R.L. “Larry†Wilson Acquitted In Louisville Arms Deal
Five years ago, R.L. “Larry†Wilson was regarded as one of the foremost experts in the world on antique firearms. More specifically, Wilson was regarded as being “the†expert on Colt firearms. After all, Wilson had literally written the book on Colt firearms, having penned or co-authored the definitive works on that historic American firearm from its beginning until 2003.

Four years ago, Wilson fell from his lofty perch, landing in a California prison, disgraced and sentenced for having committed fraud against his trusting- and generally filthy rich- clients in a long string of firearms deals.

At that point, the firearms industry was strangely silent on the whole Wilson matter. Until The Outdoor Wire reported on the case, it was widely ignored in the shooting media. At that point, it became apparent that the antique firearms industry (and it is a big-money business) didn’t really want one of their most recognized and flamboyant experts disgraced. After all, if a “Wilson letter†didn’t mean your firearm was authentic, that might put your entire collection at question. In other words, the antique and auction houses that appeared to have been bilked by Wilson simply hoped the entire matter would just go away.

So, Wilson went away – to a federal correction facility. After all, he’d joked to friends, he was tired and needed a rest anyway.

For many, however, Wilson’s biggest test wasn’t going to be getting along in prison, it was going to await him after his release. After all, Wilson and two accomplices had reportedly bilked Louisville, Kentucky’s Owsley Brown Frazier and his firearms museum by over-inflating the values of firearms Frazier purchased for the museum. The accomplices, Michael Salisbury and his wife Karen Cruse Salisbury weren’t just a couple of con artists, either. Salisbury was the curator of Frazier’s museum. Operating in tandem with Wilson, charges against the trio claimed, they used Wilson letters of authenticity and inflated purchases based on Wilson’s valuations to bilk Frazier out of money they then split.

The smart money in the firearms industry said, off the record, of course, that Wilson was facing a world of angry ego, lawyers and “old money†looking for his hide when he was released.

Smart money isn’t always right.

Yesterday, following six weeks of trial and eleven hours of deliberation, a U.S. District Court Jury in Louisville acquitted the trio of the charge of conspiring to cheat Frazier.

Further, the nine women and three men of the jury also found them innocent of having laundered money by having allegedly hidden secret kickbacks and commissions from Wilson in Cruse Salisbury’s bank account.

Michael Salisbury, however, was found guilty of two charges of failing to file taxes. He will be sentenced for those misdemeanor charges on April 28, 2008.

For Wilson, the not guilty charge meant he wasn’t looking at more jail time for aiding and abetting a false tax return by overvaluing firearms that Frazier donated to the museum. It also means the valuations he put on guns ostensibly from General George Armstrong Custer and J. Edgar Hoover and others were, essentially, found to be either accurate, or so difficult to disprove as to have essentially proven nothing in the trial. It also means Frazier is out the $1. 75 million alleged to have been taken in markups on those weapons.

In the course of the testimony, it was readily apparent that the buy-low/sell-high model was no different in antiquities than any other business. A key piece of testimony, according to jurors, was the admission that when Frazier owned an antique store, he routinely tried to sell furniture for “at least twice†what he paid for it. He also was reported to have told Salisbury to “take care of yourself†and that he expected he was charging commissions.

The verdicts end the criminal case against the Salisburys and Wilson, although Salisbury still faces a federal court suit alleging that he charged marked-up prices on approximately 70 weapons purchased for a total of more than $1 million.

Wilson, however, walks away from the criminal proceedings exactly as he had predicted far in advance of the trial – including conversations with The Outdoor Wire’s Jim Shepherd from his California prison. At the trial, Wilson had contended, it would become “readily apparent†that he had done nothing wrong in regards to the Frazier matter. In fact, he predicted, it would become apparent that despite the “mistake†that had landed him in the California slammer, he would eventually come out of all this with his reputation as a firearms expert intact.

It appears Wilson’s methods may find themselves still in question in the secretive world of antique firearms, but his letters – even those written just before his little “vacation†– will remain one of the gold standards for firearms evaluations.

Again, the operative word remains “appears†– but we’ll keep you posted.

--Jim Shepherd

Yeah, his words as good as gold, if you give him enough gold. Pah, he's a crook.

The antique business has always been that way , sell for as high a price as you can. Besides the " value " of an item is what people are willing to pay, not necessarily what you want to sell it for.How can you define what a fair markup is ?

I have a friend who works at a local automobile dealership. He hates selling new rigs, but loves the used ones. He tells me that a customer can see a thousand new ______________________(fill in the blank) at any dealership, but that used one is now a "one of a kind" and you can set your own price on it. It's the same way with antiques, especially if there is some historical connection.

Caveat Emptor...

Rich
DRSS
Knowledge not shared is knowledge lost...

Ya think Antiques Roadshow will take him back?

I have always enjoyed Larry Wilson's books and enjoyed the film "In the Blood," which he produced and in which he appeared.

I am sorry to see that he has fallen on bad times, although he seems to have convinced a jury that the charges in this case were baseless. I read that he declared bankruptcy a few years ago after his conviction for fraud in California.

Does anyone know what that case was about?

Having had some peripheral involvement in the art/collectible, antiques, and (God forbid) "show horse" world, I am not convinced that there is much difference between being a good appraiser and what someone else would call "fraud".

Calling a modern copy of an 1873 Colt an antique would be fraud.

Telling someone that their genuine 1873 Colt is worth $100K because of it's historic signicance is opinion (even if the guy selling it purchased it for $1K)

The horse business is even worse (and don't get me started because the way I see it my wife is riding what should be my double rifle).

I think I'll keep my investments in stocks and bonds, and consider my firearms my tools.

Garrett

R.L. Wilson and I used to be in the same SCI Chapter.

This was the crime he was convicted of (he plead guilty): Wire Fraud

Here is the FBI's announcement of his latest indictment, of which he was acquitted: More fraud

As a felon, he can no longer own or possess firearms, so I guess he's going to have to find a new area of expertise.

George

In the collectables market, one should always do his/her own research and due diligence and not rely on any one person's opinions. Otherwise, beware.

Thanks for those links, George. It sure looks as though he was hard up for cash, stole some and got nailed for it.

The bankruptcy is further evidence of his money problems.

What a shame.

I do not know Mr. Wilson, though I have some of his books.

If marking stuff up is a crime, then every business which manages to keep the doors open must be a criminal enterprise.

My niece has a .40-caliber (.40-65 if I recall correctly) 1886 Winchester, which was presented to her great grandfather by Buffalo Bill Cody, when her great grand-dad was Sheriff in Carson City Nevada. She has contemporary newspaper pictures of the presentation AND her great grand-pop's badge (Star). The rifle has been in the family ever since the presentation, and is still in NRA VG or better condition.

I've told her to NEVER sell that gun for less money than she can buy a house with, free and clear. Does that make me a crook too?

Seems to me the buyer has even more responsibility for deciding what something is worth to him than does the seller.

quote:

Alberta Canuck: Seems to me the buyer has even more responsibility for deciding what something is worth to him than does the seller.

Exactly.

Teddy R. summed it up best .

Gentleman the only interesting gun is an accurate gun the rest are just old wood an Iron .

Buyer beware what ever one purchases , it's only as valuable as one is willing to pay for it !.

Case in point "Cisco Kid's " Duncan's , A pair of Colt 38/40 complete with silver bolstered Holster Rig. I purchased them from an individual that lived in a trailer park !.

About two miles from the family's original ranch house !, Rancho Zorro go figure that .

The point is what ever they're worth to you is what you should pay and not one red cent more .

Shoot Straight Know Your Target . ...

Apparently you guys don't read, Wilson plead GUILTY to stealing $375,000 from a client. That ain't exactly in the same class as over valuing a gun for tax purposes. I understand there are others that he misappropriated money from as well. They just chose not to prosecute.

I repeat, he's a crook, which has NOTHING to do with honorable business practices. He should have done more time IMO. Screw him.

quote:

My niece has a .40-caliber (.40-65 if I recall correctly) 1886 Winchester, which was presented to her great grandfather by Buffalo Bill Cody, when her great grand-dad was Sheriff in Carson City Nevada. She has contemporary newspaper pictures of the presentation AND her great grand-pop's badge (Star). The rifle has been in the family ever since the presentation, and is still in NRA VG or better condition.

I've told her to NEVER sell that gun for less money than she can buy a house with, free and clear. Does that make me a crook too?

No, and it sure doesn't make you an appraiser either.

OTOH, if you sold her a gun for a house price that you told her was worth the value of a house when, in fact, it was worth much less, then you'd be doing what Wilson and Salisbury did.

Ego, Greed (same thing),

Once we get kicked hard in the cojones by life a time or three we (hopefully) learn to give up on some of it.

Don't try to steal old money; they have hung onto it through multiple generations and don't take kindly to "losing" any of it.

LD

I don't know him, maybe he is a crook. His books however are exquisite.

quote:

Originally posted by fla3006:
I don't know him, maybe he is a crook.

There is no 'maybe' about it. It is an incontrovertible fact that he is a convicted felon. He pleaded guilty to stealing $375,000 from a client.

George

Own any of his books George?

Yes, I do, 'Steel Canvas'.

George

One of several outstanding and definitive works on fine and rare firearms, not diminished by his recent problems IMO, the point I wish to make.

quote:

Originally posted by tom ga hunter:
... Louisville, Kentucky’s Owsley Brown Frazier and his firearms museum ...

If any of you come to Louisville in May for the NRA Convention, this would be a place "you would think" that you would want to visit.

It is primarily a three story building filled with ancient old "Knight's of the Round Table" era junk that the British were getting rid of. They even waste money on actors walking around in clothes and Armor from back then as if that is something special. There are indeed a few historic firearms I'd like to see in there, but I've never been inside. There on the Entrance is a sign which indicates that even if you can legally Carry Concealed, they have determined "you" are not welcome with your "firearm" - in a Firearm's Museum. Pitiful!

quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordo:
[QUOTE]My niece has a .40-caliber (.40-65 if I recall correctly) 1886 Winchester, which was presented to her great grandfather by Buffalo Bill Cody, when her great grand-dad was Sheriff in Carson City Nevada. She has contemporary newspaper pictures of the presentation AND her great grand-pop's badge (Star). The rifle has been in the family ever since the presentation, and is still in NRA VG or better condition.

I've told her to NEVER sell that gun for less money than she can buy a house with, free and clear. Does that make me a crook too?

quote:

No, and it sure doesn't make you an appraiser either..

Well, actually, it did. She asked me to give her my opinion of what she should sell it for, if she decided to ever sell it, and that was what she got. Of course, I took into account that she had no need for money and didn't need to sell it in a hurry, or at all. I also took into account the grief the sale would cause her with the rest of the family. Lastly, I took into account that the gun, the presentor, and the recipient are all unique, in the true meaning of the word...that is, there is only ONE of each. (Sure, there are plenty of other 1886 Winchesters, but NO other Winchester presented by and to the folks mentioned. There WAS a Colt presented by Cody to her breat-grand-dad at the same time, which she has too....)

Now, it may not be worth that to you, or anyone else reading this, but then you are not the potential market for that rifle.

quote:

OTOH, if you sold her a gun for a house price that you told her was worth the value of a house when, in fact, it was worth much less, then you'd be doing what Wilson and Salisbury did.

And who amonst us can say absolutely what that gun is worth? I'd say it depends on who is buying it and for what purpose.


At any rate, I was not questioning the fact that Wilson is a convicted felon, who plead guilty. I was disagreeing with the statements a few made which inferred that because he had a very high mark-up, that made him automatically a crook.

The Winchester handed down to my niece probably had a retail value of less than $100 when it was given to her grandfather. So any 4, 5, or 6 figure sum she might elect to sell it for would include considerable mark-up.

And disagreement over appraised values or selling prices is seldom more than "capitalism in action". I.E., buy low, sell high...IF you can find a buyer at the price you wish to sell for. No one is forced to buy. (That's why God invented "haggling".)

If they want absolute protection they need to put in the work to gain the knowledge to make their own estimates of value. Failure of buyers to do that does not make the seller a crook per se. Other acts may make him/her a crook, but marking up an item they have the opportunity to sell does not.


Another perfect example is with horses. Our family buys, sells, and trains Grand Prix Jumpers. One horse we currently have cost us under $100,000. Our family trained it for several years. It is now good enough that in August alone of '07 it won over $200,000 in competition in Canada. We have been offered approximately 7-figures for it. We turned the offer down, because we hope to get half again as much for it, and have some current nibbles at that higher price.

So, what is our mark-up? Is it immoral? Is it criminal? What price do you put on a horse which has currently qualified to be a National Team horse for the upcoming Pan American Games?

While it is true that fraud makes a person a crook, simple mark-up, regardless of amount, usually does not.