Ginacue popped over ivory, hopefully much or all fake.

Ginacue article

http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_30183009/famous-cue-maker-charged-helping-smuggle-elephant-ivory

Link for review...

I hope for Ernie's sake it all goes away. This is crazy...

all may be not what it seems............ the cue maker sold materials or cues with ivory and they were worth $75,000 to $85,000. They were going home to Taiwan.........

I believe he knew where the cues were going.............

So........ maybe it's time to rethink putting ivory in cues.......

Kim

Pure BS

How can they prove that Ernie is using illegal ivory. He has been making cues for a good amount of time and has had stock forever. If he can prove that the ivory was legal, what charges can they come with?

This does make everyone (cuemaker and collectors) rethink high-end cues with Ivory.

Wishing Ernie all the best! Although I see this being an expensive endeavor. Hopefully some of his past clients are lawyers and are able to help out.

Stiff sentence for selling ivory ...... A wrist slap for armed robbery, assault, murder. I'm speechless.

A few comments:

A few years back I was in Ernie's shop, having some repair work done, and he showed me some of the anniversary cues he was working on. I brought up the issue of ivory and he told me that his ivory was waaaaaaay pre-ban and from elephants that had died decades and decades earlier. I seem to recall that he knew the country of origin and even the circumstances of the elephant's death. So, given the way he spoke I would be relatively certain he has appropriate documentation.

The newspaper story makes it sound like customs stumbled on these cues in someone's luggage and perhaps the purchaser was scared and said anything and everything to try and save themselves. Proving that Ernie is ever aware of what happens to his cues once they leave his shop will probably be a tall order.

The other things is that given what Ernie gets for his cues, over a long career, I'm guessing he can afford a very good lawyer.

Lou Figueroa

ShootingArts said:

The ivory can be totally legal when you buy it, it is still a crime to export it from a CITE signee with few exceptions. Ginacue isn't accused of using illegal ivory but of aiding and abetting the illegal export of probably legal ivory.

Forty cue butts or so, Taiwanese nationals I believe, the claim is likely to be that Ernie knew the butts were for export. He probably did. Selling cues one at a time for decades that are then hauled overseas it no doubt seemed like no big deal to sell a bunch. Someone else got burned pretty big over four cues they exported themselves but this is the first time I have even heard of aiding and abetting being applied.

Hu

Click to expand...

I don't think much will happen to Ernie

It's like saying every gun shop is selling all their guns for criminal intent. If the guns were purchased legally, what can the gun shop owners do?

Will be really interesting to see how this shakes out. I really hope Ernie is able to get out of this, my guess is with good representation he probably can, but who knows. And who knows how much that will cost him.

Sad to hear of it happening to such a legendary cue maker.

"41 sections of a cue"....so I'm guessing we're talking about 13ish cues with 1 butt, 2 shafts each meaning 39 "sections"...plus a couple extra shafts?

lfigueroa said:

A few comments:

A few years back I was in Ernie's shop, having some repair work done, and he showed me some of the anniversary cues he was working on. I brought up the issue of ivory and he told me that his ivory was waaaaaaay pre-ban and from elephants that had died decades and decades earlier. I seem to recall that he knew the country of origin and even the circumstances of the elephant's death. So, given the way he spoke I would be relatively certain he has appropriate documentation.

The newspaper story makes it sound like customs stumbled on these cues in someone's luggage and perhaps the purchaser was scared and said anything and everything to try and save themselves. Proving that Ernie is ever aware of what happens to his cues once they leave his shop will probably be a tall order.

The other things is that given what Ernie gets for his cues, over a long career, I'm guessing he can afford a very good lawyer.

Lou Figueroa

Click to expand...

I agree with all of this. I believe it's a VERY TALL order they can prove what ANYONE is going to do with their purchased cues once they take possession and while " they " may try to say this I think it's very unrealistic to expect him to know at all whatsoever what will happen with his product once sold. With all that being said, I'm pretty sure he will get off - after much BS! SAD, VERY SAD that this is the best use they can find with out tax dollars. Maybe, just maybe our tax dollars might be better spent trying to keep us, US Human's safe, as opposed to an animal????

lfigueroa said:

Proving that Ernie is ever aware of what happens to his cues once they leave his shop will probably be a tall order.

Click to expand...

Possibly. On the other hand, maybe the buyer emailed Ernie and specifically mentioned that he was going to be coming to town from Taiwan and wanted some cues to take back with him. That is complete speculation, of course, but until we see how this plays out we have no idea whether the case is weak or strong.

GideonF said:

Possibly. On the other hand, maybe the buyer emailed Ernie and specifically mentioned that he was going to be coming to town from Taiwan and wanted some cues to take back with him. That is complete speculation, of course, but until we see how this plays out we have no idea whether the case is weak or strong.

Click to expand...

And perhaps Ernie told said buyer, "Shipping them out of the country is illegal."

Once they leave his shop they are the property of the guy who paid. Put them in a display case, play pool with them, resell them, set them on fire. He has zero control.

Lou Figueroa

There's also a California ban on selling ivory to anyone. We can play this anyway we want. It isn't about being able to afford a good lawyer. It sucks and I hope him the best through what will certainly be a trying time.

What's next

This has been a much discussed topic on this forum for quite a while now. Matt has gone over the details and we've had posts with the actual statute or law recited.

I feel terrible for Ernie; and wish him the very best of luck with this nightmare.

I've read the posts and it seems as though most, (like at least 95 percent) of the cues with ivory would fall under the weight and other exemptions.

So the average guy may have a cue with ivory butt cap and/or joint and/or ferrule.

Now he can't sell it to someone in another state, especially the one listed like NY and CA.

So, if I ship one of my cues with very minimal ivory, buttcap and joint, out of NY I read it as thou I am breaking the law; even if I just carry the cue on a plane to Vegas or anywhere out of NY.

But, I don't see how the cue builder could be liable at all.

Would a cue owner/seller or purchaser who travels, send or recives such a cue (minimal ivory) interstate be criminally liable?

I know its' a mess, but most of these cues are many years old; certainly before the passage of this act.

This will be a hot topic and I know we all wish Ernie the best.

Dave


link with some info https://www.fws.gov/international/travel-and-trade/ivory-ban-questions-and-answers.html


Under the "de-minimis" exception, (I) seems like the hardest to prove. That it came into US before 1990.

The 50 percent and value component would likely be self evident.

I guess we need to start contact cue builders and get letters from them or some documentation.

Anyone want an old piano (made in 1977)?

If the goal is to stop penalize poachers and illegal traffickers, then this is an example of an ineffective law.

Ernie will handle this. What it's going to do is give every other cue maker a good scare. If they use ivory, they need to make sure they are legally covered with certificates of origin etc. My guess is many will just say no to ivory orders, since the laws are so difficult.

This is a game changer.

I've warned AZers about this in nearly every "Ivory Ban" thread. The government doesn't care if you're innocent or guilty. They just want the big headline that tells the public "we're doing our job."

Ernie will spend $50,000 in lawyer's fees and a good portion of the rest of his days fighting to clear his name. The prosecutors know he'll win, but they also know there won't be any headline that says "Ginacue found innocent" or "Charges dropped against Ginacue."

Or, he could reach a settlement with the government. Publicly confess to something you didn't do. Turn over all your ivory to the government (even though it's legal pre-ban ivory) and loudly promise to never use ivory again. Welcome to North Korea.

It would be great if Mike Garland (Quality Cues) would chime in, as he is an Attorney.

This sounds like a Witch Hunt to me. They are looking to "make an example" of someone.

This whole ivory thing truthfully does not effect me one way or the other. While I have nothing against the use of ivory in a cue I've never really been a big fan either - but not for the reasons one might suspect. Back in the day when I bought and sold a lot of cues, I'd occasionally run across a cue with ivory ferrules , joints, or but caps but not really any " monster " cues heavy in ivory. As far as the hit, I honestly can't say I've ever thought the " hit " was any better or different. As far as the joints, regardless of what material is used I've ALWAYS preferred a wood to wood joint hands down. The button cap I could've cared less. When it comes to the ferrule, as I said I honestly couldn't tell the difference but what I did care about is I was always scared to death I was gonna " Crack or split " the ivory ferrules. For me, the only upside of having ivory in a cue was for the increased value or desire ability of the cue. Rarely sell any cues anymore and haven't worried about flipping them in well over a decade if not more.

So with all of this said why even worry about posting then? Good question. For me it comes down to freedom of choice, or the lack of. It's just another example for me of our government having totally screwed priorities. Without even thinking about it I can name at least 100 things that the money being used to investigate / enforce these stupid ivory laws where that money would be MUCH BETTER SPENT! How but using it for security purposes? I mean whats it been a few months since all those people where slaughtered right there in Cali? Roads, bridges ( I think the number is something like 75% of all bridges are considered structurally unsafe ?). How about using that money to help some of the countless homeless vets? Helping to feed the countless people that have no idear where their next meal is coming from ? I could go on and on, Imo the priorities just seem F'd to me. Not even to mention, as I did earlier, I find it repulsive that a small group of folks think it's OK to dictate to all the rest of us what we can and can't do, what we can and can't have etc......

So my question is this : I already think I know the answer but is there anything that we ( the little folks ) can actually do about this? What a petition ? Don't see that doing ANYTHING !!!!! A go fund me for Earnie or any other cue makers caught up in this ? Don't see that doing much, not to mention that will not help the root problem. Ok, how about calling / writing our local representatives? When was the last time that's had any effect whatsoever? Unless of course you are one of there biggest donors? Anyone have any idears? Would love to hear!

I just say it, this suckered - REALLY SUCKS!!! A man just trying to make an honest living and now he faces years of time in prison, not to mention the HUGE legal bills he will undoubtedly rack up trying to defend himself. Conversely, you can be on the corner in the hood selling Crack or dope and get busted and what get like 90 days of free room and board courtesy of the tax payers ( tax payers = people with actual jobs WORKING ! ) Sorry for the rant but when I hear stuff like this happening to good honest people it really really gets to me!!!!

Pre ban, Legal, 1000 year old, etc..it don't matter. In California as of the beginning of July you can't sell pretty much anything with ivory in it period. You can't ship anything with ivory out of nor into California either...