The REAL Story of the Langbord 1933’s

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

And that was exactly the point I was trying to make, perhaps with a bit too much snark. I don't always agree with the way things go here, but in general it works out a lot better than most other forums I've experienced.

 

And actually, I am sometimes surprised at the mods tolerance and moderate responses versus what they could be. I believe there is a very large & varied nucleus of members who continue to hang here because of the fairness & equality shown to members. Now if we can just do something about.......

 

Nice "unbiased" source, Jim. Did Breitbart have nothing available?

 

I also was amused the author disagreed with Chief Justice Roberts at the end of the piece. In fact, the entire thesis of the article is that Courts already ARE hyper-political. I don't know that we're there yet, but it does seem to be the trend.

 

EDITED: Language It was a politically based comment about the supreme court. But I see that you disagree. I can live with you being wrong, though.

 

I know for absolute certain my Pennsylvania Supreme Court has waxed hyper-partisan. They don't even try to hide it any more.

 

Kurt, I'm not sure you're still here @ CT but I wanted to state in this thread that I am attempting to get a transcript of the talk or a videotape of the talk.

FWIW, I STRONGLY disagree that this guy has arguments that are The Smoking Gun in the case of the 10 Langbord Double Eagles. While I agree that neither side proved their case beyond a reasonable doubt (the conviction for murder threshold) the preponderance of the evidence standard clearly leans to the Langbords.

There's a reason why no well-respected numismatic expert thinks the coins belong to the Mint. The Mint's chief witness during the trial was an author and part-time comic strip illustrator as I recall. The Mint LIED about returning the coins and this led them to avoid filing a forfeiture claim which would have placed the burden on them instead of the Langbords. Other government agencies even said the Mint should have filed a forfeiture claim. All Weinman proved is that when you are the federal government and run to the federal courts and stack the deck with sympathetic judges (judge shopping) and they tilt the trial against you (your witness speaks for hours at a time, theirs gets interrupted every few seconds)....you can win the case.

Whoop-de-damn-doo, as a not-so-famous athelete once said !

Frankly, I'm surprised any coin group would even invite this guy to talk. He and the Mint are NOT friends of the numismatic community. Their thuggery, lies, deception, and sleazy tactics (irrespective of their case, which I do not think was even argued convincingly let alone proved) in the 1933 Double Eagle cases was disgraceful. The logic they employed in the 1933 DE case could just as easily be employed against holders of other coins, including those actively traded and graded for decades.

That said, I'm not like The Mint or the judges or the trial jury. I'll wait to see if this guy raises a point that somehow I missed in all the articles I read. If he does, if he can PROVE that the coins were "stolen from the Mint", I'll admit it here.

I wouldn't hold my breath, though.

 

Proves that the Langbords were honest and upfront, IMO.

They wanted to do the right thing and Langbord Sr., a decorated WW II combat vet, believed in this country. His family was upfront and rather than try and do something devious (like sell the coins overseas or privately), they wanted to do it like the other 1933 DE owner and work something out with the Mint.

The Mint stabbed them in the back. Big surprise.

 

Hey, Breitbart News is better than alot of established news sources like The Times and WaPo.

And I'll bet Breitbart would not have favored seizing the coins and would have objectively noted that the government lied, smeared, and acted in bad faith in regards to the ten 1933 Saint-Gaudens DEs.

 

I finally got around to watching the Mint guy Greg Weinman's presentation to PAN. Quite frankly, the guy is lucky he and the Mint had a friendly judge to bias the trial.

He ignores the facts regarding the actual mintage dates for the 1933's.....ignores the fact that the coins were available as early as March 4th (when Hoover was STILL president !!).....says nothing about the 43 1932's that were replaced by 1933's and also available with the coiner....and other misstatements of fact.

He also doesn't go into the Mint's deplorable behavior including lying to the Langbords, procastinating, dealing in bad faith, getting Roger Burdette kicked off the Citizens's Coin Commission, letting every piece of nonsense from David Tripp go to the jury but Roger's detailed descriptions of Mint operations getting whacked to pieces, promises to "the American people" being broken regarding coin viewing & availability, etc. There's tons more.

This isn't over yet......

 

Politely begging to differ, this case is deader than 4 o’clock. Those who might have been screwed will remain that way.

 

What about the Roman gold coins and Mexican gold coins found in Israel Switt's safe deposit box at the same time the double eagles were found?

 

It's been over for a long time. When one sides expert discredits themselves the other side doesn't have to do much. Once you lose face in court your reputation as an expert never comes back, besides I believe they stopped fighting it a long time ago

 

Nice picture !!

Sadly, to win this in the courts, you probably need a trial judge who is a numismatist.

 

I presume the family kept those and I'm not aware if they were worth any great amount of $$$. Certainly, not like the 1933's.

 

If you're referencing Roger Burdette, I think his reputation emerged STRONGER since the only thing government attorneys did was bring up useless internet postings to confuse the jury. They wouldn't even let him bring up detailed information on mint operations and he wrote an entire book on that.

He's since written THE definitive book on Saint-Gaudens Double Eagles plus numerous articles for various numismatic publications. Haven't seen a single thing from David Tripp since then, FWIW.

 

I remain astounded the Langbords didn't move those coins offshore soon after discovering them. Divvy them among at least three countries. Perhaps arrange some private sales, but it would be risky. Then in a carefully chosen fourth county, reveal the existence of one coin and hint there might be one other. Then sit down with reps from the US government for a sincere talk.

For me personally, it's better that the government has them. I've seen them and may again. If they were in private hands, I don't know that I would have ever laid eyes on them.

Cal

 

In all honesty, sitting down with the federal government to negotiate over stolen government property doesn’t strike me as a bright idea.