• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Family looses ownership fight with U.S. Government over raredouble-headed gold coins.

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
I'm interested in hearing what M-Taliesin has to say about this.

I believe that even though the statute of limitations had expired, and the one in possession was beyond prosecution, if the coins were indeed stolen, then they should be returned to their rightful owner.

On the other hand, the Government's argument was that the coins "were likely stolen." That doesn't mean they were stolen. Lack of a sales receipt held by the Government doesn't mean they were stolen. Lack of a sales receipt held by the man's daughter doesn't mean they were stolen, either.

This one's the kicker, however: "The jeweler had been investigated for illegally possessing gold coins in the 1930s and '40s, but Switt was never prosecuted because the statute of limitations had expired."

If he was investigated for illegal possession some 70 years ago, why weren't the coins confiscated way back then? If the coins are worth $7 Million each, I'd appeal on the grounds the Government vacated their claim 70 years ago when they chose not to recover the coins back then.
 

END_THE_FED

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2010
Messages
925
Location
Seattle, Washington, USA
I'm interested in hearing what M-Taliesin has to say about this.

I believe that even though the statute of limitations had expired, and the one in possession was beyond prosecution, if the coins were indeed stolen, then they should be returned to their rightful owner.

On the other hand, the Government's argument was that the coins "were likely stolen." That doesn't mean they were stolen. Lack of a sales receipt held by the Government doesn't mean they were stolen. Lack of a sales receipt held by the man's daughter doesn't mean they were stolen, either.

This one's the kicker, however: "The jeweler had been investigated for illegally possessing gold coins in the 1930s and '40s, but Switt was never prosecuted because the statute of limitations had expired."

If he was investigated for illegal possession some 70 years ago, why weren't the coins confiscated way back then? If the coins are worth $7 Million each, I'd appeal on the grounds the Government vacated their claim 70 years ago when they chose not to recover the coins back then.


Wow, so never mind all that "reasonable doubt" stuff. If we claim that they were "most likely stolen" then that is good enough.

If he was investigated for "illegal possession" during the 30's or 40's it may not have been for those exact coins. The Federal government claimed that gold coins were illegal for Americans to posses at all back then. Gold was presumably made illegal to own back in 1933 (One of many crimes that FDR perpetrated against our Republic) It was not repealed until the 70's.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Yeah, better not let let a little old lady possess $7M coins.

Better seize them and put them in Ft. Knox, where they are worth----$1500 each.

Gotta get those two ounces of gold. Gold only. The government isn't exactly going to sell coins that aren't supposed to exist.

It would be hilarious if the Treasury tried to auction them and everybody refused to bid because they were stolen from the little old lady.

Scratch that. Knowing Treasury, they'll probably carry the coins on the books as assets worth $14M, even if they can't sell them for that. Bookkeeping gimmick, you know.
 

Dreamer

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2009
Messages
5,360
Location
Grennsboro NC
Better seize them and put them in Ft. Knox, where they are worth----$1500 each.

You do know that what little gold that is still left in Ft. Knox belongs to the private banks, right?...

In terms of pure dollar value, the morphine stockpiles in Ft. Knox has more value than the gold owned by the US Government there...
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
You do know that what little gold that is still left in Ft. Knox belongs to the private banks, right?...

In terms of pure dollar value, the morphine stockpiles in Ft. Knox has more value than the gold owned by the US Government there...

I was thinking about evidence that suggests a good amount of the gold at Ft. Knox might not be .999, a good amount being perhaps...wait for it...coin-melt.

Kinda like the first Pirates of the Caribbean movie. Those last two coins had to rejoin their melted fellows to lift the curse.

Wait! Did the Federal Reserve just disappear? Maybe? :)
 
Last edited:

PrayingForWar

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2007
Messages
1,701
Location
The Real World.
I just have to wonder what sort of a jury would side with the government on that case. Unless it was beyond a doubt the coins were stolen, the property should not have gone to the government. The historical value far outweighs the commodity.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
I just have to wonder what sort of a jury would side with the government on that case. Unless it was beyond a doubt the coins were stolen, the property should not have gone to the government. The historical value far outweighs the commodity.

Recently a mentally challenged man was convicted of resisting police or some such. Cops came to his home on a neighbors report of somebody kicking in his front door. He ran and hid in his bathroom. (Yeah, I can't understand why someone with a child-like mentality would be afraid of storm-troopers pounding into the house. Go figure.)

The jury convicted him. But, sent a note to the judge to the effect the defendant had been wronged and asked for leniency in sentencing.

My take: 1) The jury didn't know they could nullify. 2) The judge possibly lied during the jury instruction telling the jury something along the lines that if they found the defendant had behaved in such-and-such manner, then the law had been violated and their duty was to convict.

News Story: http://lufkindailynews.com/news/local/article_79700610-b30b-11e0-a4e5-001cc4c03286.html


I found it here: http://www.theagitator.com/
 
Last edited:

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
Recently a mentally challenged man was convicted of resisting police or some such. Cops came to his home on a neighbors report of somebody kicking in his front door. He ran and hid in his bathroom. (Yeah, I can't understand why someone with a child-like mentality would be afraid of storm-troopers pounding into the house. Go figure.)

The jury convicted him. But, sent a note to the judge to the effect the defendant had been wronged and asked for leniency in sentencing.

My take: 1) The jury didn't know they could nullify. 2) The judge possibly lied during the jury instruction telling the jury something along the lines that if they found the defendant had behaved in such-and-such manner, then the law had been violated and their duty was to convict.

News Story: http://lufkindailynews.com/news/local/article_79700610-b30b-11e0-a4e5-001cc4c03286.html


I found it here: http://www.theagitator.com/

I wonder if judges do this because many were prosecutors at one time. It's why I don't like to refer to it as a "justice" system it is simply a processing plant of human meat that makes sure it fully grinds them up before they are done with them.
 

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
My only witness of a judge/panel (not quite a jury) operation when I had inside knowledge of what was really going on was rather eye-opening:

1. The prosecutor lied through his teeth, knowingly.

2. The judge's instructions to the panel were exemplary, and above-board.

3. The defense's actions were largely limited to waffling. Whether by incompetence or design is uncertain.

4. Four witnesses for the prosecution lied through their teeth, under oath, while on the stand.

5. The panel decided against the defendant, unanimously, despite the paltry, but inescapable evidence of the defendant's innocence presented to all throughout the procedure.

Justice? No way in hell.

That experience, combined with the abundance of releases based on DNA evidence and similar issues, opened my eyes to the fact our system of justice is way out of date and easily corrupted by either intent, ignorance, inexperience, or any combination thereof.
 
Top