Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Coin Chat
>
Daniel Carr ?
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="-jeffB, post: 3321217, member: 27832"]From <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/331" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/331" rel="nofollow">18 U.S. Code § 331 - Mutilation, diminution, and falsification of coins</a>:</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>There is no <b>fraudulent intent</b> in Carr's business practice. If someone <i>fraudulently</i> tries to sell on one of his products as a legitimate US coin, the offense is theirs, not his.</p><p><br /></p><p>From <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/485" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/485" rel="nofollow">18 U.S. Code § 485 - Coins or bars</a>:</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>Again, <b>fraudulent intent</b> is absent. Unless "falsely" in the first paragraph means something different -- I honestly don't know how to interpret that term in this context. Why is it "falsely" instead of "fraudulently"?</p><p><br /></p><p>The 1971 case, restriking common dimes to resemble desirable 1955 dimes, would seem to arise from a <b>fraudulent</b> attempt to sell the product as genuine 1955 dimes, at a profit. There is also, of course, the issue that 1955 dimes were officially issued by the US Mint, unlike 1965 Peace dollars, 1964 Morgans, and so on. I don't think it mattered in the case cited, but the fact that Carr creates only items that were never issued by the Mint seems to be further evidence against fraudulent intent.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="-jeffB, post: 3321217, member: 27832"]From [URL='https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/331']18 U.S. Code § 331 - Mutilation, diminution, and falsification of coins[/URL]: There is no [B]fraudulent intent[/B] in Carr's business practice. If someone [I]fraudulently[/I] tries to sell on one of his products as a legitimate US coin, the offense is theirs, not his. From [URL='https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/485']18 U.S. Code § 485 - Coins or bars[/URL]: Again, [B]fraudulent intent[/B] is absent. Unless "falsely" in the first paragraph means something different -- I honestly don't know how to interpret that term in this context. Why is it "falsely" instead of "fraudulently"? The 1971 case, restriking common dimes to resemble desirable 1955 dimes, would seem to arise from a [B]fraudulent[/B] attempt to sell the product as genuine 1955 dimes, at a profit. There is also, of course, the issue that 1955 dimes were officially issued by the US Mint, unlike 1965 Peace dollars, 1964 Morgans, and so on. I don't think it mattered in the case cited, but the fact that Carr creates only items that were never issued by the Mint seems to be further evidence against fraudulent intent.[/QUOTE]
Your name or email address:
Do you already have an account?
No, create an account now.
Yes, my password is:
Forgot your password?
Stay logged in
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Coin Chat
>
Daniel Carr ?
>
Home
Home
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Activity
Recent Posts
Forums
Forums
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Posts
Competitions
Competitions
Quick Links
Competition Index
Rules, Terms & Conditions
Gallery
Gallery
Quick Links
Search Media
New Media
Showcase
Showcase
Quick Links
Search Items
Most Active Members
New Items
Directory
Directory
Quick Links
Directory Home
New Listings
Members
Members
Quick Links
Notable Members
Current Visitors
Recent Activity
New Profile Posts
Sponsors
Menu
Search
Search titles only
Posted by Member:
Separate names with a comma.
Newer Than:
Search this thread only
Search this forum only
Display results as threads
Useful Searches
Recent Posts
More...