It Ain't Over Till It's Over. Final Chapter?

http://www.coinworld.com/insights/g...-on-decision-in-1933-double-eagle-case.1.html

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

A good read and does not bode well for the "family of a thief." I think these should legally be returned to the government based on the laws. Having said that, I kind of hope they get to keep them and sell them all. that's $7,000,000 less competing against my efforts to build a type set

 

Even if they are ultimately sold, potential buyers should beware.

 

The government states that these at large examples “were stolen from the Mint by its cashier, George McCann, abetted by Israel Switt, a Philadelphia merchant and coin dealer, who over time sold some at a significant premium while hoarding the rest.”

I dont understand, why does the government think that McCann stole the coins?
What evidence do they have for that?

 

It would be interesting if a judge ordered restitution to the government in the amount of $200, plus interest.

 

The way I see this the government's case is that they never authorized them for release so the only way you can obtain them is by stealing them. One thing I can say if the family ever gets the coins back and they're sold, all these stories and drama is going to add a lot more value to the coin, especially to non-collectors.

 

He was a cashier in 1933. Surely security didn't allow him access to sensitive areas, and these were likely in his til or shop and he may have just wanted to buy some early issues and flip. Realized they were being recalled and probably panicked or saw an opportunity with the coin dealer.

If he replaced it with his own cash, I see no harm. If he actually took them in a malicious manner then ra they are stolen.

 

In the eyes of the government's any way It's still stolen

 

After the last volley I said this ain't over yet ! And it's not... I'm sure this is going to take another 5 to 10 years in court ,claims filed by both sides. The Lawyers will be making all the money.....

 

I'll bet the prosecuting attorneys broke their necks keeping coin collectors off of that jury. There weren't any on it, right?

 

Agreed, that would make me fall over laughing. Of course, they could even account for inflation and I'd find it hilarious.

 

Just think. There are more of these out there.
I'll bet they end up just splitting the profit like they did the first time.
Wish I was a lawyer working on this case.

 

He was a cashier.

The 1933 Saints DID Make it to the Cashiers Office.

At that point in time and for some time later, ANYBODY could go to the Cashier and exchange old gold for new gold. It was a small window of opportunity but it DID exist and Roger Burnetts research PROVED that it existed via US Mint documents.

Look at it like the 15 minute sellout of the Truman Dollars.
Those that new the window was opening were poised and waiting to take advantage of the "opportunity". Collectors and Dealers had their fingers on the pulse of the US Mint back then, just like they do today and this gold confiscation order didn't just materialize in one night. It was rationalized, thought about, discussed, mulled over and every other descriptive term you can think of. Why do you suppose Roosevelt issued the order? Was it possibly that he knew it didn't have an Ice Cubes chance of passing by Congress? I'm sure that it had been floated around and that folks new about it.

Izzy Switt did exactly what collectors and dealers do today. He was right there at the window, except that it wasn't just the 10 gold pieces. Records show that Switt had sold at least 10 others which ultimately were confiscated or surrendered by the folks that bought them. All in all, I expect that at least 50 of these coins left the US Mint which would have been a $1,000 bag as old gold exchanges.

Theft? The government never proved a theft. They discredited Roger Burnette's testimony due to comments he'd mad on the CU Forums and disqualified him as a witness.

What the government DID do, was convince the "Jury" that there had been a theft through the implications of circumstantial evidence. In other words, as some poster already stated, we never issued them so they "must" have been stolen.
Of course, the "theft" is now being put onto the US Mint Cashier and not on IZZY Switt.

I really hope the coins get returned to the Langbord's since this entire episode has been nothing more than a waste of government expenditures from the very beginning and for what reason, I just do not know.

It certainly could NOT be for the reason that they represent stolen property because the 1913 nickels represent actual stolen property. So do the multitude of "manufactured" error coins that would have been physically impossible to fit within the plastic proof lens of the time!
There's even a 1974 Aluminum Cent floating around that the government KNOWS about yet, nothing is being done. Nobody is being prosecuted.

It's a waste of resources that could be used on some other prosecution.

 

Yeah, like getting rid of the cartel that's distributing Heroin and Meth in my neck of the woods........

 

I had a hunch but didnt know the supporting or surrounding evidence that may have been uncovered.

I only read that article once and immediately questioned how they could state that he was a thief. He would have to have entered a secure area, concealed the coins, and never made an even exchange for a theft to occur.

My mind says that he either was a collector himself or had dealer/collector friends since he was a mint employee. He may have never even known about the legislation and just wanted to get his hands on the first coins so that he could make a few dollars, and as long as he exchanged the proper amount of money, there wouldnt be any theft as the government may have never been short any money.

If he was the cashier then he was responsible for selling coins to the public or performing some sort of exchange so he would be familiar with what people wanted and he may have been exchanging coins lawfully for years with no thought to committing any crimes.

If I were the Langboards attorneys I would want to see concrete evidence showing that McCann actually stole the coins to begin with. And wouldnt he be the sole thief anyway? Not Izza? Izza didnt have access to the coins or the vaults, so I believe those coins left the mint in a lawful manner in a short window of opportunity. And even then, the only loss on the United States part would be the original $200 anyway, not nearly the millions they will surely spend on something stupid anyway.

And yes, I was thinking about the Truman coin as well, you only had a short time to get them, maybe McCann was the precursor to our modern day flippers.

 

As a tax payer I hate that I'm helping to pay for all this.

 

And think of it fellows.......no modern day internet......ya had to keep your ear planted right on the street to find out was happening.