Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Obama judge steals 10 Langbord 1933 Saint-Gaudens gold $20 double eagles from destitute family.
36 views
Skip to first unread message
Issac Yitzkov
Jan 24, 2012, 5:14:07 PM1/24/12
to
http://www.coinworld.com/articles/judge-agrees-with-jury-in-1933-
20-decision/?utm_source=OB_traffic
The fate of the 10 Langbord 1933 Saint-Gaudens gold $20 double
eagles came closer to finality in a brief Nov. 10 hearing in
Philadelphia where Judge Legrome D. Davis agreed with a jury’s
decision that awarded the coins to the government.
On July 20, a 10-member jury found that the government owns 10
1933 double eagles that were allegedly found in 2003 by Joan
Langbord in a safe deposit box that belonged to the Langbord
family. While the government claims that her father, Israel
Switt, effectively stole the coins from the Mint, the Langbord
family has argued that there was a short window of opportunity
when gold for gold trades occurred at the Mint, and that 1933
double eagles could have been legally paid out from the Mint
Cashier’s window.
On Nov. 10, Judge Davis of the U.S. District Court for the
Eastern District of Pennsylvania held a hearing to allow the
government and the Langbord family to present additional
evidence and oral arguments on the pending declaratory judgment
claim. Judge Davis could grant a motion for judgment as a matter
of law if he decided after viewing the evidence in the light
most favorable to the government that the evidence was
insufficient for the jury to reasonably reach its conclusion.
The Langbord family has contended that the government failed to
prove that the coins were taken from the Mint with specific
criminal intent, and that the jury had insufficient evidence to
reasonably decide on whether the coins were paid out legally.
Judge Davis noted at the hearing that he could not make any
findings that were inconsistent with the jury, and that he did
not intend to do so. In describing the trial, Judge Davis
organized the testimony into two groups. The first dealt with
the circumstances at the Mint and its accounting practices
around 1933, and the second was about the evidence and
information regarding the circumstances of Switt’s possession
and knowledge of the coins.
Judge Davis went on to state, “I find as a fact that the records
are complete,” finding that the records as presented by the
government at trial fully accounted for the movement of the 1933
double eagles and that they conclusively established that none
of the coins were paid out by the Mint’s Cashier. Judge Davis
concluded, based on the evidence, that with every coin accounted
for, legal title could not have passed to anyone other than the
government.
Regarding the Langbord’s witnesses, Judge Davis stated that he
found Joan Langbord’s testimony unconvincing and that it was
both “self-serving” and not believable because of the number of
trips that she had made to the safe deposit box prior to the
coin’s alleged discovery.
At the trial, records were presented showing that Mrs. Langbord
made numerous trips to the safe deposit box that contained the
1933 double eagles, although in those trips she allegedly only
examined jewelry and was not aware that the coins were in the
box. Judge Davis said that her testimony — and the discovery of
the coins only after the example allegedly owned by Egypt’s King
Farouk sold at a Sotheby’s auction for $7.59 million — “did not
ring true.”
While Judge Davis ruled in favor of the government on its motion
for declaratory judgment, he concluded the hearing by
complimenting the lawyers on both sides, telling them that the
case was well-tried and that it had been a pleasure to work with
them.
20-decision/?utm_source=OB_traffic
The fate of the 10 Langbord 1933 Saint-Gaudens gold $20 double
eagles came closer to finality in a brief Nov. 10 hearing in
Philadelphia where Judge Legrome D. Davis agreed with a jury’s
decision that awarded the coins to the government.
On July 20, a 10-member jury found that the government owns 10
1933 double eagles that were allegedly found in 2003 by Joan
Langbord in a safe deposit box that belonged to the Langbord
family. While the government claims that her father, Israel
Switt, effectively stole the coins from the Mint, the Langbord
family has argued that there was a short window of opportunity
when gold for gold trades occurred at the Mint, and that 1933
double eagles could have been legally paid out from the Mint
Cashier’s window.
On Nov. 10, Judge Davis of the U.S. District Court for the
Eastern District of Pennsylvania held a hearing to allow the
government and the Langbord family to present additional
evidence and oral arguments on the pending declaratory judgment
claim. Judge Davis could grant a motion for judgment as a matter
of law if he decided after viewing the evidence in the light
most favorable to the government that the evidence was
insufficient for the jury to reasonably reach its conclusion.
The Langbord family has contended that the government failed to
prove that the coins were taken from the Mint with specific
criminal intent, and that the jury had insufficient evidence to
reasonably decide on whether the coins were paid out legally.
Judge Davis noted at the hearing that he could not make any
findings that were inconsistent with the jury, and that he did
not intend to do so. In describing the trial, Judge Davis
organized the testimony into two groups. The first dealt with
the circumstances at the Mint and its accounting practices
around 1933, and the second was about the evidence and
information regarding the circumstances of Switt’s possession
and knowledge of the coins.
Judge Davis went on to state, “I find as a fact that the records
are complete,” finding that the records as presented by the
government at trial fully accounted for the movement of the 1933
double eagles and that they conclusively established that none
of the coins were paid out by the Mint’s Cashier. Judge Davis
concluded, based on the evidence, that with every coin accounted
for, legal title could not have passed to anyone other than the
government.
Regarding the Langbord’s witnesses, Judge Davis stated that he
found Joan Langbord’s testimony unconvincing and that it was
both “self-serving” and not believable because of the number of
trips that she had made to the safe deposit box prior to the
coin’s alleged discovery.
At the trial, records were presented showing that Mrs. Langbord
made numerous trips to the safe deposit box that contained the
1933 double eagles, although in those trips she allegedly only
examined jewelry and was not aware that the coins were in the
box. Judge Davis said that her testimony — and the discovery of
the coins only after the example allegedly owned by Egypt’s King
Farouk sold at a Sotheby’s auction for $7.59 million — “did not
ring true.”
While Judge Davis ruled in favor of the government on its motion
for declaratory judgment, he concluded the hearing by
complimenting the lawyers on both sides, telling them that the
case was well-tried and that it had been a pleasure to work with
them.
emoneyjoe
Jan 24, 2012, 6:00:55 PM1/24/12
to
On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 22:14:07 +0000 (UTC), "Issac Yitzkov"
<iss...@Use-Author-Supplied-Address.invalid> wrote:
>http://www.coinworld.com/articles/judge-agrees-with-jury-in-1933-
>20-decision/?utm_source=OB_traffic
>
>The fate of the 10 Langbord 1933 Saint-Gaudens gold $20 double
>eagles came closer to finality in a brief Nov. 10 hearing in
>Philadelphia where Judge Legrome D. Davis agreed with a jury?
<iss...@Use-Author-Supplied-Address.invalid> wrote:
>http://www.coinworld.com/articles/judge-agrees-with-jury-in-1933-
>20-decision/?utm_source=OB_traffic
>
>The fate of the 10 Langbord 1933 Saint-Gaudens gold $20 double
>eagles came closer to finality in a brief Nov. 10 hearing in
>decision that awarded the coins to the government.
>
>On July 20, a 10-member jury found that the government owns 10
>1933 double eagles that were allegedly found in 2003 by Joan
>Langbord in a safe deposit box that belonged to the Langbord
>family. While the government claims that her father, Israel
>Switt, effectively stole the coins from the Mint, the Langbord
>family has argued that there was a short window of opportunity
>when gold for gold trades occurred at the Mint, and that 1933
>double eagles could have been legally paid out from the Mint
>Cashier? window.
>
>On July 20, a 10-member jury found that the government owns 10
>1933 double eagles that were allegedly found in 2003 by Joan
>Langbord in a safe deposit box that belonged to the Langbord
>family. While the government claims that her father, Israel
>Switt, effectively stole the coins from the Mint, the Langbord
>family has argued that there was a short window of opportunity
>when gold for gold trades occurred at the Mint, and that 1933
>double eagles could have been legally paid out from the Mint
>
>On Nov. 10, Judge Davis of the U.S. District Court for the
>Eastern District of Pennsylvania held a hearing to allow the
>government and the Langbord family to present additional
>evidence and oral arguments on the pending declaratory judgment
>claim. Judge Davis could grant a motion for judgment as a matter
>of law if he decided after viewing the evidence in the light
>most favorable to the government that the evidence was
>insufficient for the jury to reasonably reach its conclusion.
>
>The Langbord family has contended that the government failed to
>prove that the coins were taken from the Mint with specific
>criminal intent, and that the jury had insufficient evidence to
>reasonably decide on whether the coins were paid out legally.
>
>Judge Davis noted at the hearing that he could not make any
>findings that were inconsistent with the jury, and that he did
>not intend to do so. In describing the trial, Judge Davis
>organized the testimony into two groups. The first dealt with
>the circumstances at the Mint and its accounting practices
>around 1933, and the second was about the evidence and
>information regarding the circumstances of Switt? possession
>On Nov. 10, Judge Davis of the U.S. District Court for the
>Eastern District of Pennsylvania held a hearing to allow the
>government and the Langbord family to present additional
>evidence and oral arguments on the pending declaratory judgment
>claim. Judge Davis could grant a motion for judgment as a matter
>of law if he decided after viewing the evidence in the light
>most favorable to the government that the evidence was
>insufficient for the jury to reasonably reach its conclusion.
>
>The Langbord family has contended that the government failed to
>prove that the coins were taken from the Mint with specific
>criminal intent, and that the jury had insufficient evidence to
>reasonably decide on whether the coins were paid out legally.
>
>Judge Davis noted at the hearing that he could not make any
>findings that were inconsistent with the jury, and that he did
>not intend to do so. In describing the trial, Judge Davis
>organized the testimony into two groups. The first dealt with
>the circumstances at the Mint and its accounting practices
>around 1933, and the second was about the evidence and
>and knowledge of the coins.
>
>Judge Davis went on to state, ? find as a fact that the records
>
>are complete,?finding that the records as presented by the
>government at trial fully accounted for the movement of the 1933
>double eagles and that they conclusively established that none
>of the coins were paid out by the Mint? Cashier. Judge Davis
>double eagles and that they conclusively established that none
>concluded, based on the evidence, that with every coin accounted
>for, legal title could not have passed to anyone other than the
>government.
>
>Regarding the Langbord? witnesses, Judge Davis stated that he
>for, legal title could not have passed to anyone other than the
>government.
>
>found Joan Langbord? testimony unconvincing and that it was
>both ?elf-serving?and not believable because of the number of
>trips that she had made to the safe deposit box prior to the
>coin? alleged discovery.
>
>At the trial, records were presented showing that Mrs. Langbord
>made numerous trips to the safe deposit box that contained the
>1933 double eagles, although in those trips she allegedly only
>examined jewelry and was not aware that the coins were in the
>box. Judge Davis said that her testimony ?and the discovery of
>At the trial, records were presented showing that Mrs. Langbord
>made numerous trips to the safe deposit box that contained the
>1933 double eagles, although in those trips she allegedly only
>examined jewelry and was not aware that the coins were in the
>the coins only after the example allegedly owned by Egypt? King
>Farouk sold at a Sotheby? auction for $7.59 million ??id not
>ring true.?
>
>While Judge Davis ruled in favor of the government on its motion
>for declaratory judgment, he concluded the hearing by
>complimenting the lawyers on both sides, telling them that the
>case was well-tried and that it had been a pleasure to work with
>them.
What a way to treat an old lady!
>While Judge Davis ruled in favor of the government on its motion
>for declaratory judgment, he concluded the hearing by
>complimenting the lawyers on both sides, telling them that the
>case was well-tried and that it had been a pleasure to work with
>them.
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/44288821/ns/today-today_news/t/mystery-double-eagle-gold-coins/
Who ever said possession is 9 points of the law.
But the Mint has them now.
mazorj
Jan 24, 2012, 6:07:39 PM1/24/12
to
You're a right-wing cretin. Davis was appointed by George Bush, not by
Obama, you Obama-hating A-hole.
And you somehow expected him to fly in the face of the facts and the law
and the jury's finding, to overthrow a verdict just because it hurt your
widdle white-wing world views?
You're such a genius, pal, that I'm gonna make you the offer of a
conservative's lifetime. Give me $50 and I'll send you a $1 Presidential
dollar coin that, unlike those "Godless" strikes, actually says "In God We
Trust" on it! And if you don't snap this up, Jesus will see that you burn
in hell for eternity for disrespecting His coinage.
"Issac Yitzkov" <iss...@Use-Author-Supplied-Address.invalid> wrote in
message news:JINBKCCE40933.2568865741@reece.net.au...
> box. Judge Davis said that her testimony - and the discovery of
Obama, you Obama-hating A-hole.
And you somehow expected him to fly in the face of the facts and the law
and the jury's finding, to overthrow a verdict just because it hurt your
widdle white-wing world views?
You're such a genius, pal, that I'm gonna make you the offer of a
conservative's lifetime. Give me $50 and I'll send you a $1 Presidential
dollar coin that, unlike those "Godless" strikes, actually says "In God We
Trust" on it! And if you don't snap this up, Jesus will see that you burn
in hell for eternity for disrespecting His coinage.
"Issac Yitzkov" <iss...@Use-Author-Supplied-Address.invalid> wrote in
message news:JINBKCCE40933.2568865741@reece.net.au...
> the coins only after the example allegedly owned by Egypt's King
> Farouk sold at a Sotheby's auction for $7.59 million - "did not
Ray Keller
Jan 24, 2012, 9:16:04 PM1/24/12
to
LOL....another soon to be dead leftard fringe kook
=================================================
"mazorj" wrote in message news:jfndm1$rgm$1...@dont-email.me...
=================================================
"mazorj" wrote in message news:jfndm1$rgm$1...@dont-email.me...
Illinois Bob
Jan 24, 2012, 11:03:10 PM1/24/12
to
On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 18:07:39 -0500, "mazorj" <maz...@verizon.net>
wrote:
>You're a right-wing cretin. Davis was appointed by George Bush, not by
>Obama, you Obama-hating A-hole.
>
>And you somehow expected him to fly in the face of the facts and the law
>and the jury's finding, to overthrow a verdict just because it hurt your
>widdle white-wing world views?
>
>You're such a genius, pal, that I'm gonna make you the offer of a
>conservative's lifetime. Give me $50 and I'll send you a $1 Presidential
>dollar coin that, unlike those "Godless" strikes, actually says "In God We
>Trust" on it! And if you don't snap this up, Jesus will see that you burn
>in hell for eternity for disrespecting His coinage.
my my my... ain't you the perfect top posting lib..... (sorry group-
couldn't help it)
wrote:
>You're a right-wing cretin. Davis was appointed by George Bush, not by
>Obama, you Obama-hating A-hole.
>
>And you somehow expected him to fly in the face of the facts and the law
>and the jury's finding, to overthrow a verdict just because it hurt your
>widdle white-wing world views?
>
>You're such a genius, pal, that I'm gonna make you the offer of a
>conservative's lifetime. Give me $50 and I'll send you a $1 Presidential
>dollar coin that, unlike those "Godless" strikes, actually says "In God We
>Trust" on it! And if you don't snap this up, Jesus will see that you burn
>in hell for eternity for disrespecting His coinage.
couldn't help it)
Gary
Jan 24, 2012, 11:54:59 PM1/24/12
to
Destitue family? The Lanbords still own Switt's Jewelry store in
Philadelphia.
http://s3-media2.ak.yelpcdn.com/bphoto/8YgVqkcTAL5LqXLgOk803Q/l.jpg
And the judge is not an Obama judge, but on the recommendation of
Senator Rick Santorum was nominated to the United States District
Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania by President George W.
Bush on January 23, 2002
Philadelphia.
http://s3-media2.ak.yelpcdn.com/bphoto/8YgVqkcTAL5LqXLgOk803Q/l.jpg
And the judge is not an Obama judge, but on the recommendation of
Senator Rick Santorum was nominated to the United States District
Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania by President George W.
Bush on January 23, 2002
Phil DeMayo
Jan 25, 2012, 1:21:26 PM1/25/12
to
deceit.
He originally gave the government the names of the people to whom he
sold some of these stolen Saints (they were recovered) and then swore
he had no more.
He lied and I have no doubt his family knew.
PrecisionmachinisT
Jan 25, 2012, 2:01:49 PM1/25/12
to
"Issac Yitzkov" <iss...@Use-Author-Supplied-Address.invalid> wrote in message news:JINBKCCE40933.2568865741@reece.net.au...
> http://www.coinworld.com/articles/judge-agrees-with-jury-in-1933-
Actually, Judge Davis was appointed by GW Bush back in 2002 and NOT by Obama...
SEE:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_District_Court_for_the_Eastern_District_of_Pennsylvania#Current_judges
>
> On Nov. 10, Judge Davis of the U.S. District Court for the
> Eastern District of Pennsylvania held a hearing to allow the
> government and the Langbord family to present additional
> evidence and oral arguments on the pending declaratory judgment
> claim. Judge Davis could grant a motion for judgment as a matter
> of law if he decided after viewing the evidence in the light
> most favorable to the government that the evidence was
> insufficient for the jury to reasonably reach its conclusion.
>
>
Nice try though...
Stanley Schaefer
Jan 25, 2012, 2:43:34 PM1/25/12
to
On Jan 24, 3:14 pm, "Issac Yitzkov" <iss...@Use-Author-Supplied-
They were stolen from the Mint in the first place! See "Illegal
Tender" by David Tripp. Removing stolen property from the current
holder of same and returning it to the original owner is NOT theft,
too bad the now-previous holder is a LOL. Doesn't make the coins any
less stolen. Tripp wondered where the rest of the 1933 Double Eagles
unaccounted for had gone, now we know.
Stan
Tender" by David Tripp. Removing stolen property from the current
holder of same and returning it to the original owner is NOT theft,
too bad the now-previous holder is a LOL. Doesn't make the coins any
less stolen. Tripp wondered where the rest of the 1933 Double Eagles
unaccounted for had gone, now we know.
Stan
Paul Ciszek
Jan 25, 2012, 3:43:24 PM1/25/12
to
In article <522d8c0a-ce3e-4d94...@h3g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
"activist judges" with agendas of their own.
If the coins were stolen, it is impossible for the recipient to transfer
legal ownership of them, even through inheritance. That goes back at
least as far as English Common Law.
--
"Remember when teachers, public employees, Planned Parenthood, NPR and PBS
crashed the stock market, wiped out half of our 401Ks, took trillions in
TARP money, spilled oil in the Gulf of Mexico, gave themselves billions in
bonuses, and paid no taxes? Yeah, me neither."
Frank Galikanokus
Jan 25, 2012, 5:19:14 PM1/25/12
to
Get your head out of the fox shit bag.
JAM
Frank Galikanokus
Jan 25, 2012, 5:21:51 PM1/25/12
to
JAM
Jerry Dennis
Jan 25, 2012, 6:06:46 PM1/25/12
to
On Jan 24, 5:14 pm, "Issac Yitzkov" <iss...@Use-Author-Supplied-
Still too many facts that either weren't presented or were ignored.
I'm glad to see that the issue of the "gray window" of legal purchase
(March 15 - April 4, 1933) by Mint employees was brought up.
The biggest issue I see here is that, with the exception of the two
specimins in the Smithsonian, the Mint claims that all 1933 Saints
were destroyed. That is, until the initial 9 were seized by the
Secret Service after an extensive and exhaustive search beginning in
1944. Then the Farouk example shows up as #10. And now we have the
10 Langbord specimens.
The fact is that, back then, Mint employees were permitted to purchase
new double eagles with older double eagles. Again, who's to say that
Switt didn't purchase a bunch of 1933s with older double eagles. The
Mint's own records verify that the gold content contained in the
number of the 1933 Saints destroyed were within the tolerances for the
weight of the gold contained therein. In other words, they destroyed
445,469 gold coins, the number that was remaining in the Treasury
Vault, verified by weight.
The above is verified in the Sotheby's/Stack's auction catelog, The
1933 Double Eagle, 2002.
Jerry
I'm glad to see that the issue of the "gray window" of legal purchase
(March 15 - April 4, 1933) by Mint employees was brought up.
The biggest issue I see here is that, with the exception of the two
specimins in the Smithsonian, the Mint claims that all 1933 Saints
were destroyed. That is, until the initial 9 were seized by the
Secret Service after an extensive and exhaustive search beginning in
1944. Then the Farouk example shows up as #10. And now we have the
10 Langbord specimens.
The fact is that, back then, Mint employees were permitted to purchase
new double eagles with older double eagles. Again, who's to say that
Switt didn't purchase a bunch of 1933s with older double eagles. The
Mint's own records verify that the gold content contained in the
number of the 1933 Saints destroyed were within the tolerances for the
weight of the gold contained therein. In other words, they destroyed
445,469 gold coins, the number that was remaining in the Treasury
Vault, verified by weight.
The above is verified in the Sotheby's/Stack's auction catelog, The
1933 Double Eagle, 2002.
Jerry
DougC
Jan 26, 2012, 12:20:16 AM1/26/12
to
On 1/25/2012 2:43 PM, Paul Ciszek wrote:
> In article<522d8c0a-ce3e-4d94...@h3g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
> Gary<garydor...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> Destitue family? The Lanbords still own Switt's Jewelry store in
>> Philadelphia.
>>
>> http://s3-media2.ak.yelpcdn.com/bphoto/8YgVqkcTAL5LqXLgOk803Q/l.jpg
>>
>> And the judge is not an Obama judge, but on the recommendation of
>> Senator Rick Santorum was nominated to the United States District
>> Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania by President George W.
>> Bush on January 23, 2002
>
> And he was *agreeing* with the jury. I thought conservatives hated
> "activist judges" with agendas of their own.
>
> If the coins were stolen, it is impossible for the recipient to transfer
> legal ownership of them, even through inheritance. That goes back at
> least as far as English Common Law.
>
Perhaps someone on the coin newsgroup can chime in,,,, but IIRC
> In article<522d8c0a-ce3e-4d94...@h3g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
> Gary<garydor...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> Destitue family? The Lanbords still own Switt's Jewelry store in
>> Philadelphia.
>>
>> http://s3-media2.ak.yelpcdn.com/bphoto/8YgVqkcTAL5LqXLgOk803Q/l.jpg
>>
>> And the judge is not an Obama judge, but on the recommendation of
>> Senator Rick Santorum was nominated to the United States District
>> Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania by President George W.
>> Bush on January 23, 2002
>
> And he was *agreeing* with the jury. I thought conservatives hated
> "activist judges" with agendas of their own.
>
> If the coins were stolen, it is impossible for the recipient to transfer
> legal ownership of them, even through inheritance. That goes back at
> least as far as English Common Law.
>
post-crash double-eagles have been found before, and the (US) courts
always decides to return them to the US government.
There is no way to sell them openly or legally, and anyone who had a
coin shop should have known that.
Jerry Dennis
Jan 26, 2012, 2:07:58 AM1/26/12
to
On Jan 26, 12:20 am, DougC <dcim...@norcom2000.com> wrote:
> On 1/25/2012 2:43 PM, Paul Ciszek wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article<522d8c0a-ce3e-4d94-b7c2-4eb3c687a...@h3g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
> On 1/25/2012 2:43 PM, Paul Ciszek wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Gary<garydorman8...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >> Destitue family? The Lanbords still own Switt's Jewelry store in
> >> Philadelphia.
>
> >>http://s3-media2.ak.yelpcdn.com/bphoto/8YgVqkcTAL5LqXLgOk803Q/l.jpg
>
> >> And the judge is not an Obama judge, but on the recommendation of
> >> Senator Rick Santorum was nominated to the United States District
> >> Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania by President George W.
> >> Bush on January 23, 2002
>
> > And he was *agreeing* with the jury. I thought conservatives hated
> > "activist judges" with agendas of their own.
>
> > If the coins were stolen, it is impossible for the recipient to transfer
> > legal ownership of them, even through inheritance. That goes back at
> > least as far as English Common Law.
>
> Perhaps someone on the coin newsgroup can chime in,,,, but IIRC
> post-crash double-eagles have been found before, and the (US) courts
> always decides to return them to the US government.
>
> There is no way to sell them openly or legally, and anyone who had a
> coin shop should have known that.- Hide quoted text -
> >> Philadelphia.
>
> >>http://s3-media2.ak.yelpcdn.com/bphoto/8YgVqkcTAL5LqXLgOk803Q/l.jpg
>
> >> And the judge is not an Obama judge, but on the recommendation of
> >> Senator Rick Santorum was nominated to the United States District
> >> Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania by President George W.
> >> Bush on January 23, 2002
>
> > And he was *agreeing* with the jury. I thought conservatives hated
> > "activist judges" with agendas of their own.
>
> > If the coins were stolen, it is impossible for the recipient to transfer
> > legal ownership of them, even through inheritance. That goes back at
> > least as far as English Common Law.
>
> Perhaps someone on the coin newsgroup can chime in,,,, but IIRC
> post-crash double-eagles have been found before, and the (US) courts
> always decides to return them to the US government.
>
> There is no way to sell them openly or legally, and anyone who had a
>
> - Show quoted text -
It was only the 1933 double eagles that were/are being seized, not the
1929-1932 double eagles (post-crash as you stated) nor the 1933
eagles.
I'm not saying they should be returned to the Langbords or that the
government is entitled to keep them. As I said in an earlier reply,
there is no mention, one way or the other, whether Israel Switt
actually stole the coins or did he legitimately pay for them with
other double eagles.
The last word I heard about them, to the relief of most coin
collectors, it that they're too important and historical to be
destroyed. As far as I know, they're being held in one of the vaults
at Fort Knox.
Jerry
Jud
Jan 26, 2012, 3:34:50 PM1/26/12
to
On Jan 26, 2:07 am, Jerry Dennis <JDen1...@aol.com> wrote:
> The last word I heard about them, to the relief of most coin
> collectors, it that they're too important and historical to be
> destroyed. As far as I know, they're being held in one of the vaults
> at Fort Knox.
>
> Jerry
I saw them at the ANA convention. I hope that they will continue to be
> The last word I heard about them, to the relief of most coin
> collectors, it that they're too important and historical to be
> destroyed. As far as I know, they're being held in one of the vaults
> at Fort Knox.
>
> Jerry
displayed and not kept in the dark like the National Numismatic
Collection held at the Smithsonian. Before any nit-pickers chime in,
yes, I know that SOME of the NCC coins are displayed, occasionally,
but not in it's entirety. I made a special trip to the Smithsonian
just to see the collection before it was hidden from public view.
Thanks for the heads-up Coin World!
I have also seen all 5 of the 1913 Liberty Nickels at an ANA
convention, as well as seeing the King of Siam proof set, some of the
copper 1943 cents and some pattern coins that were on display at the
Mandalay Bay casino in Vegas. Also at one of the ANA conventions they
had the REAL gold Sacagawea dollars that were sent into space on the
shuttle. Coins that I will never own, but great to see. Too bad they
aren't on public display on a regular basis.
Jerry Dennis
Jan 26, 2012, 6:20:54 PM1/26/12
to
thought. Are they legal to own, or were they struck just to send into
space? And what of the 1974 aluminum cents? There was a story a few
years back about someone picking one off the sidewalk after a
congressman dropped it. The congressman didn't really want it and
told the finder to keep it. Said finder sent it off to NGC, who
authenticated it, graded it, and slabbed it. I haven't heard anything
about the Secret Service jumping through hoops to get it back.
Jerry
mazorj
Jan 26, 2012, 6:06:45 PM1/26/12
to
"Jerry Dennis" <JDen...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:9dcd79f7-5b3a-49bb...@m2g2000vbc.googlegroups.com...
Not having the transcripts, Jerry, I can't prove that your points were or
were not made at trial. However, one would assume that any competent
defense lawyer would have repeatedly hammered such relevant points home,
perhaps even with dramatic thumping on the jury box rail. I certainly
would have.
So all we're left with is your other speculation that the facts were
presented but ignored. Since I wasn't in the jury room, I can't confirm or
deny that either. Juries do that sometimes - look at the OJ trial! - but
it takes an awful lot of "jury misfeasance" to overthrow their verdicts,
which is what this clown cross-posting from a politics group thinks that
the "Obama judge" (Not!) should have done.
mazorj
Jan 26, 2012, 6:08:40 PM1/26/12
to
"Ray Keller" <LEFTARD TROLLS ARE DESPERATE> wrote in message
news:4f1f65e0$0$14468$9a6e...@news.newshosting.com...
> LOL....another soon to be dead leftard fringe kook
> =================================================
Who's the retard fringe kook - the guy who got a simple, extremely
> =================================================
important, and easily checked fact wrong (Davis was not an "Obama judge")
and posted his ignorance for the readers of 5 newsgroups to see; or the guy
(guys, actually - see all the others who pointed out his error) who took
one minute to check that fact before pissing on himself in public like your
rightard fellow traveler did?
You have the right to fabricate your opinions. You don't get to fabricate
your facts.
Frank Provasek
Jan 27, 2012, 11:13:38 AM1/27/12
to
The government claimed that all 1933 double eagles were accounted for,
and at the same time claimed that coins that passed through Switt were
"stolen." Can't be both, unless the 1933 coins were replaced with
earlier dated coins. Due to the Depression's low demand for new
coinage, even the few coins dated 1930-31-32 were not yet showing up
in circulation. Since collectors have always liked to have newly dated
coins as early as they are issued, it's reasonable that Switt would
have bought some 1933 coins directly from the nearby Philadelphia Mint
for his customers. The problem with legal cases where it's the US
Government vs an individual, is that lay juries still are easily
swayed by government prosecutors...the sheeple often believe "well,
they MUST HAVE DONE IT, or the government wouldn't be prosecuting
them."
----
Frank Provasek Rare Coins www.frankcoins.com
http://shop.ebay.com/merchant/frankcoins Texas Auction License
11259, Board member of Texas Coin Dealers Association,
Member TNA, ANA, PCGS, NGC, ICTA - Full Time Since 1991
and at the same time claimed that coins that passed through Switt were
"stolen." Can't be both, unless the 1933 coins were replaced with
earlier dated coins. Due to the Depression's low demand for new
coinage, even the few coins dated 1930-31-32 were not yet showing up
in circulation. Since collectors have always liked to have newly dated
coins as early as they are issued, it's reasonable that Switt would
have bought some 1933 coins directly from the nearby Philadelphia Mint
for his customers. The problem with legal cases where it's the US
Government vs an individual, is that lay juries still are easily
swayed by government prosecutors...the sheeple often believe "well,
they MUST HAVE DONE IT, or the government wouldn't be prosecuting
them."
----
Frank Provasek Rare Coins www.frankcoins.com
http://shop.ebay.com/merchant/frankcoins Texas Auction License
11259, Board member of Texas Coin Dealers Association,
Member TNA, ANA, PCGS, NGC, ICTA - Full Time Since 1991
Jerry Dennis
Jan 27, 2012, 6:11:48 PM1/27/12
to
On Jan 26, 6:06 pm, "mazorj" <maz...@verizon.net> wrote:
> "Jerry Dennis" <JDen1...@aol.com> wrote in message
> the "Obama judge" (Not!) should have done.- Hide quoted text -
minds, or the transcripts that we're left to speculate. It's quite
possible that the Mint Director at the time, Robert J. Grant, passed a
memo to Mint employees saying that they couldn't purchase new gold
coins in view of President Roosevelt's Executive Order. If he did,
it's highly probably that all copies are lost to history. All in all,
it's a fasinating story.
Jerry
> "Jerry Dennis" <JDen1...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
It's only because we don't have ready access to the court, the jury's
> - Show quoted text -
minds, or the transcripts that we're left to speculate. It's quite
possible that the Mint Director at the time, Robert J. Grant, passed a
memo to Mint employees saying that they couldn't purchase new gold
coins in view of President Roosevelt's Executive Order. If he did,
it's highly probably that all copies are lost to history. All in all,
it's a fasinating story.
Jerry
Jerry Dennis
Jan 27, 2012, 6:15:22 PM1/27/12
to
On Jan 27, 11:13 am, Frank Provasek <fr...@frankcoins.com> wrote:
> The government claimed that all 1933 double eagles were accounted for,
> and at the same time claimed that coins that passed through Switt were
> "stolen." Can't be both, unless the 1933 coins were replaced with
> earlier dated coins. Due to the Depression's low demand for new
> coinage, even the few coins dated 1930-31-32 were not yet showing up
> in circulation. Since collectors have always liked to have newly dated
> coins as early as they are issued, it's reasonable that Switt would
> have bought some 1933 coins directly from the nearby Philadelphia Mint
> for his customers. The problem with legal cases where it's the US
> Government vs an individual, is that lay juries still are easily
> swayed by government prosecutors...the sheeple often believe "well,
> they MUST HAVE DONE IT, or the government wouldn't be prosecuting
> them."
>
> ----
> Frank Provasek Rare Coins www.frankcoins.comhttp://shop.ebay.com/merchant/frankcoins Texas Auction License
> The government claimed that all 1933 double eagles were accounted for,
> and at the same time claimed that coins that passed through Switt were
> "stolen." Can't be both, unless the 1933 coins were replaced with
> earlier dated coins. Due to the Depression's low demand for new
> coinage, even the few coins dated 1930-31-32 were not yet showing up
> in circulation. Since collectors have always liked to have newly dated
> coins as early as they are issued, it's reasonable that Switt would
> have bought some 1933 coins directly from the nearby Philadelphia Mint
> for his customers. The problem with legal cases where it's the US
> Government vs an individual, is that lay juries still are easily
> swayed by government prosecutors...the sheeple often believe "well,
> they MUST HAVE DONE IT, or the government wouldn't be prosecuting
> them."
>
> ----
> 11259, Board member of Texas Coin Dealers Association,
> Member TNA, ANA, PCGS, NGC, ICTA - Full Time Since 1991
Im curious if any of the juriors were coin collectors, and to what
> Member TNA, ANA, PCGS, NGC, ICTA - Full Time Since 1991
degree they considered themselves "collectors." Grandma or Grandpa
yanking Statehood quarters from circulation for the grandkids aren't
necessarily collectors like the majority of us would consider
ourselves.
Jerry
Jud
Jan 27, 2012, 10:40:39 PM1/27/12
to
company in Ft.Knox. Legal to own..IF you are the US Government. They
were struck to send into space, and IIRC, there was some other plan
for them after they returned, but it didn't come about...Can I get
some help here? I believe that they will probably end up getting
melted down, except for one, which will probably end up in the
National Numismatic Collection.
The aluminum cent, again IIRC, and I am sure that someone will correct
me if I am wrong, was dropped by a Congresscritter somewhere in the
Capitol, was picked up by a Capitol guard who tried to return it to
him, but as you said, the Congresscritter said for the finder to keep
it...I don't know if he knew what he actually dropped. I WANT NAMES!!
State and District! 8-)
Ken Barr
Jan 28, 2012, 3:30:10 AM1/28/12
to
In article
<7ba0ff79-bb09-48ea...@n6g2000vbz.googlegroups.com>,
From Wikipedia (original sources in the footnotes) ...
In the February 20, 2001, edition of Numismatic News, Alan Herbert
reported the existence of an aluminium cent. It was attributed to US
Capitol Police Officer Albert Toven who found the coin dropped by an
unnamed US Congressman on the floor of the Rayburn Office Building. When
the officer attempted to return the coin to the congressman, thinking it
was a dime, the congressman told him to keep it.[1][13] This example was
graded and certified by the Independent Coin Grading Company as ³About
Uncirculated-58² in 2005, but later certified Mint State 62 two months
later by Professional Coin Grading Service.[1][4][5][13][14]
I've never seen the specific Congresscritter identified in any document,
probably because the officer didn't recognize him. (And he may have
only speculated that it was a Critter, but it could have been a staffer,
lobbyist or someone else altogether ...).
--
Ken Barr Numismatics email: k...@kenbarr.com
P. O. Box 32541 website: http://www.kenbarr.com
San Jose, CA 95152 Coins, currency, exonumia, souvenir cards, etc.
408-272-3247 NEXT SHOW: San Jose Coin Club Jan 27 - 29 (table 200)
<7ba0ff79-bb09-48ea...@n6g2000vbz.googlegroups.com>,
In the February 20, 2001, edition of Numismatic News, Alan Herbert
reported the existence of an aluminium cent. It was attributed to US
Capitol Police Officer Albert Toven who found the coin dropped by an
unnamed US Congressman on the floor of the Rayburn Office Building. When
the officer attempted to return the coin to the congressman, thinking it
was a dime, the congressman told him to keep it.[1][13] This example was
graded and certified by the Independent Coin Grading Company as ³About
Uncirculated-58² in 2005, but later certified Mint State 62 two months
later by Professional Coin Grading Service.[1][4][5][13][14]
I've never seen the specific Congresscritter identified in any document,
probably because the officer didn't recognize him. (And he may have
only speculated that it was a Critter, but it could have been a staffer,
lobbyist or someone else altogether ...).
--
Ken Barr Numismatics email: k...@kenbarr.com
P. O. Box 32541 website: http://www.kenbarr.com
San Jose, CA 95152 Coins, currency, exonumia, souvenir cards, etc.
408-272-3247 NEXT SHOW: San Jose Coin Club Jan 27 - 29 (table 200)
Jud
Jan 28, 2012, 10:12:59 AM1/28/12
to
Thanks for the clarification Ken!
mazorj
Jan 28, 2012, 10:19:19 AM1/28/12
to
news:76033450-5076-4104...@l1g2000vbc.googlegroups.com...
=====================
I'd be surprised if any serious or even semi-serious collectors made it
past the examination of voir dire. One side or the other (depending on how
they thought the juror's views would be affected) most likely would have
objected to seating any of them.
I'd be surprised if any serious or even semi-serious collectors made it
past the examination of voir dire. One side or the other (depending on how
they thought the juror's views would be affected) most likely would have
objected to seating any of them.
Phil DeMayo
Jan 29, 2012, 12:03:45 PM1/29/12
to
On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 19:40:39 -0800 (PST), Jud <numis...@aol.com>
wrote:
>The real gold Sacs are keeping the Langborg St.Gaudens double eagles
>company in Ft.Knox. Legal to own..IF you are the US Government. They
>were struck to send into space, and IIRC, there was some other plan
>for them after they returned, but it didn't come about...Can I get
>some help here? I believe that they will probably end up getting
>melted down, except for one, which will probably end up in the
>National Numismatic Collection.
The only person who may feel these coins were legally struck is the
Mint Director at the time, Phil (I'll do as I please) Diehl.
After returning from space they were to be lent out to museums for
exhibit....not sure that is happening although I believe they made an
appearance at an ANA show.
wrote:
>The real gold Sacs are keeping the Langborg St.Gaudens double eagles
>company in Ft.Knox. Legal to own..IF you are the US Government. They
>were struck to send into space, and IIRC, there was some other plan
>for them after they returned, but it didn't come about...Can I get
>some help here? I believe that they will probably end up getting
>melted down, except for one, which will probably end up in the
>National Numismatic Collection.
Mint Director at the time, Phil (I'll do as I please) Diehl.
After returning from space they were to be lent out to museums for
exhibit....not sure that is happening although I believe they made an
appearance at an ANA show.
Jerry Dennis
Jan 29, 2012, 1:44:28 PM1/29/12
to
On Jan 28, 10:19 am, "mazorj" <maz...@verizon.net> wrote:
> "Jerry Dennis" <JDen1...@aol.com> wrote in message
an "expert" on the jury.
Jerry
> "Jerry Dennis" <JDen1...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> news:76033450-5076-4104...@l1g2000vbc.googlegroups.com...
> On Jan 27, 11:13 am, Frank Provasek <fr...@frankcoins.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > The government claimed that all 1933 double eagles were accounted for,
> > and at the same time claimed that coins that passed through Switt were
> > "stolen." Can't be both, unless the 1933 coins were replaced with
> > earlier dated coins. Due to the Depression's low demand for new
> > coinage, even the few coins dated 1930-31-32 were not yet showing up
> > in circulation. Since collectors have always liked to have newly dated
> > coins as early as they are issued, it's reasonable that Switt would
> > have bought some 1933 coins directly from the nearby Philadelphia Mint
> > for his customers. The problem with legal cases where it's the US
> > Government vs an individual, is that lay juries still are easily
> > swayed by government prosecutors...the sheeple often believe "well,
> > they MUST HAVE DONE IT, or the government wouldn't be prosecuting
> > them."
>
> > ----
> > Frank Provasek Rare Coins
> >www.frankcoins.comhttp://shop.ebay.com/merchant/frankcoinsTexas Auction
> news:76033450-5076-4104...@l1g2000vbc.googlegroups.com...
> On Jan 27, 11:13 am, Frank Provasek <fr...@frankcoins.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > The government claimed that all 1933 double eagles were accounted for,
> > and at the same time claimed that coins that passed through Switt were
> > "stolen." Can't be both, unless the 1933 coins were replaced with
> > earlier dated coins. Due to the Depression's low demand for new
> > coinage, even the few coins dated 1930-31-32 were not yet showing up
> > in circulation. Since collectors have always liked to have newly dated
> > coins as early as they are issued, it's reasonable that Switt would
> > have bought some 1933 coins directly from the nearby Philadelphia Mint
> > for his customers. The problem with legal cases where it's the US
> > Government vs an individual, is that lay juries still are easily
> > swayed by government prosecutors...the sheeple often believe "well,
> > they MUST HAVE DONE IT, or the government wouldn't be prosecuting
> > them."
>
> > ----
> > Frank Provasek Rare Coins
> > License
> > 11259, Board member of Texas Coin Dealers Association,
> > Member TNA, ANA, PCGS, NGC, ICTA - Full Time Since 1991
>
> Im curious if any of the juriors were coin collectors, and to what
> degree they considered themselves "collectors." Grandma or Grandpa
> yanking Statehood quarters from circulation for the grandkids aren't
> necessarily collectors like the majority of us would consider
> ourselves.
>
> Jerry
> =====================
>
> I'd be surprised if any serious or even semi-serious collectors made it
> past the examination of voir dire. One side or the other (depending on how
> they thought the juror's views would be affected) most likely would have
> objected to seating any of them.- Hide quoted text -
> > 11259, Board member of Texas Coin Dealers Association,
> > Member TNA, ANA, PCGS, NGC, ICTA - Full Time Since 1991
>
> Im curious if any of the juriors were coin collectors, and to what
> degree they considered themselves "collectors." Grandma or Grandpa
> yanking Statehood quarters from circulation for the grandkids aren't
> necessarily collectors like the majority of us would consider
> ourselves.
>
> Jerry
> =====================
>
> I'd be surprised if any serious or even semi-serious collectors made it
> past the examination of voir dire. One side or the other (depending on how
> they thought the juror's views would be affected) most likely would have
>
> - Show quoted text -
Of that I'm quite sure. I doubt any lawyer on either side would want
> - Show quoted text -
an "expert" on the jury.
Jerry
Gary
Feb 1, 2012, 1:28:32 PM2/1/12
to
The judge didn't steal them. They were the government's property to
begin with.
begin with.
sgt23
Feb 3, 2012, 2:01:18 AM2/3/12
to
On Feb 1, 1:28 pm, Gary <garydorman8...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> The judge didn't steal them. They were the government's property to
> begin with.
As far as our government is concerned, they think everything belongs
> The judge didn't steal them. They were the government's property to
> begin with.
to them and they can take it away whenever they like. Your the kind of
person that makes it easy for them to repo everything we own or work
for all our lives. You can't even leave your children or other family
anything without the government want its cut so they can lay waste to
it as they see fit.
Jud
Feb 3, 2012, 5:03:28 PM2/3/12
to
On Feb 3, 2:01 am, sgt23 <bravesfandevo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> As far as our government is concerned, they think everything belongs
> to them and they can take it away whenever they like. Your the kind of
> person that makes it easy for them to repo everything we own or work
> for all our lives. You can't even leave your children or other family
> anything without the government want its cut so they can lay waste to
> it as they see fit.
I don't think that's the point. The question is whether or not the
> As far as our government is concerned, they think everything belongs
> to them and they can take it away whenever they like. Your the kind of
> person that makes it easy for them to repo everything we own or work
> for all our lives. You can't even leave your children or other family
> anything without the government want its cut so they can lay waste to
> it as they see fit.
coins left the mint legally. The jury ruled that they didn't, and
therefore subject to confiscation. Seeing as how the balance sheet
showed the proper amount of gold on hand, and that there WAS a window
of opportunity for someone to legally obtain the coins, it is my
personal belief that the government didn't make a compelling argument
PROVING that they left illegally. Whether or not they left the mint
legally really makes no difference anymore, the jury ruled that they
didn't. IMHO, innocence until proven guilty did not occur on this
occasion. I would be appealing this decision to a higher court, if it
was up to me.
Jud
Feb 3, 2012, 5:08:25 PM2/3/12
to
On Feb 3, 5:03 pm, Jud <numismat...@aol.com> wrote:
DAMMIT! Forgot to trim my headers. At least it didn't go to AMOE>
DAMMIT! Forgot to trim my headers. At least it didn't go to AMOE>
Dan
Feb 9, 2012, 9:32:53 PM2/9/12
to
Dan
0 new messages