For more details, see the blog posts listed at the bottom of this page.
FYI
Can You Squeeze Blood From A Stone?
Can Arizona Squeeze Money From a Consignment Vampire?
What About His Partner, Justin Burns?
Say what you want, Michael S. Burns (Birthdate: September 11, 1952) apparently managed to rip off a multitude of people for at least $669,000 dollars in real property over more than two years. All by himself. The judgments that comprise this total are listed below.
Not including the Justice Court judgments listed.... way down below. But what's another piddling $12,000, give or take? (Since it wasn't, apparently given, I guess the emphasis should be on the "take.")
Somehow, Michael S. Burns arranged to move thousands and thousands of pounds of stuff- antiques, paintings, furniture, you name it - into and out of his place of business. All by himself.
Just because he was approximately 60 years old and a chain smoker, doesn't mean he wasn't up to a task worthy of Hercules. Haven't you heard? Sixty is the new 40!
Michael S. Burns made that stuff disappear off his books. Then it vanished into a black hole from whence nothing ever returns, not even light. All by himself.
At least, that's what one gathers from the AG's civil suit against Michael S. Burns. After all, Michael S. Burns is the only individual referenced in the court filing, despite the partnership of his son, Justin.
Michael S. Burns has also managed to evade criminal charges from the Attorney General's Office... All by himself. Because, really, nothing was actually stolen. He served as his own attorney. (Tell me this isn't a demonically gifted guy.)
In the course of doing business, all those pieces of furniture, those antiques, collectibles, paintings, sculpture... what have you, were simply lost. It's awfully difficult to keep track of inventory, you know. So a certain amount of human error just has to be accepted. It's inevitable.
That must be the working theory, don't you think?
So Michael S. Burns won't serve time in a prison. Paradoxically, there are undoubtedly plenty of thieves doing hard time in Arizona for making items of far, far less value disappear. And probably just as many who just tried to make them disappear... and failed.
True, Michael S. Burns is, according to the Superior and Justice Court systems, liable for about $700,000 in judgments. (See below) But can you imagine someone as clever as this man actually paying those judgments? In this lifetime, I mean?
Beware of bad karma, I say. It seems like just a year ago that Mike met with me, promised to pay up and told me that he wanted to clean up his karma because he had been diagnosed with cancer. Wait. It was a year ago: January and February of 2014.
It's also true that someone, apparently, tried to roast Michael S. Burns alive by setting his rental unit and car on fire. But it seems he escaped unharmed, thank goodness.
The vehicle he drove, the one not in his name, may have been ruined, according to various reports. But he was, presumably, insured. Unlike me or many of his other victims.
According to a private investigator who looked into the matter long before the Attorney General did, Michael S. Burns owned no assets in his own name. See: Comprehensive Asset Report: Mike Burns, Camelback Consign & Design
I've said it before, I'll say it again. Michael S. Burns is impressive. Not a very nice man. But durned if Mr. Consignment Vampire hasn't suckered and outsmarted a whole bunch of smart people and the Arizona "justice" system... such as it is.
Of course, I would be delighted to be proved wrong. Grateful, in fact. If you can demonstrate that I am wrong about all this, my retraction will appear promptly.
PS
Can someone please explain why the Attorney General failed to list Justin Burns, explicitly, as a defendant? Given that he is a member of the Camelback Consign & Design LLC and worked there for some time prior to his election, wouldn't you think he ought to bear some responsibility in the matter?
I do.
Who said, "Judge not lest you be judged"? Apparently this wouldn't apply in Mike's case. Or perhaps the following list of judgments against him and Camelback Consign & Design is his reckoning for being judgmental, himself. It is a long list.
Thank goodness for the BBB! Now there's consumer protection you can count on. The AG filed a lawsuit against Camelback Consign & Design in August of 2014. But the BBB still knows of no significant government actions.... (Screen capture made on 3/1/15)
Isn't the Attorney General considered a significant actor in state government? So... maybe BBB is telling me not to jump to conclusions.
Oh, damn I'm dumb sometimes. That's it. "The BBB knows of no significant government actions...."
What the BBB is really saying is that the actions of the Office of the Arizona Attorney General aren't significant. And who can argue with that. As detailed elsewhere in this blog, the AG's office dilly-dallied and dallied yet some more before actually responding to consumer complaints against Camelback Consign & Design.
As noted in the Arizona Republic articles on the antics of the Consignment Vampire and the "law," the latter didn't think much of the AG's efforts. And perhaps we should agree. After all, it sought to put him out of business... but only long after his doors had already closed.
It has finally won a default judgment against him, and Camelback Consign & Design, but only long after many others beat them to it (see above). And, by the by, it appears highly unlikely that any of the victims represented by the State of Arizona will actually be reimbursed for their losses.
Go ahead. Prove me wrong. Show me that Arizona actually has a "justice" system, as opposed to an unwieldy, unresponsive, inept, uncaring, inhumane, uncommunicative Office of the Attorney General of Arizona... that is to say, a functionally useless "legal" system.
Pretty please? With ice cream on top?
It's almost as if I can overhear a lawyer from the AG's office opining that the victims of the Consignment Vampire should have expected to be financially raped, since they voluntarily turned over their valuables to a consignment store.
"They should have known better." Isn't that the current mantra of the local AG?
Indeed, their losses are the Good Lord's way of telling them that they deserved what happened to them.
I guess Arizona's voters still believe in "rough" justice.
For more details, check out these posts:
