U.S. Mint seizes priceless coins

Status
Not open for further replies.
So where is the Mint's police report detailing the original theft which enumerates the serial numbers of the specific coins in question?

Oh wait, you mean the only proof is that the mint says they were stolen?

Tell ya what, open up your wallet. See that "twenty"? Its mine. its mine because i say its mine. :rolleyes:

Ask yourself this; If the mint has a prefectly legitimate claim to these coins, why didnt they call it in as soon as the woman asked about them? Why did they feel the need to trump up this 'verification' scam to get them into their possession prior to claiming their rights to them?
 
Lets continue on this line of thought. I have US paper currency that are "silver certificates" instead of federal reserve "notes". These were kept as a souvenier from before our currency was baseless. All silver certs were supposted to be burned ages ago and be turned in for the new funny money. Does that mean the feds can confiscate my silver certs?

The fed mints have also mistakenly minted coins that were double stamped or flawed in some way. When this happens, the are to be destroyed. Some make it into public circulation by accident OR on purpose. If I had one of these coins, could the feds confiscate it?

This question was already raised, lets say Grandpa was in WWII and sneaks home a nice 1911. He dies and I find the gun. Wow, it ends up being a priceless variation. Can .gov confiscate it?

This all raises the philosophical question of:
In a free society, can the "state" be a "victim" of a crime? Or only an individual?
If you answer yes, then the state trumps individual rights.
The two items that are missing here are the individual that took the double eagle coins from the mint and the individual that received them, both dead and gone. Sure, you may argue that the "state" represents the will of the people, but the "state" uses this same arguement against the 2nd Amendment.
 
Idiots deserve what they get.

Anyone who has ever made even the most cursory inquiries about rare coins in the last 70 years knows about the legendary 1933 Double Eagles. The coins were minted, but melted down before any were distributed for public use. Rumors persisted for decades that someone had grabbed a few from the Mint before they could be melted. One of the coins finally surfaced and the resulting court battle has already been mentioned.

Enter Miss Hollow-Skull, who discovers that Daddy had hidden away not one or two of the coins, but 10 of them. Knowing that any 1933 Double Eagles are, by definition, illegally obtained, she also knows that selling the coins will require a long wait while potential buyers check the coins to ensure their authenticity. But Miss Greedier-than-Smart is in a hurry, so she bundles the coins off to the Mint with a note that says "Please confirm that these are 10 of the ultra-rare coins that someone improperly took from you eons ago."

For everyone who thinks Miss Dumber-than-Dirt should get to keep the coins, here's some advice to remember: never allow the rightful owner to regain physical possession of stolen property.
 
When gov't becomes a criminal operation...

...the first thing they do is disarm honest people. See the pattern here? Try to disarm the people and then steal this lady's coins. The people who did this are criminals in every sense of the word. Those who authorized the action are the mastermids and have the same moral values at Al Capone.

What low-life trash we have in gov't. Right down there with the Dishonorable Five "judges" who enabled Property Piracy.

How much longer do we take this crap from this trash?

My apologies to Al Capone for comparing him with these thieves.

rr
 
I agree that the lady was a complete idiot for handing them to .gov and that on the face of it, it could be claimed they were stolen and the stolen property was received by people who are long since dead.
There is a bigger picture here though; an ominous undercurrent in society of .gov, with its new golden era of eminent domain vs. John Q Citizen.
Poor John Q Citizen,... a guy who is fast becoming John Q. Servant to the State. Maybe someday just simply Mr. J Q Slave.
 
For everyone who thinks Miss Dumber-than-Dirt should get to keep the coins, here's some advice to remember: never allow the rightful owner to regain physical possession of stolen property.
Click to expand...
As you learn in law school: Possession is 9/10's of the law. See to it that they are using the legal system to get it from you, not you trying to get it back.
 
Silly. Silly, silly, silly.

It's stolen property. It doesn't matter if the thief is dead; it doesn't matter how long ago the crime took place.

The coins belong to the Mint (the government -- us!)
 
If it is proventhat the woman's family stole currency from the mint, wouldn't it be sufficient to repay the mint the face value of the currency that was "stolen"? Currency is curency, right? (At least, that's what they told us when they eliminated the gold and silver standards...) These were $20 coins, so wouldn't it be good enough if the lady gave the mint a similar stack of $20 bills?

Maybe inflation should be accounted for, so make it the inflation-adjusted value of a stack of $20 pieces from 1933. Better yet, compute the bullion value of the gold contained in the coins, and pay that to the mint.


Many people are ignoring the fact that these coins today are fundamentally different from what was "stolen" in 1933. Back in 1933 those coins were currency and/or bullion, worth only their face value or their weight in gold. Today they are priceless collectors' items. What was seized form the woman today is NOT the same as what was (allegedly) stolen from the mint back in the '30s.

Somewhere between 1933 and today, the value of those coins skyrocketed. Who created that additional value? Who should receive the benefits of creating that value?

It was the family that created this increased value. They were the ones who had the foresight to save the coins until some future date when they would be worth more. They were the ones who provided the labor necessary to preserve and safeguard the coins over the last 7 decades. That extra value was earned, not stolen.

Why shouldn't the family be entitled to the fruits of their labors?

EDIT:
Is it even legal to use gold as a form of money? If not, then that which was "stolen" from the mint (i.e. money) is long gone. It was destroyed by lawmakers. It simply doesn't exist anymore.
 
It's stolen property. It doesn't matter if the thief is dead; it doesn't matter how long ago the crime took place.

The coins belong to the Mint (the government -- us!)
Click to expand...
That's the mint's take on it.

For all we know the head of the mint at the time could have gifted these to the original owner (who was seriously into coins and was on good terms with mint personnel, from the news story I heard...), so they were handled appropriately all the way down the line.

The thing is, the mint should have to prove that something wrong took place, rather than making an assertion, seizing what they want, and making the family sue to regain custody.
 
" Yes, the mint should have to prove wrongdoing. But that is not the way our government works anymore. "

And 50% of the most rights-minded crowd you can find support the mint in their decision. :(

I urge many of you to reconsider. I'll try to put see your points of view too.
 
Ok guys, there's more to this story than most of you realize.

First off, I'm not picking on Yeager, but his post is a good example of one point that I want to refute:

So where is the Mint's police report detailing the original theft which enumerates the serial numbers of the specific coins in question?

Oh wait, you mean the only proof is that the mint says they were stolen?
Click to expand...

There is more than just the mint's word for it that the coins were stolen. The most important point is that 1933 Double Eagles were NEVER CIRCULATED. That means that not only did they never officially leave the custody of the mint, but that they were NEVER DECLARED TO BE OFFICIAL U.S. CURRENCY. The mint's records show they were never circulated, so the burden of proof is on anyone who claims that there was a legal way for the coins to leave the mint.

The coins were all supposed to be destroyed. The mint's position is that any discovered outside the mint are, in the face of it, illegal because there was no legal way for those coins to have been taken outside of the mint. (With the exception of the coin donated to the Smithsonian). The mint doesn't need to prove that any particular 1933 Double Eagle was stolen, since none were circulated, they can claim that ANY outside of the mint's control are therefore stolen. The fact that the coins were never circulated and thus, were never made into official currency, is why any current owner can't just pay the government the $20 face value of the coin and keep it.

As far as a police report, there is an extensive FBI investigation into the theft when it was discovered. This investigation reactivated whenever any 1933 Double Eagles later turned up. The mint always has claimed that they are stolen property of the federal government and the FBI investigated with the intent of the recovering the stolen property and, if possible, tracing the original theft.

The FBI investigation was never closed. As far as I know, there is no statue of limitations regarding a theft from the U.S. Mint and illegally stolen mint property (the Double Eagles) were, and still are, contraband.

The last known 1933 Double Eagle turned up a few years ago. The FBI actually conducted a "sting" operation and arrested the then owner of the coin when he attemped to sell it. He faced federal felony charges for owning/receiving stolen property. This is the coin that went on auction a few years back. What happened was that in his defense he was able to mount a strong enough case that the coin was not stolen, but was accidently circulated. The feds didn't want to set a precedent that ANY of the coins made it into circulation legally so they agreed to make a deal. They would officially take legal possession of the coin, "circulate" it officially so it would become legal U.S. currency, and then sell the coin at auction and split the proceeds with the man that they had arrested. They'd drop all charges, but he would relinquish ownership of the coin. In return, the feds avoided a trail that would give them bad publicity and didn't have to risk actually losing title to the coin and any others that were out there.

The argument can be made that the coin was not actually stolen but was "accidently" circulated. The guy the FBI arrested made this argument and the waters are just muddy enough for this to have a chance. The problem for the last owner of the coin was that he was facing felony charges and if he lost, he'd not only loose the coin, but go to prison and become a felon. When the deal was broached, he would have been a fool to refuse.

This is why Joan S. Langbord was actually very smart when she turned the 10 coins into the mint for "authentication." This way she does NOT face felony charges and now has standing to sue the government in civil court to recover her "property."

If she loses, she's out coins that are already contraband, but won't face charges because she turned them in as soon as she discovered them. If she wins, she has clear title to coins worth millions. She knows all about the other case and is hoping that she can convince a civil jury that the exact circumstances of how the coins left the mint is just muddy enough that the government's claim that they *had to have been stolen* won't stand up. The evidence and the odds are against her, but the reward if she wins is huge.

As it is now, the coins are both incredibly valuable and totally valueless. There some of the most rare coins around, but without clear title, you can't sell them openly and face arrest for their possesion.

My info is from an excellent book on the subject that I recently read:

Illegal Tender : Gold, Greed, and the Mystery of the Lost 1933 Double Eagle (Hardcover) by David Tripp

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0743245741/qid=1125086438/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bb
s_1/102-9936831-7952149?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
 
I think the woman was brilliant. With the previous person given 50% it sets a presidence for the same event. She does not have to authenticate the coins, the mint did it for her. Now a good lawyer works for a similar deal. Could it go wrong, sure; but she could get shot from a shady buyer too (if she elected to go black market.)
 
There are similar coins hiding out there like the Peace Dollar of the 1960's - forgot the date and some aluminum one cent pieces given to Congress to be returned after examination and then 'lost'.

The coins were not circulated and illegally gotten. If you are worried about her losing something - give her some common $20s.

Didn't the Farouk coin stay in collectors' hands as the government did give it as a gift to Farouk?
 
She's still stupid. What makes the coins so valuable is the fact they are so rare. With something like 3 or 4 in existance.

For this broad to "flood" the market with 10 coins is to devalue all the coins. Plus the fact she submitted all 10 coins. I personally would have sat on a few and maybe submitted 1 or 2 coins. That way, if I lose them, no big loss, got 8 more. If the Feds let me keep them, I maintain the value of the coins and "gee, have 8 more to release later down the line".

Of course if she really has a bag of these things then wow, what a smart broad.
 
Didn't the Farouk coin stay in collectors' hands as the government did give it as a gift to Farouk?
Click to expand...

I don't believe so. I returned the book to the library so I can't check though. I do remember that an aynonamous collector bought the last coin in auction.
 
Flood the market HaHa.

Say the value is one 5th of what they went for at last auction. She still makes out like a bandit (which may be part of her lienage.)

Perhaps she would have been wiser to give one coin, who knows.
 
Some points:

Nixon rescinded the order forbidding holding/ownership/sale of bullion to citizens in 1971 IIRC, which ended the circle of the gold confiscation started by commie FDR in 1933. Shouldn't that have effectively ended .govs title to these?

Of course, Nixon is to be faulted for taking us completely off a gold standard (the effective end of Bretton Woods in theory). This was due to pressure from the French, who were exchanging inflated dollars for gold... the fault lies with the Federal Reserve for sure. At least Nixon gave those who wanted to opt-out of paper dollars an escape, subject to the whim of the Supremes (keep reading).

There were supreme court cases right after the confiscation, mostly abominations that declared (massive oversimplification here) that gold coins were "stamped with the sign of the sovereign" and could always be bought back at face value by the feds, no matter what its intrinsic worth. Some allowances were made for "collectors" pieces only. Ownership of bullion was also curtailed.

Good reason to only buy foreign gold coins... it's neither bullion nor stamped by our "sovereign", and .gov can't get its claws on them "legally". Sorry for the quotes, and dripping sarcasm.

Bottom line, unless the Mint has proof these particular coins were stolen (and they were looking for them the whole time, reported/recorded them as missing, etc), it's not their property at all. They are now, most definitely "collector" pieces, and should be legally (by SCOTUS precedent) covered against confiscation by the feds under any law, past or present.
 
And if you do happen to come across one in grand dad's desk; don't offer it up for sale in the USA. Take a nice little trip to Switzerland and auction it off there.
 
Bottom line, unless the Mint has proof these particular coins were stolen (and they were looking for them the whole time, reported/recorded them as missing, etc), it's not their property at all.
Click to expand...
The fact that they left the mint without authorization, which they would have had to, makes them stolen property.

Would you feel the same if the money had been stolen from taxpayers by welfare fraud or fraudulent FEMA calims
 
After a legal battle, the dealer was permitted to sell the coin at auction on the condition he split the proceeds with the Mint.
Click to expand...

This may be a little out there.....

But what happens if down the line the owner or his descendants of the
legally sold one wants to resell it? Does the Government swoop in and take
that one too if 80 years from now the owner can't prove it is that very one?

What happened to innocent until proven guilty?
 
However, in 2001, the U.S. government reached an agreement with the owners of the "Farouk-Fenton" specimen of the 1933 Double Eagle which allows the coin to be sold, thus making it the only example outside of government hands that is legal to own. Sorry forgot to add the link last time
What happened to innocent until proven guilty?
Click to expand...
I don't follow where does that aply here.
Nobody has been declared or even implied guilty of anything.

Property known to be stolen was recovered by the authorities. Those in possession of that stolen property were allowed to go home apparently. minus the stolen property, which they had no right to take home with them because it was stolen and is in the process of being returned to the victim
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
Theodore Roosevelt Memorial Coin - NGC - Off Topic
Replies
2
Views
796
Don Gwinn
D
Y
  • Locked
UPDATE on the "Italy Seizes 8,000 Kalashnikovs Headed to U.S."
Replies
13
Views
1K
c_yeager
C
G
  • Locked
Italy Seizes 8,000 Kalashnikovs Headed to U.S.
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
johnr
J
G
  • Locked
Bankruptcy of the United States
Replies
14
Views
740
Art Eatman
A
J
  • Locked
Raped Iraqi woman feared US troops: report
Replies
3
Views
646
Justin
Justin
Back
Top