German Tarantula Breeder, Sven Koppler, sentenced for smuggling tarantulas today

[Steve Nunn]

Sven id advise you not to answer this contradicting person's who belive's everyone ow's him an answer and not his effectionate friend.

Of course you would advise him to do that

What should Rick "prove" as you put it?? The reality is his deposition was heard in a court of law (that's right, real evidence, not opinions like posted here), and the reality is Sven's defence team had every right to cross the depostion (which was a response to questrions posed by the prosecution). Rick cannot lie about it in court, if he did, it would be purgery at worst, and at best, Sven's team could have questioned it. The reality (in court), is that he did not question a single statment in Rick's deposition.

And if that doesn't make you wonder why not, then <edit>, plain and simple.

---------- Post added at 11:57 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:52 PM ----------

As a matter of fact, I did have an experience with the media in which they (a newspsper and a TV station) misidentified me as a criminal. And from that experience I can guarantee you that media outlets do worry about the repurcussions of misquoting or misrepresenting people. My case was settled without a lawsuit

My guess (only a guess) is that the newspaper asked you if they could print an apology in the paper, which is usually done in small print and never as large as the original article). I may be wrong, but I've experienced similar issues with newspapers, and everytime, that is exactly how they got around being sued.

I would still like to hear why Sven's defence team did not question the deposition. Rememeber, Sven posted here and expressed an opinion about Rick, so is now part of this conversation. He chose to question Rick's deposition here, by using the media cut and pastes. So, all I care to know are facts, not conjecture and heresay, blah, blah, blah... So, Sven, why didn't you question the deposition in court if you feel it was incorrect??? And I'll bet you I get no answer to this question, even though it has been heard in court and Sven has been found guilty. Hell, after all this, I still don't have an answer to one question!!

Steve

 

[xhexdx]

No. They were given amnesty so Sven could be taken out of the supply chain.

I assume you can supply proof to back this claim?

 

[PhobeToPhile]

Arachnology is, put very, very simply, the study of arachnids. Yes, there are arachnologists. These are people who devote their career to the studying of arachnids. If you actually knew what you were doing, you wouldn't even have to ask this, because the word itself is self explanatory! In any case, the issue not "is it dangerous". The question is "were regulations followed".

And for another, could you prove to us you ARE "the" Sven? It is incredibly easy to claim to be someone else over the internet, due to the anonymity it provides.

 

[campj]

So Rick payed his Los Angeles holiday himself? Wow!

So are you implying that if you were called as an expert witness and had to fly across the country (or world, I'm not sure where Rick flew in from), that you would do it on your own dime? What about the days of work you miss? Would you write it off as a favor? Come on, whoever bought the plane ticket, paid for the hotel, etc. (I'm guessing the prosecution paid for all this) knows that they would never get an expert witness on the stand (and possibly lose the case) unless they forked over some cash to make it happen.

What were the reasons for doing the expertises how dangerous it is to send tarantula babies in the mail including the new bacteria theory?

You don't get it that these quotes are 100% correct from the context?

If a lawyer asked the Rick a question, he had to answer it. The prosecution obviously knew what questions to ask in order to make what you did seem as wrong as possible... that's their job! If your lawyer decided to ask him whether or not any of the cross examination from the prosecution has anything to do with transporting captive bred animals (flesh eating bacteria for example), it may have helped your case a little.

 

[Kathy]

Only one question...how is Sven posting if he is jail?

 

[JC50]

The article stated he is free on bond.

 

[PhobeToPhile]

Arachnology is, put very, very simply, the study of arachnids. Yes, there are arachnologists. These are people who devote their career to the studying of arachnids. If you actually knew what you were doing, you wouldn't even have to ask this, because the word itself is

OK, thanks for the lesson. I still think that this is not a profession at all since you can't studdy this at university or find in the dictonary at all...right?

Arachnology
In Merriam-Webster no less.

Graduate Degrees in Arachnology

What was that about not being able to study it? Protip: Search before you claim.

Edit: Odd. I could see his post when you had posted Smitty, but now I can't. He had a follow up post too (quoted in my post).

 

[MrDeranged]

>If it's not from them, from Sven or from a dealer who comes forward and >admits to being one of the "CITES 9" then I don't want to hear it or see it in >this thread or any other thread on the forums.

Myself and a few others just noticed that Sven posted the name and then - "poof". His post was deleted. With the admin note above, I thought that would be allowed by Sven to do. ?

Todd, if you're going to quote me, please do it the right way.

For a single post:

or if you're going to be quoting multiple posts:

.

this is how my quote should have looked:

If it's not from them, from Sven or from a dealer who comes forward and admits to being one of the "CITES 9" then I don't want to hear it or see it in this thread or any other thread on the forums.

Where did Sven's post go? It was #123 and now it's gone.

I cannot tell either of you anything other than the fact that it was not deleted by myself, Debby or any of the staff here.

Regards,
Scott

 

[Sven]

Graduate Degrees in Arachnology

Oh wow...Did not know that there is a technical college for that, stupid me...

 

[Steve Nunn]

So are you implying that if you were called as an expert witness and had to fly across the country (or world, I'm not sure where Rick flew in from), that you would do it on your own dime? What about the days of work you miss? Would you write it off as a favor?

You're right, the fact is, the prosecution paid for the air ticket, and that was it. Again, Rick was not paid to be there, he lost pay due to time off work!! That's the irony, how people can twist words to suit their selfish needs. For Sven to call it a holiday is hilarious. All Rick did was answer the prosectutions questions in a deposition (redundant). Rick would have been asked about potential dangers of tarantulas in general, he would need to have provided references for each case he discussed. All the above are facts.

How this morphs into Rick testifying against Sven as anything other than a prosecutions expert witness, are simply baseless and hollow allegations.

Put it this way, what if the charge happened in the UK, than there would be an expert witness who would have to answer the same questions, they MUST disclose what they know the potential dangers involving tarantulas are, if they fail to do that, they commit purgery. Rick used all expert references in relation to the points he discussed about the dangers he was aware of, all with referencing. Why do you all think Sven is evading the question I ask?? Because he knew (well, his lawyers did) that Rick's deposition could not be argued if they did not have equal references from experts and peer reviewed publications to dispute any of Rick's deposition.

That's why the real question keeps being avoided. Just some food for thought. Sven's claims that Rick took a free "holiday", are just Sven being pissy about Ricks involvement. What Sven does not get, or is failing to disclose, is that Rick's testimony was objective to the point of immaculate referencing, to which the defense could not (and did not!) argue, not ONE POINT!!!!

So, Sven, fluff it up as much as you like, but when the facts boil down to it, you got busted, your pissy about Rick being involved, and you try to make out like he was out to harm you. Nice story, but total fluff (as usual from someone who got busted for smuggling and tries their best to look good after the event, and pleading guilty!). We've seen it before, same thing happened with Lee in England. Hobby suck ups supporting those they buy from without considering real facts, just conjecture on a hobby forum of all places (yeah, ignore the court decision, and anything else that actually happened in court, you'll get the real story right here by those who were notably absent form the case, or who were actually there, are posting here in this thread, and avoiding questions directly related to the case).

Face facts, you got busted avoiding paperwork on protected species, and you pleaded guilty without questioning (even once) the expert testimony in court 9and yet you had every right to).

Instead, you go for the next best option and that's trying to confuse hobbyists with attacks on objective witnesses within hobby forum (and outside of peer review), nice job. But then that might be your speciality.

Steve

P.S. For your information, Rick is a good friend and a research colleague in our papers on the revision of Selenocosmiinae. You know this, there's nothing strange about it. I respect the guy and to see him trashed here by the likes of you disgusts me. So I speak up as one who's sick of the trashing. End of story.

 

[xhexdx]

Steve,

Curious on your thoughts about this. No underlying motive, just plain curiosity from me to you:

What do venom and bacteria have to do with smuggling? How does Mr. West's testimony regarding the aforementioned relate to the smuggling charges against Sven?

 

[Steve Nunn]

Steve,What do venom and bacteria have to do with smuggling? How does Mr. West's testimony regarding the aforementioned relate to the smuggling charges against Sven?

Hi,
Neither Rick nor I could answer that. Only the prosecution can answer why they would want to know the potential dangers of tarantulas in general. I could assume it might be due to potential risk to the public, if they were exposed??? But that is only a guess, I cannot be certain why prosecution would want those details. Perhaps Sven knows why they wanted that information. All I do know is Rick is purging himself if he hides information from prosecution. I also know he was predicting the typical hobby backlash. I also know he's annoyed at how his remarks were used out of context in the newspapers.

I think some of the people in this thread have missinterpreted Rick's actual role in the case. He has no decision on what the prosecution choose to ask, he is only an objective expert witness, open to questioning by defence council, and is only bound to answer the questions posed to him from either side. It just so happens that defence did not choose to cross his deposition.

Steve

 

[KenTheBugGuy]

Steve,

Curious on your thoughts about this. No underlying motive, just plain curiosity from me to you:

What do venom and bacteria have to do with smuggling? How does Mr. West's testimony regarding the aforementioned relate to the smuggling charges against Sven?

Truthfully those were my thoughts too...but I bet the prosecution was making them seem dangerous in some way as it just helps to give a bad perception of what happened. If you think something someone was bringing in was dangerous you are more likely to believe they should definately have the permits to do it.

Not much to do with the case in my opinion but thats how it all works unfortunately. Wish everyone could be fully subjective but then we would all be robots....

 

[PhobeToPhile]

Truthfully those were my thoughts too...but I bet the prosecution was making them seem dangerous in some way as it just helps to give a bad perception of what happened. If you think something someone was bringing in was dangerous you are more likely to believe they should definately have the permits to do it.

This, and I'd wager they were also probably trying to take advantage of the general fear of spiders in the general public. It's not exactly hard to make people more afraid of something they already feared. And the more graphically they can do it, the better.

 

[xhexdx]

Hi,
Neither Rick nor I could answer that. Only the prosecution can answer why they would want to know the potential dangers of tarantulas in general. I could assume it might be due to potential risk to the public, if they were exposed??? But that is only a guess, I cannot be certain why prosecution would want those details. Perhaps Sven knows why they wanted that information. All I do know is Rick is purging himself if he hides information from prosecution. I also know he was predicting the typical hobby backlash. I also know he's annoyed at how his remarks were used out of context in the newspapers.

I think some of the people in this thread have missinterpreted Rick's actual role in the case. He has no decision on what the prosecution choose to ask, he is only an objective expert witness, open to questioning by defence council, and is only bound to answer the questions posed to him from either side. It just so happens that defence did not choose to cross his deposition.

Steve

Makes sense, thanks for the quick response.

Truthfully those were my thoughts too...but I bet the prosecution was making them seem dangerous in some way as it just helps to give a bad perception of what happened. If you think something someone was bringing in was dangerous you are more likely to believe they should definately have the permits to do it.

Not much to do with the case in my opinion but thats how it all works unfortunately. Wish everyone could be fully subjective but then we would all be robots....

This, and I'd wager they were also probably trying to take advantage of the general fear of spiders in the general public. It's not exactly hard to make people more afraid of something they already feared. And the more graphically they can do it, the better.

Agreed.

--Joe

 

[Steve Nunn]

Truthfully those were my thoughts too...but I bet the prosecution was making them seem dangerous in some way as it just helps to give a bad perception of what happened. If you think something someone was bringing in was dangerous you are more likely to believe they should definately have the permits to do it.

Ken, I thought about that too. One could guess the reasons you mentioned, and it seems logical for a prosecution team to make things look as bad as they can, so they know exactly what to ask whom I can't presume to know why, and I don't think Rick could either. He's not part of that process in court. He is only forced to answer questions posed to the best of his knowledge and ability, and further, as an expert support his claims with references.

Maybe Sven's team should have called Rick as a witness and posed different questions to Rick, to which he would still be bound to explain to the best of his ability, or maybe at least crossed him, if they felt his testimony was weak. They chose not to, which says a lot about the case and Rick's involvement. I don't think it's his fault he got his references and testimony right. But you could certainly blame the prosecution for the questions Rick was asked to provide information on. It's their case, and Rick was not involved other than the above testimony.

Steve

 

[Mojo Jojo]

My guess is an emotional appeal. If I was a prosecutor, I'd want to bring in as much as the judge would allow that may not directly have anything to do with the offense but that could paint the person that I was prosecuting in a negative light.

 

[Anastasia]

Truthfully those were my thoughts too...but I bet the prosecution was making them seem dangerous in some way as it just helps to give a bad perception of what happened. If you think something someone was bringing in was dangerous you are more likely to believe they should definately have the permits to do it.

Not much to do with the case in my opinion but thats how it all works unfortunately. Wish everyone could be fully subjective but then we would all be robots....

is well is mine, also in same note wore all tarantulas that came from Sven was Captive stock?

 

[Ecstasy]

My general advice to people would be to stay out of this if it doesn't involve you. I work for the state and I can tell you from personal experience that it's best to stay out of things that involve legal actions because it may put you in a place where you don't want to be.

Sven and whoever else was involved with all the stuff, I hope all of you get things worked out and get off with as little as possible regarding legal actions. I hope everybody else is wise to stay out of this if it doesn't regard them.

 

[xenesthis]

curious

I totally understand the prosecution trying to design questions for Rick, but just out of curiosity for my own education on two topics as reported by the media, does somebody have a link to the study concluding that tarantulas possess flesh-eating bacteria so badly that they pose a danger to humans more so that what is on the bottom of my shoe? Also, a link to the study concluding that tarantulas are dangerous to humans? Everything out there says they are considered my many researchers to me medically insignificant.

I'd like to see these studies. Thank you.