Georgia coin case with unusual twist is going to trial
Michigan
Posts: 4,942 ✭
Andrew O'Connell is accused of stealing coins from Joe and Tammy Barnes and is scheduled for trial in November. The Barnes, however, owe O'Connell and his father close to $200,000 for slandering them by saying they stole their rare coins, a civil jury found last week.
All this begs the question -- what's going on?
"Our contention is the civil case and criminal case are independent of each other," said Assistant District Attorney Shelly Faulk. "It's our intention to proceed."
The whole thing started in August 2006, when O'Connell appraised some of the Barnes' rare coins, said attorney Michael Garner, who represents O'Connell in the civil and criminal cases. O'Connell had the coins for a few days, returning them with an appraisal of about $3-4,000.
The Barnes, however, claimed that O'Connell had substituted less valued coins for theirs, and he went to the Public Safety Building in late September 2006 for an interview. After taking a polygraph test and talking to Tammy Barnes, O'Connell was arrested and charged with theft by taking, police report.
Garner filed a civil suit on behalf of Andrew and Joseph O'Connell in October 2006, claiming the Barnes slandered his clients in the media. He asked for $2,500,000 in total damages.
Instead, a Muscogee County jury decided Friday that Andrew O'Connell was entitled to $6,000 from Tammy Barnes and his father to $175,000 from both the Barnes.
"We think the case is full of error," said Matt Pope, who represents the Barnes.
Pope intends to appeal the case on behalf of the Barnes to the Georgia Court of Appeals. They have 30 days after the verdict to submit notice of appeal. Pope said he's confident of a reversal.
Garner said it's unusual for a civil case to reach trial before a criminal one. Faulk said Garner requested the civil case to go first.
"We wanted to get one of them tried," Garner said. "It had been over two years."
The prosecutor added she will review the civil case and its issues.
"One verdict doesn't necessarily mean a certain verdict will be found in another case," Faulk said.
All this begs the question -- what's going on?
"Our contention is the civil case and criminal case are independent of each other," said Assistant District Attorney Shelly Faulk. "It's our intention to proceed."
The whole thing started in August 2006, when O'Connell appraised some of the Barnes' rare coins, said attorney Michael Garner, who represents O'Connell in the civil and criminal cases. O'Connell had the coins for a few days, returning them with an appraisal of about $3-4,000.
The Barnes, however, claimed that O'Connell had substituted less valued coins for theirs, and he went to the Public Safety Building in late September 2006 for an interview. After taking a polygraph test and talking to Tammy Barnes, O'Connell was arrested and charged with theft by taking, police report.
Garner filed a civil suit on behalf of Andrew and Joseph O'Connell in October 2006, claiming the Barnes slandered his clients in the media. He asked for $2,500,000 in total damages.
Instead, a Muscogee County jury decided Friday that Andrew O'Connell was entitled to $6,000 from Tammy Barnes and his father to $175,000 from both the Barnes.
"We think the case is full of error," said Matt Pope, who represents the Barnes.
Pope intends to appeal the case on behalf of the Barnes to the Georgia Court of Appeals. They have 30 days after the verdict to submit notice of appeal. Pope said he's confident of a reversal.
Garner said it's unusual for a civil case to reach trial before a criminal one. Faulk said Garner requested the civil case to go first.
"We wanted to get one of them tried," Garner said. "It had been over two years."
The prosecutor added she will review the civil case and its issues.
"One verdict doesn't necessarily mean a certain verdict will be found in another case," Faulk said.
0
Comments
Yep, look at O.J., guilty in civil and "innocent" in criminal.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm,
Welcome to Las Vegas, O.J.!
bob
I know the OConnell famly personally as a friend and a Business Associate [for over 20 years]. This is a third generation coin business and the first accusation of any wrong doing ever in the life of this family. Very upstanding and honest people. The people bringing these charges however have a very shady and warped lifestyle. Kind of people who have a lawer on call ready to sue at the least little instance of your neglect or mistake. This is what I was led to believe as I do not want to get any where near for fear of being next. The OConnells are associated with a lot of Collector,Dealer and Friends that signed affidavits to the Character and Reputation of all the OConnell Family and offered to appear in court on their Behalf. I hope you can get the picture of the both sides from a fellow board member and a close associate and friend of the OConnell family. Chas. Crews Woodstock, Georgia.
Specializing in 1854 and 1855 large FE patterns
<
Uneducated person sends a coin for authentication/attribution and then claims a different coin was sent back!
The name is LEE!
<< <i>"one verdict doesn't necessarily mean......"
Yep, look at O.J., guilty in civil and "innocent" in criminal.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm,
Welcome to Las Vegas, O.J.!
bob
The burden of proof is different in civil and criminal cases. But, if the criminal case is won, chances are that the same civil case will follow suit.
<< <i>I can not imagine any coin dealer submitting to a polygraph. Sorry, but all I can say is what a fool. It brings to mind the old joke about coin dealers...Q. How do you know if a coin dealer is lying? A. His lips are moving.
It also reminds me of a joke about investment bankers in today's financial meltdown, which can also be applied to coin dealers:
Q: What is the difference between a pidgeon and a coin dealer [or investment banker]?
A: The pidgeon can still put a deposit on a Ferrari.
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
<< <i>I can not imagine any coin dealer submitting to a polygraph. Sorry, but all I can say is what a fool. >>
Unless he was telling the truth and figured the polygraph would help exonerate him. Nowhere in the article does itsay that he failed the polygraph, just that he took one prior to being charged. There is a presumption of innocence in our court system, and at least one group of twelve citizens believed him already.
Sean Reynolds
"Keep in mind that most of what passes as numismatic information is no more than tested opinion at best, and marketing blather at worst. However, I try to choose my words carefully, since I know that you guys are always watching." - Joe O'Connor
I guess dealers should have a plan to protect themselves, especially with any collection that is raw or non top tier grading that needs a couple of days to look through. Photos maybe...
K
edited for a couple of missing words!