• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

My Conversation with Doug Schmell
1 1

72 posts in this topic

I am starting another thread on Schmell not to rip or rehash a lot of the issues yet again, but really to hopefully offer some sort of closure to the situation. My concern is that there's been a lot of talk (from myself included -- see the later portion of this post) and I think some damage that my very myopic view of the situation has caused.

 

A few days ago I decided to email Doug because I had heard that he was upset that some of his friends in the hobby had taken the time to simply email him and hear what he had to say. Although I would not say Doug and I knew each other super well, we had eaten dinner and lunch together a few times, I have bought a few books off of him, and generally always enjoyed his company.

 

Everyone reading this post is well familiar what has happened in recent days, so there's no need for me to recap. After speaking to Doug I found the following:

 

1) I found Doug to be very contrite for what happened in the past with regard to the disbarment. These events took place in 1999. Doug by his own admission states he did a poor job managing the client's money, and that there is no excuse for his actions. He says he is a different person now. It was in fact, about 6 1/2 years ago.

 

2) Doug emphatically restated that he has never, nor would he ever, intentionally manipulate a book on his site in the line of trimming or color touch. Does he press? Yes, from time to time. I believe this is the case, and I believe that the grounds for that is that Doug, no matter how badly you believe the disbarment situation was, has always been passionate about comic books and loves them. For him to damage some priceless treasure like a Pacific Coast book to make a sale seems unfathomable when you factor it in with his personality overall.

 

3) I asked him about the counseling to avoid child payments and his explanation did make sense to me in that he was asked to cash checks for his clients who did not have bank accounts. Those clients were seeking to avoid child support payments. He did not ask (perhaps imho he should have) what the rationale was behind the cashing, and made a remark during his deposition on what the situation was regarding the cashed checks. This was his explanation, and I suppose I'd say that I feel it is plausible.

 

4) There is no doubt to me that Doug was careless as a lawyer, but because of his passion for comics and his past mistakes, has been much better at accounting for funds in his PedigreeComics business. Some of the conduct was intentional and willful. I have no doubt Doug did know what he was doing in the manipulation of the money -- but I do not believe that it is going on right now, and frankly, JIM 92 notwithstanding, I don't see evidence or a story where someone did have a problem with Doug since the inception of PedigreeComics.

 

 

Let me be clear: I maintain this is a black and white issue. There is no grey when it comes to the actual disbarment proceedings.

 

However, I offer the following analogy. A defendant committs a theft in 1999, goes to trial and is convicted. Before his sentencing, he bench warrants (flees). In 2006, the defendant is picked on the bench warrant, comes before the court, and is ready now to be sentenced. In the last 6 1/2 years, he hasn't gotten arrested, cited, not so much as a traffic ticket. He gets married, has a family, maintains a job, is a model worker. What should be done? This scenario presented itself at least once a month while I was a DA.

 

And in most instances, I asked that the defendant be judged on the totality of his behavior but with a recognition and restitution for the crime he committed because he cannot evade responsibilities. Second chances are necessary and given out. Those chances are not immediate or given without some thought.

 

Doug has been a good dealer, honest in the ways in which I can see since being a dealer, so while this was a severe question of character, punishing him over and over again in the court of public opinion likewise seems unfair.

 

While I won't withdraw what I said, I will admit that I was probably too quick to judge what should happen with Doug going forward. And I believe that my language was overly strong. Each of us must decide whether or not this will still affect our perception of Doug. And I guess what I'd say is that Doug deserves a genuine second chance to show that what happened in 1999 was an abberation and that he has changed. And by genuine I mean, not throwing it back in his face every time we have the chance. By not constantly bringing it up, by trusting him the same way we would have anyway. If Doug proves me wrong, and I am made to look foolish by posting this, then I will be rather upset.

 

But I will choose to believe him, to trust him again, even in light of everything that has happened.

 

I know I may not have a lot of influence here, and that what I say may not matter here to any of you, but I am hopeful that we (the boards) can all put this behind us, treat Doug and deal with Doug as we always would, and if there is a question about his business dealings, then we will all remember what happened. We shouldn't entirely forget. But in order to get past this, I think we genuinely have to say, Doug, what you did was wrong, but I'm not going to keep saying it over and over again. My conversation with Doug was productive, I believe the conduct to be an egregious, but isolated (during part of the time he was a lawyer), incident, and that he was contrite.

 

I believe Doug himself will appear here to offer more information. I have encouraged him to do so. I'm hopeful that after reading what I've said and what Doug has said, we will all be able to move on.

 

 

And not to be a DQ, I will just add that a lot of older board members and others outside have mentioned the overwhelmingly negative tones the boards have taken on recently. I agree. But that's from all sides -- when people that I like and am friends with like Brad (Redhook) feel like they are attacked, but then in kind attack with strong language against people like Mark (esquire) who I'm also friends with, I wonder if we're on a comics chatboard or debating world peace.

 

I'd be the first to admit, since Ewert, my increasingly vocal voice has been a shining example of chatter without substance. Although I believe my positions on both Ewert and Doug are morally correct, I have certainly contributed to the "beat the dead horse" negativity that has now become full of scandal and conspiracy. I believe there are deep and severe problems in our hobby as well as significant corruption. But there are positive ways to address these concerns and move the hobby forward. I haven't been part of that solution.

 

I've been talking a great deal and not being part of finding out what kind of action can be taken to formulate a solution. What am I trying to achieve? Where is this going? What improvements in comics can and should be enacted? What can I do to help? The comics hobby is unregulated and unsupervised and dealers have enjoyed the luxury of those business practices. But it is then incumbent upon the consumer to self regulate by exposing those dealers who are dishonest. They may not like it, and it is tricky to figure it out. But it has to be a collective public effort.

 

I'm not going anywhere. Not going to make some dramatic exit. But -- I do feel like I've been talking the talk without walking the walk. I like to judge others by their actions and what they do. In the future, of course we should speak out when there is fraudulent activity, but for me, I want to be contributing positively to the hobby, to make things better, safer for the consumer, and that is where my energy should go. Hopefully, we will all as a community be able to move in that direction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am glad that you have reconciled yourself with this scenario and have been able to rationalise the facts into "it was only a one off" and therefore he is good old Doug again. I can't do that same rationalisation........if he hadn't been caught mis appropriating funds would he have still been doing it? if he says he would press....why would I not believe he would do it to a pedigree book (i.e. so he has degrees of greed in that any book that isn't a pedigree he is more than willing to press up but a pedigree book is sacrosanct?) and on top of that he has been caught lying about the JIM (at least to one of the board members involved)........If I was to do an operational risk assessment on him I would have to rate him as a high risk.....

 

I have tried to stay out of the debate as I am not really keen on mudslinging and to me there aren't any shades of grey either.

 

He won't get anymore business from me.........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great post, Brian! thumbsup2.gif Civil discussion among rational people really is the best way to approach whatever problems arise. Disagreements will always arise, but it's nice to not lose friendships that have been made here over the course of years just cause people can't see eye-to-eye over every issue. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: I wish Doug the best and hope that he can move on from this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very well said. These boards have become vital in exposing wrongdoing in our hobby, as well as a ground to share knowledge about the hobby. Like you, I want to concentrate not on the problems (overly) but the solutions. I'm definitely on the same page with you. I hope others will find that this will be a more productive use of our time as a collective group.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is one area where I am truly torn on what to think. My last dealing with Doug was very professional, and he supplied me with a book I had been wanting for quite awhile, in the grade that I wanted. This was also my first dealing with him, and I truly looked forward to doing future business with him in that his offerings are top notch. I had even looked at his site the morning of the disclosure and thought the standard expletive when I read the thread. At first I was pretty angry, due to the trust that I feel Doug destroyed with his past clients, and it made me feel that if someone could do that, they might do disreputable things in their current profession. If Doug is truly sorry and wants everyone to know that he is, he needs to come forward and assure people that he is going to operate above board and with the professionalism he has displayed with Pedgree thus far. If he can do this, then he might once again have my business. This is purely an issue of trust for me now, and I will not deal with someone I cannot trust.

 

 

Scott

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is one area where I am truly torn on what to think. My last dealing with Doug was very professional, and he supplied me with a book I had been wanting for quite awhile, in the grade that I wanted. This was also my first dealing with him, and I truly looked forward to doing future business with him in that his offerings are top notch. I had even looked at his site the morning of the disclosure and thought the standard expletive when I read the thread. At first I was pretty angry, due to the trust that I feel Doug destroyed with his past clients, and it made me feel that if someone could do that, they might do disreputable things in their current profession. If Doug is truly sorry and wants everyone to know that he is, he needs to come forward and assure people that he is going to operate above board and with the professionalism he has displayed with Pedgree thus far. If he can do this, then he might once again have my business. This is purely an issue of trust for me now, and I will not deal with someone I cannot trust.

 

 

Scott

 

Scott, I thouoght Doug did come forward on another post. In private conversations he has assured me I have nothing to worry about as far as my books and money are concerned and I believe him

 

keith

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brian,

 

I disagree. A child learns right from wrong at a very early age. They learn as they grow, that once found wrong they suffer the consequences. Public opinion is one of those consequences. If this deterrent is insufficient, than they may continue to err. Criminal behavior as an adult is a result of not learning, or not caring, or both. If you cheat, lie and steal, you should expect to be caught, not to get away with it. I'm not here to judge others, and I don't care about Doug, his business, or his "passion for comics". None of this has anything to do with forgiveness. Forgiveness must come from those he has wronged.

 

As they say . . . THE BUCK STOPS HERE.

 

peace,

 

d

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brian,

 

I disagree. A child learns right from wrong at a very early age. They learn as they grow, that once found wrong they suffer the consequences. Public opinion is one of those consequences. If this deterrent is insufficient, than they may continue to err. Criminal behavior as an adult is a result of not learning, or not caring, or both. If you cheat, lie and steal, you should expect to be caught, not to get away with it. I'm not here to judge others, and I don't care about Doug, his business, or his "passion for comics". None of this has anything to do with forgiveness. Forgiveness must come from those he has wronged.

 

As they say . . . THE BUCK STOPS HERE.

 

peace,

 

d

 

dream on, Reverend. Dream on..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brian,

 

I disagree. A child learns right from wrong at a very early age. They learn as they grow, that once found wrong they suffer the consequences. Public opinion is one of those consequences. If this deterrent is insufficient, than they may continue to err. Criminal behavior as an adult is a result of not learning, or not caring, or both. If you cheat, lie and steal, you should expect to be caught, not to get away with it. I'm not here to judge others, and I don't care about Doug, his business, or his "passion for comics". None of this has anything to do with forgiveness. Forgiveness must come from those he has wronged.

 

As they say . . . THE BUCK STOPS HERE.

 

peace,

 

d

 

dream on, Reverend. Dream on..

 

and your point is . . . grin.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good post Brian. It is funny how a conversation like that can soothe the savage beast. But it is human nature to be that way, assuming the person "on trial" conducts himself in a mature and reasonable way.

 

But does that cloud judgment or does it help clear it up? I'm not sure how the legal system works in this area, but before going on trial, and outside of a plea bargain, does the defendant and prosecutor meet up directly to chat and explain circumstances or to offer a defense face to face (phone to phone)? I would imagine that if the defendant is able to make a direct plea that is could affect the prosecutor emotionally, in one way or another. I guess that can be good or bad. confused-smiley-013.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think any of the conduct described is per se illegal. I guess it's subject to interpretation. The old lady thing may be pushing it.

 

It's a lesson for all of us to keep in mind. Get your priorities in order. Don't let the money spent on this hobby interfere with your obligations elsewhere. Given the amazingosity of this guy's collection, it sure seems like some sales of some expensive items back when these troubles occurred could have fixed the problems, at least to the point that nobody was complaining even if there was some commingling. The Ethics Police only get involved when someone complains, they don't have an all-seeing eye that knows when there's been commingling. I don't know, I don't have the facts, of course, but my perspective seems plausible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I wouldn't meet with the defendant, but rather the defense attorney. If it was a defense attorney I knew and trusted, and the defendant's record and crime were not egregious, I would make the appropriate recommendation. I would not take one from the defendant directly.

 

This, of course, is not a criminal situation. And really all it did was say to me that this situation needs to come to an end... and Doug deserves a second chance to prove that he would not do something like this again, or hang himself by his own actions. Either way, I'm willing to move forward. But -- I will note that should an unethical action ever be discovered and proven, I will not be recommending a third chance.

 

Good post Brian. It is funny how a conversation like that can soothe the savage beast. But it is human nature to be that way, assuming the person "on trial" conducts himself in a mature and reasonable way.

 

But does that cloud judgment or does it help clear it up? I'm not sure how the legal system works in this area, but before going on trial, and outside of a plea bargain, does the defendant and prosecutor meet up directly to chat and explain circumstances or to offer a defense face to face (phone to phone)? I would imagine that if the defendant is able to make a direct plea that is could affect the prosecutor emotionally, in one way or another. I guess that can be good or bad. confused-smiley-013.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for taking the time to speak with Doug and create this thread. Everyone, of course, will reach their own personal decisions on the impact of Doug's actions, past, present and future. I only wish the best for Doug in putting these matters behind him.

 

And I look forward to working with you and numerous others in taking positive steps to protect and promote our hobby, particularly with the upcoming meeting we will be holding in NYC at the Javitts' show next month to discuss the creation of a new organization. thumbsup2.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

And I look forward to working with you and numerous others in taking positive steps to protect and promote our hobby, particularly with the upcoming meeting we will be holding in NYC at the Javitts' show next month to discuss the creation of a new organization. thumbsup2.gif

 

Don't forget to wear a cup!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
1 1