Brad,
I think you did more than just state some facts in your starter post.
If, and I reiterate if, the two lugers shown in the Gibson book are indeed the same luger; there is no evidence of any one individual's participation in this alledged "boosting" and "forgery".
All that a logical mind can surmise from the two photos is that a Mr. Harold Skinner owned the gun once and had it photographed for Gibson's book. At some later date, Mr. Shattuck was the gun's owner and also had it photographed for the Gibson book as well.
There is no evidence in your post that either owner of this gun did anything but own this luger at some point in time, at differening times.
If you cannot produce any facts in evidence that Mr. Shattuck was personally involved in this alledged boosting/forgery activity; then I personally feel you might owe Mr. Shattuck an apology.
You also stated a little more than "facts" with your closing, poorly veiled, inuendo; that the that the guy with the boosted/faked 1941 is now the same seller of the controversial .45 cal luger carbine. A true "statement of fact" would not have ended with your words of "imagine that"...
I would also be curious to know about those conversations you had with those involved when you state you have "had conversations" with the parties (which I assume to mean you have spoken with both Mr. Gibson and Mr. Shattuck, and possibly Mr. Skinner before his passing).
In those conversations, did you you just make social "small talk" or did you ask real questions about the luger(s) in question ?
I too have had some conversations with some of these guys. A bunch of us here on the Forum have...
But have you asked Mr. Shattuck questions such as :
1. Hey Ralph, did you know you owned an HK luger in 1978 (?) that might have been boosted before you bought it ?
2. Hey Ralph; were you the person that was responsible for creating this "forgery" ?
3. Hey Ralph, did you buy that luger from Mr. Skinner or did it go through other hands/owners first ?
Or have you asked Mr. Gibson such questions as :
4. Hey Randall, what is the the real "scoup" behind the two guns in your book that sure look like the same gun with two different chamber dates and varying condition ?
5. Hey Randall, do you know who was responsible for the "forgery" that appeared in your book on pages 175 and 179 ?
Brad, having conversations with parties is one thing. Asking such pertinent, tough questions is another matter.
If you did receive replies to these tough questions, why would you not want to post that info. It cannot be heresay if you were the direct recepient of such answers, first hand.
If you have such replies, why not state those facts ? <img src="graemlins/yltype.gif" border="0" alt="[typing]" />