Yet Another Ethical Dilemna: The Pink Elephant

Coinosaurus

Suppose researcher A has certain evidence which suggests that Coin X is stolen. The evidence is strong, but not conclusive. It is unlikely that further evidence will appear in the future to make a confirmation either way.

Should the facts be published? To do so will taint the coin forever, and leave it in limbo, so to speak. There will always be questions about it, and frustrating ones, because they can probably never be answered. And it would possibly impair the market value.

Or should researcher A just shut up and wait for more conclusive information to appear, unlikely as that may be. On the other hand, perhaps publicizing information about the coin may cause further information to come forth.

tradedollarnut

Depends. Is it held by a private party or a museum or other semi public entity? If the former, be very very careful. If the latter, then I'd say go for it.

kranky

Are the whereabouts of the coin known?

gecko109

"The evidence is strong, but not conclusive."

Nothing should be said at this time. Anything said is simply an unfounded rumor that will not only damage the perception of said coin, but also possibly the reputation of the owner.

RWB

Agree with TDN.

AngryTurtle

I don't know that this is a good idea, but one option would be to privately give the info to the potential former owner or insurance co that took the loss (if there was one). They may have additional evidence that taken with this this evidence may confirm or deny the suspicion.

yellowkid

If you had evidence that you thought might be used in an investigation, you could turn it over to the authorities, be they private or public, otherwise I'd stay out of it.

MsMorrisine

not conclusive?

you've answered your own question.

don't publish it as it will just stir up things without a definitive solution possible.

partagas

Agree with the others, don't get into a potential legal bind when it isn't your fight. I would at best give an anonymous tip to the authorities, or former owner.

PTVETTER

Two things come to mind

Bad news never, I repeat, Never gets better with age.

Fact are facts.

Now what you do with the facts is your business, no one elses.

Integrity, is doing what is right

Question is what are your values.

Should someone elses values coutrol your actions??

gecko109

<< <i>Two things come to mind

Bad news never, I repeat, Never gets better with age.

Fact are facts.

Now what you do with the facts is your business, no one elses.

Integrity, is doing what is right

Question is what are your values.

Should someone elses values coutrol your actions?? >>





Facts? I saw the words "not conclusive". You deem that as being synonomous with FACTS? You arent serious, are you?

Robb

Coinosaurus' hypothetical is a good one to ponder but the real Pink Elephant in the hobby that's far from a hypothetical is the lack of a youth movement in a dying hobby. The closest thing that we have to a youth movement is early 40-somethings trying to figure out how to make a buck.

50LargeCentz

Id be very careful of doing anything in our current climate. It would seem one can be sued for just about anything in our country.

Id get as much evidence as possible and maybe, after that contact a lawyer who deals in such matters and then possibly Law Enforcement.

Either way, Id tread lightly.

TwoSides2aCoin

I can't think that deep.

+1

telephoto1

Simple answer. Unless you have ironclad proof, stay out of it.

It's like the old saying.... "the more you stir up (poop), the more gets on your hands."

ricko

Without conclusive proof, say nothing. Cheers, RickO

Longacre

Is Researcher A a member of law enforcement? If not, then if the evidence is not conclusive, I think that Researcher A should seek out more conclusive evidence before he raises allegations.

gsaguy

Here are my thoughts on the issue.

I'd first assume that the current owner is an honorable person and would not want to own a stolen coin. I'd then approach the current owner with whatever 'evidence' I had about the coin's believed troubled provenance.

If the current owner is an honorable person and wants to get to the bottom of things, the process of retracing the history of sales could begin. If the current owner knows he's got a stolen coin (not an honorable person), the story would end there with him.

If it's a big coin, you'd know soon enough if the owner knew or not.

JMHO.

kurtdog

You're asking, in effect, if you think you have evidence of a crime, what do you do? If it's a crime-in-progress, you call the police. If it's a completed crime, you call the state's attorney. If it's neither of the above, you resist the natural inclination to be the first kid on the block with the news, so to speak, and you keep quiet, just as everybody, here, is suggesting...