked nicely. Ugh .

Hindsight is 20/20
I'm kicking myself right now for not doing it.

 

[nickolasanastasiou]

Since I didn't recall him saying he came back to work after he went to see Jay I used the word insinuating because it felt best. He told me he had an opening in his day. He did not say there were no more appointments at whatever time at the end of the day. So when he said I had an opening it felt right thinking he prob went back to work. I used insinuating because I couldn't say it to be a fact. But it makes since.
I don't fill in the blanks when there empty.

Did he say opening in his day or an opening in his work day? Not the same thing.

I had no openings during business hours today for extraneous travels because I was booked up with appointments, but I have an opening right now in my day.