Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;calcol, post: 2483788, member: 77639&quot;]It&#039;s possible the ten double eagles were a trial (no pun) balloon, and a bunch of others are now offshore. However, given their value, one would have sufficed as a legal test coin.&nbsp; I can&#039;t see how they or their legal team would think that the Farouk coin established a precedent.&nbsp; The Farouk case hinged on the government having provided an export permit.&nbsp; No such permit existed for other 1933 double eagles.</p><p><br /></p><p>So, why did they announce their possession of ten coins rather than one?&nbsp; Could be lots of reasons.&nbsp; They may have felt the government did have a potentially valid claim and really did want it adjudicated.&nbsp; It may be that when the legal team was informed there were ten coins and knew that there was a possibility of them being stolen property, they faced an ethical dilemma. They could continue to represent the Langbords only if all ten coins were disclosed.&nbsp; The Langbords were then faced with either doing that or finding&nbsp; a new legal team.&nbsp; However, the legal team had been successful in the Farouk case, so they stuck with them.</p><p><br /></p><p>Beyond the thirteen well known coins, there is at least one other in private hands. There is a picture of it in Frankel&#039;s book.</p><p><br /></p><p>Anyone with 20th century pattern coins would do well to keep quiet about them unless they were known to leave the mint&#039;s ownership legally.&nbsp; This is especially true of patterns created after 1933. If there is a need to sell, do it privately through a dealer.&nbsp; Patterns from the 1700&#039;s and 1800&#039;s are probably on safer ground for private ownership as a lot of records were lost or are ambiguous, and many patterns appear to have been distributed legally.</p><p><br /></p><p>Folks should keep in mind differences between criminal and civil cases.&nbsp; Statutes of limitation apply to some crimes, but if theft was involved, civil recovery of the property by the owners or their legal descendants may be possible long after the statutory period for theft expires.&nbsp; The key is supporting a claim to title by a preponderance of evidence (beyond a reasonable doubt is not required!).</p><p><br /></p><p>Cal[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

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