Should the whole Langbord family end up in Federal Prison?

stinkinlincoln · July 31, 2009 6:24AM

In sanctions thread about the 33 Double Eagles, another member made the following comment: I only hope the whole Langbord family ends up in Federal Prison where they belong.

Does anyone here feel the same way? And if so, care to explain why?

Ive seen that same comment by the same person several times, on several different threads. Ive asked why they feel that way, but no response to date.

Does anyone else think the Longbord family should be sent to prison?

Wolf359 · July 31, 2009 6:26AM

So every time someone states their personal opinion for an unknown reason and fails to answer you, a thread should be started to pressure them?

SaorAlba · July 31, 2009 6:29AM

Punished for the alleged sins of their forefathers. Well, if we do that, an awful lot of people are going to jail for this and that.

coindeuce · July 31, 2009 6:31AM

Jack, don't worry. Be happy. I for one don't perceive this thread as a conduit of pressure. It's merely a line of questions. Nothng more, nothing less. Is your response an attempt to derail this thread?

stinkinlincoln · July 31, 2009 6:31AM

No need to pressure them, as I didnt ask for them to respond here. I asked the board in general if they thought the Langbord family should be sent to prison...

Also, thanks for not ignoring me like you said you were going to do...

I find your posts to be of great interest.

MikeInFL · July 31, 2009 6:32AM

<< So every time someone states their personal opinion for an unknown reason and fails to answer you, a thread should be started to pressure them? >>

The cynic in me would respond...

So every time someone starts a post on a topic you don't approve of, you should pressure them to stop?

However, I tend to agree with you that some of these issues could be solved via PM.

stinkinlincoln · July 31, 2009 6:33AM

<< Is your response an attempt to derail this thread?>>

No, we dont see eye to eye, and instead of following through with his 'Im ignoring you' promise, he thought to join in the thread and try to provoke me abit...

Its not working, but I thank him for posting to this thread none the less.

MikeInFL · July 31, 2009 6:33AM

Derailment avoided, back to the topic at hand...

"Does anyone else think the Longbord family should be sent to prison?"

Nope, not me.

stinkinlincoln · July 31, 2009 6:35AM

<<However, I tend to agree with you that some of these issues could be solved via PM. >>

This question though is for the board in general, all members. The person that made the comment matters little here. His views, whatever they may be are his and he is allowed to have them. Im not asking his thoughts as I have already done that. He cares not to respond which is fine.

I was more curious though to see if anyone else felt the same way.

SanctionII · July 31, 2009 6:41AM

In prior threads I asked the poster why he felt the Langbords should be in prison and if he really feels this way.

No response yet.

I would be very interested to hear his reasons why the family should be sent to the big house.

Does anyone else share his opinion?

As for me, I do not believe the Langbords should be sent to prison. It they lose the case, they lose the coins. If the win the case they get the coins. If they settle, they settle and obtain the benefits of the settlement (money or some of the coins). As simple as that.

MikeInFL · July 31, 2009 6:45AM

What if it were to be proven, perhaps by a letter or other communication, that they were in fact aware the coins were "stolen" (or otherwise sold outside the normal channels) from the mint.

Does that change anyone's perspective? And I wonder if this prior knowledge handed down from generation to generation was what led to the comments made by that other poster -- because it is not out of the realm of possibility for this to have occurred, at least from where I sit....Mike

IrishMike · July 31, 2009 6:46AM

<< In prior threads I asked the poster why he felt the Langbords should be in prison and if he really feels this way.

No response yet.

I would be very interested to hear his reasons why the family should be sent to the big house.

Does anyone else share his opinion?

As for me, I do not believe the Langbords should be sent to prison. It they lose the case, they lose the coins. If the win the case they get the coins. If they settle, they settle and obtain the benefits of the settlement (money or some of the coins). As simple as that. >>

Its called "near" posse comitatas.

Consider the source, a lot of us got used to these comments that were frequently posted on the open forum. They soon became a sort of sad daily humor. If you are looking for logic, fogettaboutit.

Julian · July 31, 2009 6:48AM

This is an absolutely absurd question.

Clearly the Langbord family could not have committed an imprisonable crime!! Any crime, if committed, would have been committed over 70 years ago and since it would not have been a capital crime, I am pretty sure that any statute of limitations should have run out.

MikeInFL · July 31, 2009 6:50AM

Julian, How is it absurd? If my grandfather robbed a bank, for instance, and hid the money in the basement of his house and it was never found, but told me on his deathbed about the money, is it not a crime if I do not report it as such, particularly if asked by the government if somehow they found out about it? I believe perjury, for example not admitting information concerning the coins they were privy to under oath, is a Federal Crime, and certainly it is possible to have occurred. Just wondering, and perhaps playing a bit of devil's advocate here....Mike

keoj · July 31, 2009 7:01AM

I'm not familar with the case but I'm with Julian on this. If a crime has been commited, if evidence exists to prove someone was directly or indirectly responsible for said crim, if the statue of limitations hasn't run out....a lot of "ifs" on this. The outcome was stated: they lose the coins, keep the coins or a settlement is reached. No one is going to prison.

keoj

WoodenJefferson · July 31, 2009 7:02AM

I’m sorry, I have to put this in the category of “I don’t give a rats behind!”

This thread has nothing to do with coins or collecting, this is a statement about emotional feelings of a board member who is posting to threads to incite the psyche and nothing more.

Avoid the troll and thusly avoid confrontation.

Julian · July 31, 2009 7:07AM

If the Langbord's committed perjury, then I agree that a crime has been committed, but there is a great likelihood that any deathbed confession would not have involved all of the plaintiffs and I cannot figure out how that could ever be proven, as well, unless there was a recording made of such conversation.

19Lyds · July 31, 2009 7:09AM

<< Julian, How is it absurd? If my grandfather robbed a bank, for instance, and hid the money in the basement of his house and it was never found, but told me on his deathbed about the money, is it not a crime if I do not report it as such, particularly if asked by the government if somehow they found out about it? I believe perjury, for example not admitting information concerning the coins they were privy to under oath, is a Federal Crime, and certainly it is possible to have occurred. Just wondering, and perhaps playing a bit of devil's advocate here....Mike >>

Kinda apples to oranges here ain't it Mike? I mean, if the grandfather knew he robbed the bank and admitted that fact?

It has to be proven that Izzy actually stole these coins. Sure he could have revealed their existance and the controversy regarding his acquisition of them on his deathbed but I think you've defined two different scenarios.

One where a crime was actually commited and the other where a crime was supposedly committed.

I say supposedly because there simply is not enough evidence one way or the other to state emphatically that a crime did occur especially since new issues were made available to smart collectors/dealers in the past.

stinkinlincoln · July 31, 2009 7:12AM

<<I’m sorry, I have to put this in the category of “I don’t give a rats behind!”

This thread has nothing to do with coins or collecting, this is a statement about emotional feelings of a board member who is posting to threads to incite the psyche and nothing more.

Avoid the troll and thusly avoid confrontation.>>

Im sorry, but I disagree with part of your statement. This is directly relating to coins and coin collecting. 10 of the most famous and talked about coins may be coming to the market, making the number of examples to 11! If this is not coin related, I dont know what is.

I have zero emotional feelings in regard to the member that made the original comment, I have never talked with him nor know him in anyway, nor do I have any emotional feelings regarding these coins.Aside from the collector in me that is curious about this case and the coins.
Im more interested if people think the family that 'found' these coins should be in prison for their involvement with these coins.

I do my best to avoid trolls, but the comment stuck out to me and I was interested in what everyone else thought on the matter.

ziggy29 · July 31, 2009 7:12AM

<< In sanctions thread about the 33 Double Eagles, another member made the following comment: I only hope the whole Langbord family ends up in Federal Prison where they belong. >>

I think the law has evolved a lot since the days when people could be punished for the sins of their ancestors -- and in this case, it's changed in a good way.

MikeInFL · July 31, 2009 7:16AM

<< 

<< Julian, How is it absurd? If my grandfather robbed a bank, for instance, and hid the money in the basement of his house and it was never found, but told me on his deathbed about the money, is it not a crime if I do not report it as such, particularly if asked by the government if somehow they found out about it? I believe perjury, for example not admitting information concerning the coins they were privy to under oath, is a Federal Crime, and certainly it is possible to have occurred. Just wondering, and perhaps playing a bit of devil's advocate here....Mike >>

Kinda apples to oranges here ain't it Mike? I mean, if the grandfather knew he robbed the bank and admitted that fact?

It has to be proven that Izzy actually stole these coins. Sure he could have revealed their existance and the controversy regarding his acquisition of them on his deathbed but I think you've defined two different scenarios.

One where a crime was actually commited and the other where a crime was supposedly committed.

I say supposedly because there simply is not enough evidence one way or the other to state emphatically that a crime did occur especially since new issues were made available to smart collectors/dealers in the past. >>

I'm with you, Lee (and Julian). Just trying to put myself in the shoes of someone who would take the position that the Langbord family was guilty then try and rationalize it. I do not subscribe to the idea that it is true, only that it might be....Mike

PerryHall · July 31, 2009 7:24AM

Is receiving stolen property now legal?

stinkinlincoln · July 31, 2009 7:41AM

Are these considered stolen property?

BECOKA · July 31, 2009 7:45AM

<< Are these considered stolen property? >>

That's what will be determined after this is all over.

The trick is deciding if the government has to prove they were stolen or if the Langbord's have to prove they were not.

stinkinlincoln · July 31, 2009 7:46AM

Thats what I thought.

cmerlo1 · July 31, 2009 7:55AM

Quite the opposite- give 'em the coins already!

Lakesammman · July 31, 2009 8:02AM

I just want to know about Switt -- Izzy guilty or not??

mrearlygold · July 31, 2009 8:04AM

Most of our so called "representatives" belong in prison, and/or given the gallows.

Certainly not the Langbords.

seatedcollector · July 31, 2009 8:06AM

if you find a gold chain in your (now deseased) grandmother's estate, should you have to prove that she didnt steal it ? if you found it in her personal belongings after her estate was settled would that mean that you concealed it from probate ? or would that mean that you may have overlooked it when the original inventory was done of her belongings ? the fact of the matter is that the coins were in POSESSION of the langbord family, if izzy bought them off ebay in 1990 and then the family found them in 1999 does that prove that they were stolen in 1933 ?? izzy is no longer with us, only he knows how he originally acquired those coins, he didnt walk into the mint vaults and STEAL them, he most likely bought them from a mint employee or the mint cashier, he most likely did not steal them himself, hell, he may have bought them the day they were minted, no amount of story telling will prove where and when izzy obtained them conclusively, even if the langbords have a note signed by him that states, he broke into the mint during the night and stole them, that doesnt PROVE he did it, it proves they have a note. i could confess to stealing gold from the treasury in 1972 but no one could PROVE that i did it.

robec · July 31, 2009 8:17AM

If the 1933 Saint has been illegal to own for over 70 years, why is there even a question about the legality of these in the first place? Maybe in 2030 someone will discover 10 1964 Peace dollars. Then we can have another court case to see if those are also legal.

abitofthisabitofthat · July 31, 2009 8:22AM

<< if you find a gold chain in your (now deseased) grandmother's estate, should you have to prove that she didnt steal it ? if you found it in her personal belongings after her estate was settled would that mean that you concealed it from probate ? or would that mean that you may have overlooked it when the original inventory was done of her belongings ? the fact of the matter is that the coins were in POSESSION of the langbord family, if izzy bought them off ebay in 1990 and then the family found them in 1999 does that prove that they were stolen in 1933 ?? izzy is no longer with us, only he knows how he originally acquired those coins, he didnt walk into the mint vaults and STEAL them, he most likely bought them from a mint employee or the mint cashier, he most likely did not steal them himself, hell, he may have bought them the day they were minted, no amount of story telling will prove where and when izzy obtained them conclusively, even if the langbords have a note signed by him that states, he broke into the mint during the night and stole them, that doesnt PROVE he did it, it proves they have a note. i could confess to stealing gold from the treasury in 1972 but no one could PROVE that i did it. >>

Of Course! We all no that if you are not convicted than no crime ocurred. It was never PROVED that OJ butchered his ex. Since he was not convicted, I am sure he is actually a really nice guy. What if Izzy tried for a book deal - based upon hypothetical of course - "If I stole the Double Eagles, here's how it happenned".

seatedcollector · July 31, 2009 8:38AM

indeed it was never proven that oj killed nicole, thats why today he is a free man, and murder has been illegal for more than 70 years. what it boils down to is the question of whether the family should be held responsible for the actions of izzy, regardless of what those actions were, obviously they should not. did they have knowledge of the coins and that the coins were illegal to own ? any sensible person would think not considering they openly allowed the mint to authenticate them, why would the family do this if they thought the coins were illegal to own ? civic duty ? patriotism ? or maybe they were niave enough to think the "gubmint" was going to say, "yeah theyre real" thanks for letting us look at them. to the persons who believes izzys family should go to prison for owning the coins, i pose these questions: what criteria do you use to determine if a family member of a person who committed a crime, or may have committed a crime, should be punished for that crime ? and should that family member be punished as if they themselves had committed the crime ? and should that family member be punished only if the crime can be proven or does it even matter ?

GrumpyEd · July 31, 2009 8:42AM

They should make a set of 2010 aluminum cents and secretly put micro serial numbers on each coin.

Hand them out to each government official (secretly noting who gets each numbered coin) and tell them that they must not let the coin out of their control and only to inspect them in a meeting. At the end of the meeting tell them to place the coin in a drop box bin as they leave the room but make it so nobody can see if they place anything in the bin.

Then count the coins and see how many were stolen by the trusted officials and check the numbers to see who stole the coins.

I'd like to see the results.

seatedcollector · July 31, 2009 8:48AM

government officals ? be trusted ?? LOL ahh but could anyone PROVE that the coin didnt get dropped in the box ?? just because it wasnt in the box, isnt proof that it was not dropped in.

GFourDriver · July 31, 2009 8:49AM

Statute of limitation ran out a long time ago.

seatedcollector · July 31, 2009 8:54AM

theoretically speaking, does anyone know what the statute of limitations is for stealing government property ?

EagleEye · July 31, 2009 10:01AM

Seems pretty petty. If ol' Izzy traded earlier dated $20's for the 20 or so 1933's then it is not stealing.

BECOKA · July 31, 2009 10:03AM

<< Seems pretty petty. If ol' Izzy traded earlier dated $20's for the 20 or so 1933's then it is not stealing. >>

This is why I think the burden of proof should be on the government in which case I beleive they may try to settle out of court.

rgCoinGuy · July 31, 2009 10:23AM

<< Most of our so called "representatives" belong in prison, and/or given the gallows.

Certainly not the Langbords. >>

mrpotatoheadd · July 31, 2009 10:27AM

<< If the 1933 Saint has been illegal to own for over 70 years... >>

I believe there had been some public sales for about 10 years (until the mid 40's) before the government decided they were not legal to own. If you do a search of the forum, you'll find other threads on the topic, of which at least some include this information.

ksteelheader · July 31, 2009 10:31AM

<< In sanctions thread about the 33 Double Eagles, another member made the following comment: I only hope the whole Langbord family ends up in Federal Prison where they belong.

Does anyone here feel the same way? And if so, care to explain why?

Ive seen that same comment by the same person several times, on several different threads. Ive asked why they feel that way, but no response to date.

Does anyone else think the Longbord family should be sent to prison? >>

That was dbldie55, he doesn't even like himself.

robec · July 31, 2009 10:33AM

<< 

<< If the 1933 Saint has been illegal to own for over 70 years... >>

I believe there had been some public sales for about 10 years (until the mid 40's) before the government decided they were not legal to own. If you do a search of the forum, you'll find other threads on the topic, of which at least some include this information. >>

Thank you, that changes my whole thought process. I had thought they were illegal from day 1 and were never suppose to have left the mint. It's ridiculous to even think about any surviving family member ending up in prison. For what???

Bear · July 31, 2009 10:33AM

Because Eve ate the apple, in the Garden of Eden,

does that mean we all have to now go to jail now?

mrearlygold · July 31, 2009 10:54AM

<< 

<< Most of our so called "representatives" belong in prison, and/or given the gallows.

Certainly not the Langbords. >>

>>

Raybo · July 31, 2009 11:07AM

<< Because Eve ate the apple, in the Garden of Eden,

does that mean we all have to now go to jail now? >>

"I swear it was all her fault!"

AndyMac · July 31, 2009 11:35AM

Its a scary world we live in when people even suggset this.

TwoSides2aCoin · July 31, 2009 11:36AM

How numismatic can we get related ? yes or noe ?

19Lyds · July 31, 2009 11:44AM

<< Are these considered stolen property? >>

For some they are as they've reviewed the circumstantial evidence and declared them stolen.

Others have reviewed the circumstantial evidence and concluded that they aren't stolen.

While a third group has reviewed the circumstantial evidence and concluded they just don't know.

19Lyds · July 31, 2009 11:51AM

<< If the 1933 Saint has been illegal to own for over 70 years, why is there even a question about the legality of these in the first place? Maybe in 2030 someone will discover 10 1964 Peace dollars. Then we can have another court case to see if those are also legal. >>

If I recall correctly, the US Mint made the 1964-D Peace Dollars available to Denver Mint employees on a 1 to 1 exchange.

However, after it was decided the coins would not be minted and released, those "unknown" employees were ordered to return the coins. I say unknown because records do not exist but the mint knows that some were exchanged. The 1964-D Peace Dollar holds the exact same dearness of heart to the Secret Service as the 1933 St Gaudens does and any known specimens would be confiscated immediately. I have nbo doubts in my mind that some 1964-D Peace Dollars do in fact exist as any records regarding the exchange are very sketchy along with the posting that employees who received the coins were ordered to return them.

That post is somewhere on these forums.

On the same line of thought though, if any do exist, were they obtained illegally?

Found it. Sinin1 posted this in this thread.

Of course, I have no idea if he made this up or not.

ProofRainbowRoosevelt · July 31, 2009 12:10PM

If you break the written law, you should pay/serve the fine/sentence.

oreville · July 31, 2009 12:42PM

Hang 'em!

Should the whole Langbord family end up in Federal Prison?

Comments

Leave a Comment