Huge announcement about ANA show exhibit

Halfsense

Please bring your seats to their full, upright positions and make sure your seatbelts are low and snug..... A big, I'm talkin' REALLY BIG, announcement is about to be made regarding a major exhibit at the upcoming ANA World's Fair of Money convention in Denver.

Hint: You'll be seeing DOUBLE but there are more than two of them......

-donn-

Leiana

The 1913 Lib nickels?

-Amanda

kranky

1933 Saints on parade! (hopefully)

Halfsense

This just in.... The word is now out: The United States Mint will display the ten recently recovered 1933 Double Eagles at the ANA convention in Denver. Here's a link to the official announcement from the Mint.

United States Mint news release about 1933 Double Eagles display at ANA Denver convention

While in Washington, DC last week for Congressional testimony, ANA Executive Director Chris Cipoletti met with Mint officials to discuss the possibility of this exhibit.

See you in Denver,
-donn-

291fifth

The new sets of Doublemint Twins?

Stuart

Very !!!

2ndCharter

Will cameras for taking pictures of the exhibit be allowed?

CaptHenway

<< <i>This just in.... The word is now out: The United States Mint will display the ten recently recovered 1933 Double Eagles at the ANA convention in Denver. Here's a link to the official announcement from the Mint.

United States Mint news release about 1933 Double Eagles display at ANA Denver convention

While in Washington, DC last week for Congressional testimony, ANA Executive Director Chris Cipoletti met with Mint officials to discuss the possibility of this exhibit.

See you in Denver,
-donn- >>



Do they have the owner's permission?????
Tomm

kranky

That's about as cool as it gets.

Maybe B&M could offer $1 million for any additional 1933 Saints sold to them during the show. PCGS could offer to slab them free. Maybe we'll see some more turn up!

If anyone knows who has that 1974 aluminum Lincoln that was seen briefly by some board members a few years ago, could you tell the owner to bring it to Denver? If I could see that in hand, plus view all the 1933 Saints, and having already seen the five 1913 Liberty nickels, I'd be on cloud 9.

Longacre

Sounds really neat!

Pistareen

Donn --

What? No 64-D Peace dollars? You're slacking off.

It takes more than a few Saints to impress the people here ...

Julian

Do they have the owner's permission?????

TD has got it absolutely correct. What is bugging me is why hasn't this gone to court yet?

Barry

Will they be giving them back to the rightful owner?

Russ

I'm not seeing the presse release. Just this:



<< <i>Contact: Press inquiries:
Customer Service information: (800) USA MINT (872-6468) >>



Russ, NCNE

CaptHenway

The press release has been confiscated by the Secret Service........

robertpr

I find it odd that they would be eager to show off coins which the mint considers to be illegally stolen contraband and which they have recently confiscated. Equally odd is that it hasn't (publicly) gone to court yet. Could there be a behind the scenes hush hush talks to bring these coins to market, splitting the procedes with the Mint as was done with the first example?

OKbustchaser

<< <i>I'm not seeing the presse release. Just this:



<< <i>Contact: Press inquiries:
Customer Service information: (800) USA MINT (872-6468) >>



Russ, NCNE >>



Try here

291fifth

<< <i>Will they be giving them back to the rightful owner? >>



The rightful owner is the US government.

ColonialCoinUnion

Great. Just when we are planning some deluxe presentation at our table at the show the US Government comes along with some lame group of coins and wrecks everything.

I don't like it, I tell ya'.

Russ

<< <i>After United States Mint officials enlisted the assistance of the Secret Service and the Department of Justice, the Secret Service recovered the 10 Double Eagles >>



Nice spin.

Russ, NCNE

Whizzard

<< <i>

<< <i>Will they be giving them back to the rightful owner? >>



The rightful owner is the US government. >>



Better spin.

Mark

koynekwest

I was thinking maybe a bunch of major doubled dies to go along with the release of the CPG we've been waiting so long for. The double eagles will do, tho.

PhillyJoe

Hopefully, the Mint will not inflict further humiliation on the doofus that walked these coins into the Mint asking if they were real by not mentioning his name on the display.

If it had been me, the display would have read:

"A Philadelphia collector named PhillyJoe walked into the Mint with these 10 1933 Double Eagles asking if they were the real deal. Since the Mint did not know these were out in the public's hand, only PhillyJoe's sheer stupidity aided the Secret Service in the coins' recovery which have an estimated value of $40-60 MILLION dollars."

Joe

kranky

Joe, I always suspected the owner did it as a legal ploy (not that I would understand the mechanics of it) to seek legal ownership.

PhillyJoe

<< <i>Joe, I always suspected the owner did it as a legal ploy (not that I would understand the mechanics of it) to seek legal ownership. >>



I hope you're right, but I see little upside and a big downside to letting the government decide who is the legal owner.

Joe

tradedollarnut

<< <i>

<< <i>Joe, I always suspected the owner did it as a legal ploy (not that I would understand the mechanics of it) to seek legal ownership. >>



I hope you're right, but I see little upside and a big downside to letting the government decide who is the legal owner.

Joe >>



The government doesn't have the final say....

Russ

<< <i>The government doesn't have the final say.... >>



True. However, I can't help but wonder if the precedent of this display and the public announcement by the mint - with its clear inference that the coins are not the legal possession of those who surrendered them - will influence the decision of the courts.

Russ, NCNE

tradedollarnut

I would have at least negotiated a finder's fee.


I'm still of the opinion that eventually the coins will be returned to the family. Seems to me there's a long history of exchanging old gold for new gold prior to actual release. 'Monetization' is just a fancy term made up to justify the seizure....

IGWT

-- "The government doesn't have the final say.... " --

Last I heard, the courts are a well established part of the government.

relayer

Bring 'em to Long Beach

PhillyJoe

"The 10 gold pieces were illegally removed from the United States Mint at Philadelphia more than 70 years ago."

Is that a fact or more spin? I know we have debated the dates and circumstances before, but if the coins were minted and someone paid or exchanged full price prior to the April 1933 "recall" and these were considered to be of numismatic interest (collectible coins were not subject to the seizure) (OK, that part might be a stretch)then how was all of this illegal? You're telling me the Secret Service has had people looking for these for the last 7 decades? I worked down by the Mint for 15 years and no one asked me if I saw anything suspicious. There were no "reward for the safe return" posters on telephone poles.

Guess I better get to the Records Group 104, 1933 Mint Supervisor's Correspondence, at the Phila. Archives before "they" do.

Joe

tradedollarnut

<< <i>-- "The government doesn't have the final say.... " --

Last I heard, the courts are a well established part of the government. >>



Picky.

Ok - the Mint, Treasury or Secret Service don't have the final say.

SanctionII

I recall posting about a court fight over ownership of these coins previously but I will take another stab at it.

I understand that the lawyer that handled the litigation over the Farouk 1933 Saint was hired by the person who had the ten 1933 Saints. If this is true, I have no doubt that the person who delivered the coins to the government, did so only after having all the legal angels researched and after creating a plan to follow in pushing the matter forward towards the goal of having an settlement (or in the absence of a settlement a court decision) that confirms the legality of his/her private ownership of these coins.

Delivering the coins to the government was probably the first step in the process and was done to deprive the government of certain legal arguments it could make if the person retained custody of the coins. Further, it was done to request and obtain from the government a confirmation that the coins are authentic and not fake. From a PR standpoint, it makes the person look more sympathetic and the government look less sympathetic.

If a settlement is not reached and a lawsuit is filed, the case for legal private ownership will stand or fall on the whether under any scenario it was possible for these coins to have been lawfully issued by the mint and placed into the hands of the public ("monetized"). If the timing of the creation of the 1933 Saints by the mint and the timing of the executive order of FDR is such that a window of time existed where it is possible that 1933 Saints could have legally be released, then at trial the party with the burden of proof (as determined by the court) would have to introduce competent evidence to establish facts that support their position (i.e. the government would have to introduce evidence that these 10 coins were not legally released; or the person who surrendered them to the government would have to introduce evidence that the 10 coins were legally released).

Whoever the court places the burden of proof on will have the toughest job to accomplish, since it is doubtful that anyone is alive that can testify about the facts surrounding these 10 coins.

There will no doubt be legions of lawyers on both sides who do endless research into case law, statutes and regulations directly or indirectly addressing the arcane law of ownership of personal property in general, arcane law regarding when coins produced by the mint are "monetized", arcane law regarding the burdens of proof, persuasion and going forward in civil trials and arcane law regarding rules of evidence.

If the tens coins ever go through litigation to determine ownership, it will be a fascinating case to follow, both as collectors and for me as a lawyer.

tradedollarnut

It will be fascinating - no doubt.

An additional curveball in the case is the document signed by Izzy swearing he didn't possess any of the coins. Of course, I suppose that all depends on what the definition of 'is' is....

Barry

'Monetization' is just a fancy term made up to justify the seizure....

The Mint's version of eminent domain.

Coinosaurus

Sanction is correct. The Switt family is geting very good legal advice. Everything else is speculation until they make their move.

RWB

If any poster hasn't read them, pick up a copy of David Tripp's "Illegal Tender" or Alison Frankel's "Double Eagle." Both tell the story of the 1933 $20 in excellent style based on careful research.

PS: Alison will be at the ANA and is scheduled to speak at the Numismatic Theater on Aug 19 at 2:30pm, Room 706. I don't know if David is speaking - his name is not on the program - or if he will be attending the convention.

SilverDaddy

This is incredible. Is Berke going to let this go without a fight? Wonder if Langbord still thinks turning in the coins was such a good idea. And what if something happens to the coins while on display, yet the Langbords are eventually ruled the legal owners? If I were Berke I would, at the very least, clarify this issue in advance.

SilverDaddy

<< <i>If any poster hasn't read them, pick up a copy of David Tripp's "Illegal Tender" or Alison Frankel's "Double Eagle." Both tell the story of the 1933 $20 in excellent style based on careful research. >>




Both books are excellent, with Tripp's earlier work much richer in detail concerning the original 1940's investigation, and Frankel's better at explaining the Parrino/Moore saga. And of course Frankel got to report the appearance of the ten new ones.

I never get tired of this story.

JustaRookie

In the end after all of the dust clears. the real winners will be the lawyers. If the case goes to litigation then the fees will be astronomical and just might exceed any monetary value the coins have on the open market unless the gov. wins then it will be all of us footing the bill. As far as I can see it, there will be no true winners in this matter but the play by play of how this unfolds will be priceless!!!