Mystery 67 GT-500 #2395

I see you contacted everybody BUT SAAC !!?? Why is that?

 

This kind of conduct only works to cast doubt in the mind of buyers of ANY Shelby and only works to hurt the hobby. I am all for flushing out frauds and have exposed a few myself, but using this forum to defame a car that has not yet been determined to have a checkmark history is an action I cannot support and must speak out against.

What is your stake in this other than to make trouble for the current owner? What have you lost? Nothing. What has your bosses friend lost? He wants the junk hulk off of his property. What does the current owner have to lose? Everything. It is just as likely that the hulk you found was a fake that someone tried to destroy twenty years ago.

IMJ, from reading your posts you do not even have the expertise to begin to judge which car is authentic. You didn't even know that they didn't place VIN plates on dash pads in 1967, yet you are the harbinger of SHELBY JUSTICE?!

If all you really wanted was a nice barn pull Shelby to restore, you would have simply walked away from this car and reported your findings to SAAC. Or, as a courtesy, you would have contacted the current owner to warn him this other car exists and he may have bought a re-body. That is a measured, proportional response.

Instead, for reasons I can only speculate on, you have assumed the worst of the guy who BORROWED $180k to buy a prized possession. He is more likely a guy like you who has a genuine affection for Shelby's and bought the car ignorant of this situation.

For as little you have to go on, you are certainly being heavy handed with your actions. I see this conduct as disrespectful of both the current owner of the registered car AND your boss' friend.

Even if you chose to involve yourself, before doing anything else did you even confer with a local Shelby Authority to inspect the hulk or perhaps met face to face with either owner to determine the facts or history of either car? No, you've skulked around using grainy photos, internet security camera, and brought law enforcement down on two men you have not taken the time to meet yourself.

Others who have posted here are right, if there was attempt at fraud here you've given who ever the perpetrator is ample warning to cover their tracks. You've also ruined the reputation of 67 GT-500 #2395 without conclusive evidence and a presumption of guilt and by extension, anyone with ownership interest in her.


You wrote:

"I want this car so bad, I will probably buy it, even without VIN, hopefully owner has a title or reg."

Perhaps your motivation behind your obsession in attempting "Con the Con" is to devalue both cars, purchase them for a song and then "Restore the integrity of the market" for yourself.

You already told us the owner of the hulk just wants the car off of his property.

You have already begun to bully the owner of the titled car: "Yet. I made contact with his secretary, I assume. Just asked if she knew who owned it and she said she did, but did not give his name. She stated he was looking to get rid of it, so I gave my name and # to have him call me. I'll give them 24 yrs to respond, before I move forward with plan 2."

I suppose you think that would be a JUST conclusion.

This scenario is just as plausible as anything you've submitted here. If it is true, you've used this forum as an unwitting confederate in framing up both of your patsies.

Whatever your motivation, do not paint yourself so noble. I don't see that in anything you've done so far. :

 

Trust me, with all your ranting and lack of discretion, I'm sure SAAC already knows about this car.
Is your real name Sen. Joe McCarthy?

 

So, allow me to understand your response. "I'm rubber, your glue?"

Or is it rather, "It's okay to presecute someone, if they are innocent then they should not be afraid, or object to the implication." followed by, "If you disagree with my methods, you must be among the guilty." I was unaware that Fahrenheit 451 was a buyers guide for Shelby Mustangs.

I support exposing fakes and rebodies. Anyone who knows me would vouche for me on that fact.

What I object to is holding a public inquisition about a person's personal property, particularly when it is an investment collectible, especially when they have no voice in the matter. I bet you would appreciate the same courtesy if the providence of your car was called into question.

"If it aint "original" then it aint ever gonna be, that why they are so prized and value" This statement again begs the question why you would also say ""I want this car so bad, I will probably buy it, even without VIN."

If you are a trial layer, then you must know that innuendo holds as much sway as evidence does to a jury. Your evidence is circumstantial. It does not belong here just the same as you believe that it does not belong in SAAC's hands until you have something CONCLUSIVE.

As for the decoder ring, any SAAC concours judge has been issued one. If you asked who to be directed to, me or anyone else on the board would gladly point you to one.

Welcome, qgraham, ask as much as you want when it comes to learning bout how to properly identify, authenticate, or restore a Shelby.

Just don't hold court here. I don't like walking into jury duty, especially when the accussed hasn't even faced his accuser and there is not presumption of innocence.

 

as determined as you seem to Right an alleged wrong, you have continued to do things "your way". all while appearing to seek out advice on how to proceed properly. SAAC has worked hand in hand with Law Enforcement on many of these ordeals as they care even less for Frauds than you do. who they DO NOT WORK WITH, is Pushy Lawyers who have clients with questionable cars and motives. you are and have been way off base since your arrival here. I am not getting personal nor do I want this thread to go that way. we (the FORUM) as a group have Collective knowledge iin these matters that all the midnight oil you burn in a Law library can never equal. take a Breath, get some sleep and let us know how it all works out in the end. as far as I am concerned, your "Play By Play" is soon to be challenged John Madden and Al whats his name....

 

I assume you were on this guys private property looking at his car. Were you invited on his property ? If he doesn't give you a good deal on it you are going to turn him in ? Nice...Won't tell SAAC though...Nice...

 

Hemingway?? Retard?? I said lets not get personal and I meant it. you are fast on your way to becoming a fading memory around here. if you want to right some more wrongs, join the ACLU and leave us Alone. You do not own a Shelby, and you will never own this one in particular. you are a wannabe who knows very little about Shelbys other than the fact that you probably saw Nic Cage in a Silver one with a Girls name. now you think you spot an opportunity to get your hands on what may or may not have been the remains of one. well, after the Mayor pins a medal on your chest for Civic duty above and beyond the call of Stupidity, your Reward will be to have the car "Overhauled" with the Help of Chip Foose and Carroll Shelby himself. all documented of course on Video for the Speed Channel. the Producers at Speed Channel are amazed with your keen eye for Crime solving and even sharper wit. they create a Reality show for you. I see it now "G. Graham, Shelby Morality Crusader" . they will give you a David Hasselhoff Makeover. your new GT500 will Talk to you as it detects vehicles passing above the speed limit. his left headlight has a secret Camera that snaps a picture of the Offenders tag and forwards the information to the Texas Rangers. Citations will arrive in the mail to the offending Hombre! you will then Drive to the homes of them Southern Televangelists and start making them return money to little old ladies who you help cross the street in your spare time (Of course as we all know you are out there adjusting the angles on your hidden cameras...) of course this little scenario is written for the pleasure of the readers and to hopefully make you aware that making a Fool of yourself is best done on a Dance floor.

 

At this point your credibilty has to come into question too as you may have unseen motives. Now that you have defamed 2395 to all the world without proof. You should post another picture clearly showing that portion of the VIN. For all we know you have some old pictures of a wrecked GT500, possibly a different car and your throwing mud at some poor owner that did something that offended you. I think you should produce that picture before you say anymore. Good pictures of the cut outs where the Ford VINS were may help us believe your story...

 

You don't know that we here all are superheros and have decoder rings? Don't you know about the Green Hornet? As to your statement its a pretty simple situation you are 100% correct. 20+ people think one way and you think another. Hmmmm...... seems simple to me.
Old saying: Better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.

 

I like Mark Twain, he knew how to deal with the stubbornly ignorant...

 

Finally a thread that I have nothing to do with and I am not getting hammered!!!!

 

Give it time Stephen. when GGRaham gets done this investigation, EVERYBODY on this thread will be indicted!

 

I was going to watch a good movie tonight, but this is much more interesting!

 

Final random thoughts and opinions that are mine only:
1)IF you are not a SAAC member, they really might (or should) frown opon this kind of stuff. IE, purporting a redody. Maybe this has already been known to the registrar, who is not required to inform non-members of anything.
2)Maybe, you would have been better off hauling away this hulk as scrap metal. Maybe the former owner is now going to torch this shell into little pieces and put them on the bottom of the preiviously mentioned lake.
3) And, since you say that the land was rented, well, the claim to the property would be the landowners to make, not yours.

 

I'll second that opinion. ~Hemingway

 

there is still plenty of time...........