Originally posted by: CaptHenway I wonder if the Mint still has the plaster models? Somebody want to file a FOIA request for a picture of them? Could be very handy down the road.
Originally posted by: Coinosaurus RWB says they don't exist. He's worked on this problem more than anyone and I'll take his word for it.
In the long run you have to trust documents more than hearsay. Hearsay may occassionally trump documentation, but don't take the one exception where it does and automatically assume that the same thing applies to your favorite problem.
RWB says otherwise ATS.
"My conclusion was not that they don't exist, but that no one has ever shown a specimen or provided photos for examination. The research data shows that there was enough inconsistency in reporting of alloy weight to allow for several coins to be missing and the loss would not be detected. Further, the Denver Mint claimed the gross weight of silver before melting and after melting was identical - something which is nearly impossible to achieve without some sort of intervention."
Originally posted by: AUPT The picture in John Highfill's book is NOT a 1964 Peace dollar. It is a picture of a black-and-white glossy photograph of a genuine Peace dollar on which the art director of Coins magazine changed the date for use in the magazine.
I saw the retouched photo many times during my years with Krause Publications.
Not good for Krause Pub., '64 Peace exist crowd.
This is not news to those of us who have written about 1964-D Peace dollars.
That a guy from Coins mag posts to the thread as to the legitimacy of the pics is news to me. If you have posted / written that the picture in John Highfill's book is NOT a 1964 Peace dollar, I must have missed it. MHO.
I wonder if the Mint still has the plaster models? Somebody want to file a FOIA request for a picture of them? Could be very handy down the road.
Anybody?
Class?
Bueller?
RWB addresses this ATS.
I do not see it. Is it an old thread?
Does he talk about the coins, or the plaster models? I am asking about the plaster models.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
Originally posted by: CaptHenway I wonder if the Mint still has the plaster models? Somebody want to file a FOIA request for a picture of them? Could be very handy down the road.
Anybody? Class? Bueller?
RWB addresses this ATS.
I do not see it. Is it an old thread?
Does he talk about the coins, or the plaster models? I am asking about the plaster models.
I may have misread what Roger wrote. Here is the thread ATS:
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
RWB says they don't exist. He's worked on this problem more than anyone and I'll take his word for it.
In the long run you have to trust documents more than hearsay. Hearsay may occassionally trump documentation, but don't take the one exception where it does and automatically assume that the same thing applies to your favorite problem.
LOL, researching something is great, can read all you want in print from what others knew or did not know.
Then there is life experiences, can create a different perspective.
If someone had one, do you think they would tell someone who would put it in the book. What if they did, and the Secret Service shows up at their door to find out where they got the photograph, what if they told of you rather than go to jail?
LOL! Come into the 21st Century Kevin. The Secret Service doesn't go to peoples doors anymore. Instead, the US Treasury Department, through the US Attorney's Office, sends out letters demanding return which ultimately ends up in court.
The 1974-D Aluminum Cent is a prime example. It was certified by PCGS and even "displayed" at the Long Beach Coin Show.
It is no longer a case of Secret Service "brute" force as was the case with the recovery of 1933 Saints. It's more a case of who can do what as directed by the Federal Courts.
It's the 21st Century, not the 19th or 20th Century's where such brute force showing up at your door tactics worked out of fear of the general public and their relative ignorance over what the US Government can or cannot do.
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
Normally you need an opprotunity in order to get something like this out of the Mint.
In this case, normal practice at the Mint was to permit employees to purchase 5 specimens of the new coin. This was done prior to Congress pulling the plug, then they were asked to return.......
I believe that you are wrong with this assessment as the 1964-D Peace Dollars never even made it to the counting (accountability) stages of production. The US Mint KNEW full well that the coin had not been officially approved for production. As such, the small production qwhich had occurred was under heavy security with locked gondola's. Manufacturing was in an outbuilding and not on the main production floor(s). Security was very tight.
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
Originally posted by: Coinosaurus RWB says they don't exist. He's worked on this problem more than anyone and I'll take his word for it. In the long run you have to trust documents more than hearsay. Hearsay may occassionally trump documentation, but don't take the one exception where it does and automatically assume that the same thing applies to your favorite problem.
LOL, researching something is great, can read all you want in print from what others knew or did not know. Then there is life experiences, can create a different perspective.
If someone had one, do you think they would tell someone who would put it in the book. What if they did, and the Secret Service shows up at their door to find out where they got the photograph, what if they told of you rather than go to jail?
LOL! Come into the 21st Century Kevin. The Secret Service doesn't go to peoples doors anymore. Instead, the US Treasury Department, through the US Attorney's Office, sends out letters demanding return which ultimately ends up in court.
The 1974-D Aluminum Cent is a prime example. It was certified by PCGS and even "displayed" at the Long Beach Coin Show.
It is no longer a case of Secret Service "brute" force as was the case with the recovery of 1933 Saints. It's more a case of who can do what as directed by the Federal Courts.
It's the 21st Century, not the 19th or 20th Century's where such brute force showing up at your door tactics worked out of fear of the general public and their relative ignorance over what the US Government can or cannot do.
Guess the Secret Service missed that memo in 1996 when they busted Jay Parino and Stephen Fenton when Fenton brought the 1933 to the U.S and were arrested on conspiring to sell an outlawed coin.
Please show me the memo, letter, law from the Treasury Dept stating that the Secret Service does not arrest people or pursue people for owning/selling illegal coins.
There are other examples, it is more toward who is in charge, what are their objectives. The same was true during most of the 19th century. For example Mint Director Kimball decided that patterns should not be sold or owned privately, and stopped the estate sale of Linderman, which included the 1804 dollar.
Your interpretation is one one example, what facts back up your conclusions that the Secret Service would not use brute force. On the other side of the coin, so to speak, if people who own there believe they will be confiscated through brute force, they will not come out.
Originally posted by: kevinj If someone stated they had a 1964-D and wanted to show me in their room, would I go?
insatiable curiosity, opportunity, yes paranoia, general being careful, I would meet in a neutral controlled environment such as a bank, and also have a back up plan, such as a friend there, or waiting close by, or would bring my friends smith & wesson. I would also do my research first on the coin, person, and such. I am also a bigger person, confident in my abilities in defending myself after years of training in diferent arts, even played chicken with Joe Frazier once down in Phila (I lost). So I do not worry about different scenarios, but still follow basic common sense. I have seen some incredible collections over the years, normally it was with individuals who I had established friendships over the years, stuff of legends, normally at their house where it was secure. I have a close friend, who during the 60s, grandfather used to take him to these underground meetings, where they would show their fantasy and sometimes illegal coins, show and tell so to speak. I spoke to someone who I knew had one of the 1858 doubled die Lincolns, I wanted to photograph, we agreed to meet at my mother-in-laws, who was half way between us and a neutral place, he was an older gentlemen, who I did a background check before and knew he was a retired cop, so knew he was probably carrying....., it was all fine, but I told him, I hope he was not carrying a gun into the house, if my mother-in-law sees that, she would kill both of us, LOL If your talking about Breen, I had read he did not go after young men, who could defend themselves, he went after kids. And as any parent would, they would not permit their child to go with any adult, no matter who they were, unless they were there with their child. Kevin
Wow. Talk about perpetuating a numismatic myth with over zealous scenarios. Do you suppose that the Langbords took such actions?
What are you talking about????? 1. The original question I was answering was whether a person should go up to a room to view a famous coin. How does this pertain to perpetuating a numismatic myth???? 2. How does talking about whether one would go up to a room to view a coin parallel to Langbords, who found the additional 1933 20 dollar gold coins in a safety deposit box or something and sent to the Mint to authenticate????????
Originally posted by: kevinj Normally you need an opprotunity in order to get something like this out of the Mint.
In this case, normal practice at the Mint was to permit employees to purchase 5 specimens of the new coin. This was done prior to Congress pulling the plug, then they were asked to return.......
I believe that you are wrong with this assessment as the 1964-D Peace Dollars never even made it to the counting (accountability) stages of production. The US Mint KNEW full well that the coin had not been officially approved for production. As such, the small production qwhich had occurred was under heavy security with locked gondola's. Manufacturing was in an outbuilding and not on the main production floor(s). Security was very tight.
Please show evidence and proof of your assertions through eye witness accounts or Mint documents.
Under the highest of security no doubt since PCGS did grade the illegal to own 1974 Aluminum Cent. It has never been to market and as such is under the radar. But it does exist, it is also illegal to own.
The 1974 aluminum cent is illegal to own only because the government says so. Several of these coins were distributed to U. S. Congress for review, then not all were returned, and the government did nothing to try to get them back. My opinion is that the government abandoned their interest in the coins by doing nothing to get the remaining coins back. If it came to a court case, it would be very interesting to see how it would turn out.
That court case actually occurred with the recent 2014 discovery of a 1974-D Aluminum cent which was displayed at a Long Beach Coin Show.
It came to the governments attention because it was scheduled to be offered in a 2014 Heritage Auction.
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
RWB says they don't exist. He's worked on this problem more than anyone and I'll take his word for it.
In the long run you have to trust documents more than hearsay. Hearsay may occassionally trump documentation, but don't take the one exception where it does and automatically assume that the same thing applies to your favorite problem.
LOL, researching something is great, can read all you want in print from what others knew or did not know.
Then there is life experiences, can create a different perspective.
If someone had one, do you think they would tell someone who would put it in the book. What if they did, and the Secret Service shows up at their door to find out where they got the photograph, what if they told of you rather than go to jail?
Guess the Secret Service missed that memo in 1996 when they busted Jay Parino and Stephen Fenton when Fenton brought the 1933 to the U.S and were arrested on conspiring to sell an outlawed coin.
Please show me the memo, letter, law from the Treasury Dept stating that the Secret Service does not arrest people or pursue people for owning/selling illegal coins.
There are other examples, it is more toward who is in charge, what are their objectives. The same was true during most of the 19th century. For example Mint Director Kimball decided that patterns should not be sold or owned privately, and stopped the estate sale of Linderman, which included the 1804 dollar.
Your interpretation is one one example, what facts back up your conclusions that the Secret Service would not use brute force. On the other side of the coin, so to speak, if people who own there believe they will be confiscated through brute force, they will not come out.
The above are a lot closer to "facts" than what you've posted.
The 1996 case serves as a standard for future confiscations with the costly results and legal ramifications of such actions.
But, if you want to believe in "brute force - we'll come knocking down your door at midnight", it's a free country.
LOL! Come into the 21st Century Kevin. The Secret Service doesn't go to peoples doors anymore. Instead, the US Treasury Department, through the US Attorney's Office, sends out letters demanding return which ultimately ends up in court.
The 1974-D Aluminum Cent is a prime example. It was certified by PCGS and even "displayed" at the Long Beach Coin Show.
It is no longer a case of Secret Service "brute" force as was the case with the recovery of 1933 Saints. It's more a case of who can do what as directed by the Federal Courts.
It's the 21st Century, not the 19th or 20th Century's where such brute force showing up at your door tactics worked out of fear of the general public and their relative ignorance over what the US Government can or cannot do.
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
If someone stated they had a 1964-D and wanted to show me in their room, would I go?
insatiable curiosity, opportunity, yes
paranoia, general being careful, I would meet in a neutral controlled environment such as a bank, and also have a back up plan, such as a friend there, or waiting close by, or would bring my friends smith & wesson. I would also do my research first on the coin, person, and such.
I am also a bigger person, confident in my abilities in defending myself after years of training in diferent arts, even played chicken with Joe Frazier once down in Phila (I lost). So I do not worry about different scenarios, but still follow basic common sense.
I have seen some incredible collections over the years, normally it was with individuals who I had established friendships over the years, stuff of legends, normally at their house where it was secure.
I have a close friend, who during the 60s, grandfather used to take him to these underground meetings, where they would show their fantasy and sometimes illegal coins, show and tell so to speak.
I spoke to someone who I knew had one of the 1858 doubled die Lincolns, I wanted to photograph, we agreed to meet at my mother-in-laws, who was half way between us and a neutral place, he was an older gentlemen, who I did a background check before and knew he was a retired cop, so knew he was probably carrying....., it was all fine, but I told him, I hope he was not carrying a gun into the house, if my mother-in-law sees that, she would kill both of us, LOL
If your talking about Breen, I had read he did not go after young men, who could defend themselves, he went after kids. And as any parent would, they would not permit their child to go with any adult, no matter who they were, unless they were there with their child.
Kevin
Wow. Talk about perpetuating a numismatic myth with over zealous scenarios.
Do you suppose that the Langbords took such actions?
What are you talking about?????
1. The original question I was answering was whether a person should go up to a room to view a famous coin. How does this pertain to perpetuating a numismatic myth????
2. How does talking about whether one would go up to a room to view a coin parallel to Langbords, who found the additional 1933 20 dollar gold coins in a safety deposit box or something and sent to the Mint to authenticate????????
Please read the entire post before responding.
YOU said: "If someone stated they had a 1964-D and wanted to show me in their room, would I go? insatiable curiosity, opportunity, yes paranoia, general being careful, I would meet in a neutral controlled environment such as a bank, and also have a back up plan, such as a friend there, or waiting close by, or would bring my friends smith & wesson. I would also do my research first on the coin, person, and such. I am also a bigger person, confident in my abilities in defending myself after years of training in diferent arts, even played chicken with Joe Frazier once down in Phila (I lost). So I do not worry about different scenarios, but still follow basic common sense."
So let's examine this.
Someone want's to show you "their" 1964-D Peace Dollar yet "you" want to invite along a friend with a Smith & Wesson after you've completely "vetted" the individual that wants to show you "his/her" coin??
Perhaps you should read what you type?
Let me get back to you on that as I'll have to "vet" you first................
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
And for the record, I don't believe you Kevin as you have presented nothing but here say with regard to your assertions.
Not a single person has stated, emphatically that, "I have actually SEEN a 1964-D Peace Dollar in person and in hand" out of fear that the Treasury Department or Secret Service will show up at their house with 2 gallons of "Crystal Geyser" and a water board in tow.
Poppy*****.
Not to mention that fact that, despite the claims of confiscation and fear propagated by such claims of confiscation, there are limits to what the United States Government can or cannot do without due process of law. Simply saying "It's Mine because I say it's mine", doesn't work anymore as there are plenty of lawyers that can prove otherwise and usually through procedural process.
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
Not to mention that fact that, despite the claims of confiscation and fear propagated by such claims of confiscation, there are limits to what the United States Government can or cannot do without due process of law. Simply saying "It's Mine because I say it's mine", doesn't work anymore as there are plenty of lawyers that can prove otherwise and usually through procedural process.
It worked quite well for the Treasury Department in the Langboard trial. The appellate courts were nicer, but the final result is still up in the air. Whether you like it or would admit to it or not, there are many people that would not open up the can of worms and expend the attorney's fees in order to disclose the existence of the coin if one did exist.
And it is legally quite messy. If a coin does ever appear, the coin will undoubtedly be seized. The government will accuse the owner of theft and/or argue that the item seized was otherwise the fruit of the crime, and then you must come to court and fight. The burden of proof falls on you. And how has this escaped being ruled unconstitutional you might ask? The answer is that the property seized is pursued in rem, so that is can be seized even if the current holder wasn't culpable or have personal liability. Put another way courts have created a legal fiction whereby "[t]he thing [seized] is here primarily considered as the offender, or rather the offence is attached primarily to the thing." See The Palmyra 12 Wheat. 1 (1827). This U.S. Supreme Court case has been cited as still being good law. See e.g. Dennis v. Michigan, 517 U.S. 1163 (1996) (discussing in rem forfeiture more generally). And while Congress has passed bills like CAFRA to try to cut down on dubious forfeitures, its application is far from clear as the Longboard case has demonstrated. (For instance, if it is stolen and title never conveys, how do you forfeit something you never lost? Is it a forfeiture and does CAFRA even apply?). It is far from a guaranteed result.
If you are interested, Google "in rem forfeiture" and read up on the topic.
There are many scenarios like this that would allow someone to at least come forward with a photograph anonymously. That it has never happened makes me a tad worried that there may not be any extant examples. That said, if I had one nobody would know a thing about it. The government clearly feels that anyone with material like this is guilty until proven innocent.
Originally posted by: ricko If anyone out there actually has a '64 Peace Dollar (a real one)... they could anonymously mail me a photograph (good quality please) and I would be glad to post it... since no matter the method of interrogation (waterboard etc.) I could not identify the source. It sure would make for an incredible thread here on the forum. Any takers out there??? I can provide a mailing address and we can go from there. Cheers, RickO
...with 42,600+ posts without one single picture posted...what a way that would be coming out of the gate with your first posted picture of a coin
Originally posted by: ricko If anyone out there actually has a '64 Peace Dollar (a real one)... they could anonymously mail me a photograph (good quality please) and I would be glad to post it... since no matter the method of interrogation (waterboard etc.) I could not identify the source. It sure would make for an incredible thread here on the forum. Any takers out there??? I can provide a mailing address and we can go from there. Cheers, RickO
Come on RickO, we all know that this is to throw the feds off your trail and that you have a few secretly tucked away. Peace Dollars must be your favorite series since you hate tarnish. (I'm obviously joking.)
Originally posted by: kevinj Normally you need an opprotunity in order to get something like this out of the Mint.
In this case, normal practice at the Mint was to permit employees to purchase 5 specimens of the new coin. This was done prior to Congress pulling the plug, then they were asked to return.......
Originally posted by: 19Lyds I believe that you are wrong with this assessment as the 1964-D Peace Dollars never even made it to the counting (accountability) stages of production. ...
Originally posted by: kevinj Please show evidence and proof of your assertions through eye witness accounts or Mint documents.
Please show eye witness accounts or Mint documents that indicate employees were allowed to purchase 1964-D Peace Dollars and were later asked to return them.
Here is the only eye-witness testimony that I know of regarding the actual production of 1964-D Peace Dollars. There is no mention of mint employees being able to purchase any of the coins. But it is clearly indicated that the coins never left the Mint annex building where they were produced (except for a couple samples that were sent to Mint head quarters for assay - those may be the two that were reported destroyed in the early 1970s.) The 1964-D Peace dollars never reached the cashier, and so they were never available for purchase.
I'm having difficulties in constructing replies with two of them already going to the bit bucket.
BUT, the Langbord's coins were voluntarily surrendered, without coercion, to the Treasury Department for "authentication". There were no strong armed tactics used by the Secret Service.
The 1974-D Aluminum Cent, graded and destined for auction by Heritage, was, from what I understand, displayed at the Long Beach Coin Show.
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
I'm having difficulties in constructing replies with two of them already going to the bit bucket.
BUT, the Langbord's coins were voluntarily surrendered, without coercion, to the Treasury Department for "authentication". There were no strong armed tactics used by the Secret Service.
The 1974-D Aluminum Cent, graded and destined for auction by Heritage, was, from what I understand, displayed at the Long Beach Coin Show.
So what do you suppose may have happened had you told the Feds that you were in the Langbord's jewelry store and you saw and heard them show the 10 1933 DEs to another party?
I'm having difficulties in constructing replies with two of them already going to the bit bucket.
BUT, the Langbord's coins were voluntarily surrendered, without coercion, to the Treasury Department for "authentication". There were no strong armed tactics used by the Secret Service.
The 1974-D Aluminum Cent, graded and destined for auction by Heritage, was, from what I understand, displayed at the Long Beach Coin Show.
So what do you suppose may have happened had you told the Feds that you were in the Langbord's jewelry store and you saw and heard them show the 10 1933 DEs to another party?
That has absolutely nothing to do with the conversation Bajjer.
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
BUT, the Langbord's coins were voluntarily surrendered, without coercion, to the Treasury Department for "authentication". There were no strong armed tactics used by the Secret Service.
They were sent to the US Mint for authentication...NGC as well. While the US Mint is under the umbrella of the USTreasury, your wording of this is confusing. The Langbords would not have surrendered the coins directly to the USTreasury Dept (ie the Secretary of Treasury for one). Had they not sent the coins to the USMint and word got out about 10 more coins out there, possibly in the Langbord's possession, you can bet "strong arm" tactics would have been used. Do you think the UST would have sent them a letter to turn in the coins if they had them? $20-$40 MILL is worth a few door knocks....lol. And if they didn't respond favorably to said letter, wouldn't agents have been knocking on their doors in short order.
I didn't realize that whether the US Treasury is still performing strong arm tactics or not is somewhere important to the existence of 1933 $20 Saints or a 1964-D Peace Dollar. Amazing what can be passed offed as "proof" to support one's arguments.
I'm having difficulties in constructing replies with two of them already going to the bit bucket.
BUT, the Langbord's coins were voluntarily surrendered, without coercion, to the Treasury Department for "authentication". There were no strong armed tactics used by the Secret Service.
The 1974-D Aluminum Cent, graded and destined for auction by Heritage, was, from what I understand, displayed at the Long Beach Coin Show.
So what do you suppose may have happened had you told the Feds that you were in the Langbord's jewelry store and you saw and heard them show the 10 1933 DEs to another party?
That has absolutely nothing to do with the conversation Bajjer.
If the Langbords had not surrendered them, but the Feds got wind of them by other means, do you thing they would have used strong arm tactics to seize the coins? Methinks they might well have done just that.
BUT, the Langbord's coins were voluntarily surrendered, without coercion, to the Treasury Department for "authentication". There were no strong armed tactics used by the Secret Service.
They were sent to the US Mint for authentication...NGC as well. While the US Mint is under the umbrella of the USTreasury, your wording of this is confusing. The Langbords would not have surrendered the coins directly to the USTreasury Dept (ie the Secretary of Treasury for one). Had they not sent the coins to the USMint and word got out about 10 more coins out there, possibly in the Langbord's possession, you can bet "strong arm" tactics would have been used. Do you think the UST would have sent them a letter to turn in the coins if they had them? $20-$40 MILL is worth a few door knocks....lol. And if they didn't respond favorably to said letter, wouldn't agents have been knocking on their doors in short order.
I didn't realize that whether the US Treasury is still performing strong arm tactics or not is somewhere important to the existence of 1933 $20 Saints or a 1964-D Peace Dollar. Amazing what can be passed offed as "proof" to support one's arguments.
One report says the US Mint at Philadelphia, one report simply says the US Mint while others report the Treasury Department.
The entire point being, the Langbord's voluntarily submitted the coins for validation.
From what I've read, the authentication request was in conjunction with a request for payment of the coins that same as Farouk specimen received. (i.e. 50% of Auction sales price)
In response to your letter question: Yes. I expect that ANY "rumor" that 10 1933 Saints were floating around would have prompted an investigation followed by a legal response once it had been determined that it was not a rumor.
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
I'm having difficulties in constructing replies with two of them already going to the bit bucket.
BUT, the Langbord's coins were voluntarily surrendered, without coercion, to the Treasury Department for "authentication". There were no strong armed tactics used by the Secret Service.
The 1974-D Aluminum Cent, graded and destined for auction by Heritage, was, from what I understand, displayed at the Long Beach Coin Show.
So what do you suppose may have happened had you told the Feds that you were in the Langbord's jewelry store and you saw and heard them show the 10 1933 DEs to another party?
That has absolutely nothing to do with the conversation Bajjer.
If the Langbords had not surrendered them, but the Feds got wind of them by other means, do you thing they would have used strong arm tactics to seize the coins? Methinks they might well have done just that.
Some would like to believe this. I do not.
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
Originally posted by: abcde12345 Those that believe Kennedy's assassination was a grand conspiracy = those who believe there are 1964 Peace dollars floating out there.
Those that believe Kennedy's assassination was performed by a lone shooter = those who believe there are no 1964 Peace dollars still in existence.
Comments
I wonder if the Mint still has the plaster models? Somebody want to file a FOIA request for a picture of them? Could be very handy down the road.
Anybody?
Class?
Bueller?
RWB addresses this ATS.
RWB says they don't exist. He's worked on this problem more than anyone and I'll take his word for it.
In the long run you have to trust documents more than hearsay. Hearsay may occassionally trump documentation, but don't take the one exception where it does and automatically assume that the same thing applies to your favorite problem.
RWB says otherwise ATS.
"My conclusion was not that they don't exist, but that no one has ever shown a specimen or provided photos for examination. The research data shows that there was enough inconsistency in reporting of alloy weight to allow for several coins to be missing and the loss would not be detected. Further, the Denver Mint claimed the gross weight of silver before melting and after melting was identical - something which is nearly impossible to achieve without some sort of intervention."
The picture in John Highfill's book is NOT a 1964 Peace dollar. It is a picture of a black-and-white glossy photograph of a genuine Peace dollar
on which the art director of Coins magazine changed the date for use in the magazine.
I saw the retouched photo many times during my years with Krause Publications.
Not good for Krause Pub., '64 Peace exist crowd.
This is not news to those of us who have written about 1964-D Peace dollars.
That a guy from Coins mag posts to the thread as to the legitimacy of the pics is news to me. If you have posted / written that the picture in John Highfill's book is NOT a 1964 Peace dollar, I must have missed it. MHO.
I wonder if the Mint still has the plaster models? Somebody want to file a FOIA request for a picture of them? Could be very handy down the road.
Anybody?
Class?
Bueller?
RWB addresses this ATS.
I do not see it. Is it an old thread?
Does he talk about the coins, or the plaster models? I am asking about the plaster models.
I wonder if the Mint still has the plaster models? Somebody want to file a FOIA request for a picture of them? Could be very handy down the road.
Anybody?
Class?
Bueller?
RWB addresses this ATS.
I do not see it. Is it an old thread?
Does he talk about the coins, or the plaster models? I am asking about the plaster models.
I may have misread what Roger wrote. Here is the thread ATS:
Link
RWB says they don't exist. He's worked on this problem more than anyone and I'll take his word for it.
In the long run you have to trust documents more than hearsay. Hearsay may occassionally trump documentation, but don't take the one exception where it does and automatically assume that the same thing applies to your favorite problem.
LOL, researching something is great, can read all you want in print from what others knew or did not know.
Then there is life experiences, can create a different perspective.
If someone had one, do you think they would tell someone who would put it in the book. What if they did, and the Secret Service shows up at their door to find out where they got the photograph, what if they told of you rather than go to jail?
LOL! Come into the 21st Century Kevin. The Secret Service doesn't go to peoples doors anymore. Instead, the US Treasury Department, through the US Attorney's Office, sends out letters demanding return which ultimately ends up in court.
The 1974-D Aluminum Cent is a prime example. It was certified by PCGS and even "displayed" at the Long Beach Coin Show.
It is no longer a case of Secret Service "brute" force as was the case with the recovery of 1933 Saints. It's more a case of who can do what as directed by the Federal Courts.
It's the 21st Century, not the 19th or 20th Century's where such brute force showing up at your door tactics worked out of fear of the general public and their relative ignorance over what the US Government can or cannot do.
The name is LEE!
Normally you need an opprotunity in order to get something like this out of the Mint.
In this case, normal practice at the Mint was to permit employees to purchase 5 specimens of the new coin. This was done prior to Congress pulling the plug, then they were asked to return.......
I believe that you are wrong with this assessment as the 1964-D Peace Dollars never even made it to the counting (accountability) stages of production. The US Mint KNEW full well that the coin had not been officially approved for production. As such, the small production qwhich had occurred was under heavy security with locked gondola's. Manufacturing was in an outbuilding and not on the main production floor(s). Security was very tight.
The name is LEE!
RWB says they don't exist. He's worked on this problem more than anyone and I'll take his word for it.
In the long run you have to trust documents more than hearsay. Hearsay may occassionally trump documentation, but don't take the one exception where it does and automatically assume that the same thing applies to your favorite problem.
LOL, researching something is great, can read all you want in print from what others knew or did not know.
Then there is life experiences, can create a different perspective.
If someone had one, do you think they would tell someone who would put it in the book. What if they did, and the Secret Service shows up at their door to find out where they got the photograph, what if they told of you rather than go to jail?
LOL! Come into the 21st Century Kevin. The Secret Service doesn't go to peoples doors anymore. Instead, the US Treasury Department, through the US Attorney's Office, sends out letters demanding return which ultimately ends up in court.
The 1974-D Aluminum Cent is a prime example. It was certified by PCGS and even "displayed" at the Long Beach Coin Show.
It is no longer a case of Secret Service "brute" force as was the case with the recovery of 1933 Saints. It's more a case of who can do what as directed by the Federal Courts.
It's the 21st Century, not the 19th or 20th Century's where such brute force showing up at your door tactics worked out of fear of the general public and their relative ignorance over what the US Government can or cannot do.
Guess the Secret Service missed that memo in 1996 when they busted Jay Parino and Stephen Fenton when Fenton brought the 1933 to the U.S and were arrested on conspiring to sell an outlawed coin.
Please show me the memo, letter, law from the Treasury Dept stating that the Secret Service does not arrest people or pursue people for owning/selling illegal coins.
There are other examples, it is more toward who is in charge, what are their objectives. The same was true during most of the 19th century. For example Mint Director Kimball decided that patterns should not be sold or owned privately, and stopped the estate sale of Linderman, which included the 1804 dollar.
Your interpretation is one one example, what facts back up your conclusions that the Secret Service would not use brute force. On the other side of the coin, so to speak, if people who own there believe they will be confiscated through brute force, they will not come out.
Please back up your statements with actual facts
If someone stated they had a 1964-D and wanted to show me in their room, would I go?
insatiable curiosity, opportunity, yes
paranoia, general being careful, I would meet in a neutral controlled environment such as a bank, and also have a back up plan, such as a friend there, or waiting close by, or would bring my friends smith & wesson. I would also do my research first on the coin, person, and such.
I am also a bigger person, confident in my abilities in defending myself after years of training in diferent arts, even played chicken with Joe Frazier once down in Phila (I lost). So I do not worry about different scenarios, but still follow basic common sense.
I have seen some incredible collections over the years, normally it was with individuals who I had established friendships over the years, stuff of legends, normally at their house where it was secure.
I have a close friend, who during the 60s, grandfather used to take him to these underground meetings, where they would show their fantasy and sometimes illegal coins, show and tell so to speak.
I spoke to someone who I knew had one of the 1858 doubled die Lincolns, I wanted to photograph, we agreed to meet at my mother-in-laws, who was half way between us and a neutral place, he was an older gentlemen, who I did a background check before and knew he was a retired cop, so knew he was probably carrying....., it was all fine, but I told him, I hope he was not carrying a gun into the house, if my mother-in-law sees that, she would kill both of us, LOL
If your talking about Breen, I had read he did not go after young men, who could defend themselves, he went after kids. And as any parent would, they would not permit their child to go with any adult, no matter who they were, unless they were there with their child.
Kevin
Wow. Talk about perpetuating a numismatic myth with over zealous scenarios.
Do you suppose that the Langbords took such actions?
What are you talking about?????
1. The original question I was answering was whether a person should go up to a room to view a famous coin. How does this pertain to perpetuating a numismatic myth????
2. How does talking about whether one would go up to a room to view a coin parallel to Langbords, who found the additional 1933 20 dollar gold coins in a safety deposit box or something and sent to the Mint to authenticate????????
Please read the entire post before responding.
Normally you need an opprotunity in order to get something like this out of the Mint.
In this case, normal practice at the Mint was to permit employees to purchase 5 specimens of the new coin. This was done prior to Congress pulling the plug, then they were asked to return.......
I believe that you are wrong with this assessment as the 1964-D Peace Dollars never even made it to the counting (accountability) stages of production. The US Mint KNEW full well that the coin had not been officially approved for production. As such, the small production qwhich had occurred was under heavy security with locked gondola's. Manufacturing was in an outbuilding and not on the main production floor(s). Security was very tight.
Please show evidence and proof of your assertions through eye witness accounts or Mint documents.
5 exist, were shown at the 1972 ANA in New York, sold for 5K each
will not be shown as they will be confiscated.
Without question they exist.
Kevin
PCGS will pay $10,000 for the opportunity to grade one
The 1974 aluminum cent is illegal to own only because the government says so. Several of these coins were distributed to U. S. Congress for review, then not all were returned, and the government did nothing to try to get them back. My opinion is that the government abandoned their interest in the coins by doing nothing to get the remaining coins back. If it came to a court case, it would be very interesting to see how it would turn out.
It came to the governments attention because it was scheduled to be offered in a 2014 Heritage Auction.
The name is LEE!
RWB says they don't exist. He's worked on this problem more than anyone and I'll take his word for it.
In the long run you have to trust documents more than hearsay. Hearsay may occassionally trump documentation, but don't take the one exception where it does and automatically assume that the same thing applies to your favorite problem.
LOL, researching something is great, can read all you want in print from what others knew or did not know.
Then there is life experiences, can create a different perspective.
If someone had one, do you think they would tell someone who would put it in the book. What if they did, and the Secret Service shows up at their door to find out where they got the photograph, what if they told of you rather than go to jail?
Guess the Secret Service missed that memo in 1996 when they busted Jay Parino and Stephen Fenton when Fenton brought the 1933 to the U.S and were arrested on conspiring to sell an outlawed coin.
Please show me the memo, letter, law from the Treasury Dept stating that the Secret Service does not arrest people or pursue people for owning/selling illegal coins.
There are other examples, it is more toward who is in charge, what are their objectives. The same was true during most of the 19th century. For example Mint Director Kimball decided that patterns should not be sold or owned privately, and stopped the estate sale of Linderman, which included the 1804 dollar.
Your interpretation is one one example, what facts back up your conclusions that the Secret Service would not use brute force. On the other side of the coin, so to speak, if people who own there believe they will be confiscated through brute force, they will not come out.
Please back up your statements with actual facts
Here
Here
Here
The above are a lot closer to "facts" than what you've posted.
The 1996 case serves as a standard for future confiscations with the costly results and legal ramifications of such actions.
But, if you want to believe in "brute force - we'll come knocking down your door at midnight", it's a free country.
LOL! Come into the 21st Century Kevin. The Secret Service doesn't go to peoples doors anymore. Instead, the US Treasury Department, through the US Attorney's Office, sends out letters demanding return which ultimately ends up in court.
The 1974-D Aluminum Cent is a prime example. It was certified by PCGS and even "displayed" at the Long Beach Coin Show.
It is no longer a case of Secret Service "brute" force as was the case with the recovery of 1933 Saints. It's more a case of who can do what as directed by the Federal Courts.
It's the 21st Century, not the 19th or 20th Century's where such brute force showing up at your door tactics worked out of fear of the general public and their relative ignorance over what the US Government can or cannot do.
The name is LEE!
If someone stated they had a 1964-D and wanted to show me in their room, would I go?
insatiable curiosity, opportunity, yes
paranoia, general being careful, I would meet in a neutral controlled environment such as a bank, and also have a back up plan, such as a friend there, or waiting close by, or would bring my friends smith & wesson. I would also do my research first on the coin, person, and such.
I am also a bigger person, confident in my abilities in defending myself after years of training in diferent arts, even played chicken with Joe Frazier once down in Phila (I lost). So I do not worry about different scenarios, but still follow basic common sense.
I have seen some incredible collections over the years, normally it was with individuals who I had established friendships over the years, stuff of legends, normally at their house where it was secure.
I have a close friend, who during the 60s, grandfather used to take him to these underground meetings, where they would show their fantasy and sometimes illegal coins, show and tell so to speak.
I spoke to someone who I knew had one of the 1858 doubled die Lincolns, I wanted to photograph, we agreed to meet at my mother-in-laws, who was half way between us and a neutral place, he was an older gentlemen, who I did a background check before and knew he was a retired cop, so knew he was probably carrying....., it was all fine, but I told him, I hope he was not carrying a gun into the house, if my mother-in-law sees that, she would kill both of us, LOL
If your talking about Breen, I had read he did not go after young men, who could defend themselves, he went after kids. And as any parent would, they would not permit their child to go with any adult, no matter who they were, unless they were there with their child.
Kevin
Wow. Talk about perpetuating a numismatic myth with over zealous scenarios.
Do you suppose that the Langbords took such actions?
What are you talking about?????
1. The original question I was answering was whether a person should go up to a room to view a famous coin. How does this pertain to perpetuating a numismatic myth????
2. How does talking about whether one would go up to a room to view a coin parallel to Langbords, who found the additional 1933 20 dollar gold coins in a safety deposit box or something and sent to the Mint to authenticate????????
Please read the entire post before responding.
YOU said: "If someone stated they had a 1964-D and wanted to show me in their room, would I go? insatiable curiosity, opportunity, yes paranoia, general being careful, I would meet in a neutral controlled environment such as a bank, and also have a back up plan, such as a friend there, or waiting close by, or would bring my friends smith & wesson. I would also do my research first on the coin, person, and such. I am also a bigger person, confident in my abilities in defending myself after years of training in diferent arts, even played chicken with Joe Frazier once down in Phila (I lost). So I do not worry about different scenarios, but still follow basic common sense."
So let's examine this.
Someone want's to show you "their" 1964-D Peace Dollar yet "you" want to invite along a friend with a Smith & Wesson after you've completely "vetted" the individual that wants to show you "his/her" coin??
Perhaps you should read what you type?
Let me get back to you on that as I'll have to "vet" you first................
The name is LEE!
Not a single person has stated, emphatically that, "I have actually SEEN a 1964-D Peace Dollar in person and in hand" out of fear that the Treasury Department or Secret Service will show up at their house with 2 gallons of "Crystal Geyser" and a water board in tow.
Poppy*****.
Not to mention that fact that, despite the claims of confiscation and fear propagated by such claims of confiscation, there are limits to what the United States Government can or cannot do without due process of law. Simply saying "It's Mine because I say it's mine", doesn't work anymore as there are plenty of lawyers that can prove otherwise and usually through procedural process.
The name is LEE!
Not to mention that fact that, despite the claims of confiscation and fear propagated by such claims of confiscation, there are limits to what the United States Government can or cannot do without due process of law. Simply saying "It's Mine because I say it's mine", doesn't work anymore as there are plenty of lawyers that can prove otherwise and usually through procedural process.
It worked quite well for the Treasury Department in the Langboard trial. The appellate courts were nicer, but the final result is still up in the air. Whether you like it or would admit to it or not, there are many people that would not open up the can of worms and expend the attorney's fees in order to disclose the existence of the coin if one did exist.
And it is legally quite messy. If a coin does ever appear, the coin will undoubtedly be seized. The government will accuse the owner of theft and/or argue that the item seized was otherwise the fruit of the crime, and then you must come to court and fight. The burden of proof falls on you. And how has this escaped being ruled unconstitutional you might ask? The answer is that the property seized is pursued in rem, so that is can be seized even if the current holder wasn't culpable or have personal liability. Put another way courts have created a legal fiction whereby "[t]he thing [seized] is here primarily considered as the offender, or rather the offence is attached primarily to the thing." See The Palmyra 12 Wheat. 1 (1827). This U.S. Supreme Court case has been cited as still being good law. See e.g. Dennis v. Michigan, 517 U.S. 1163 (1996) (discussing in rem forfeiture more generally). And while Congress has passed bills like CAFRA to try to cut down on dubious forfeitures, its application is far from clear as the Longboard case has demonstrated. (For instance, if it is stolen and title never conveys, how do you forfeit something you never lost? Is it a forfeiture and does CAFRA even apply?). It is far from a guaranteed result.
If you are interested, Google "in rem forfeiture" and read up on the topic.
mail me a photograph (good quality please) and I would be glad to post it... since no matter the
method of interrogation (waterboard etc.) I could not identify the source. It sure would make for
an incredible thread here on the forum. Any takers out there??? I can provide a mailing address
and we can go from there.
Cheers, RickO
There are many scenarios like this that would allow someone to at least come forward with a photograph anonymously. That it has never happened makes me a tad worried that there may not be any extant examples. That said, if I had one nobody would know a thing about it. The government clearly feels that anyone with material like this is guilty until proven innocent.
If anyone out there actually has a '64 Peace Dollar (a real one)... they could anonymously
mail me a photograph (good quality please) and I would be glad to post it... since no matter the
method of interrogation (waterboard etc.) I could not identify the source. It sure would make for
an incredible thread here on the forum. Any takers out there??? I can provide a mailing address
and we can go from there.
Cheers, RickO
...with 42,600+ posts without one single picture posted...what a way that would be coming out of the gate with your first posted picture of a coin
If anyone out there actually has a '64 Peace Dollar (a real one)... they could anonymously
mail me a photograph (good quality please) and I would be glad to post it... since no matter the
method of interrogation (waterboard etc.) I could not identify the source. It sure would make for
an incredible thread here on the forum. Any takers out there??? I can provide a mailing address
and we can go from there.
Cheers, RickO
Come on RickO, we all know that this is to throw the feds off your trail and that you have a few secretly tucked away. Peace Dollars must be your favorite series since you hate tarnish. (I'm obviously joking.)
Normally you need an opprotunity in order to get something like this out of the Mint.
In this case, normal practice at the Mint was to permit employees to purchase 5 specimens of the new coin. This was done prior to Congress pulling the plug, then they were asked to return.......
I believe that you are wrong with this assessment as the 1964-D Peace Dollars never even made it to the counting (accountability) stages of production. ...
Please show evidence and proof of your assertions through eye witness accounts or Mint documents.
Please show eye witness accounts or Mint documents that indicate employees were allowed to purchase 1964-D Peace Dollars and were later asked to return them.
Here is the only eye-witness testimony that I know of regarding the actual production of 1964-D Peace Dollars. There is no mention of mint employees being able to purchase any of the coins. But it is clearly indicated that the coins never left the Mint annex building where they were produced (except for a couple samples that were sent to Mint head quarters for assay - those may be the two that were reported destroyed in the early 1970s.) The 1964-D Peace dollars never reached the cashier, and so they were never available for purchase.
What Really Happened to the 1964 Denver Mint Peace Dollars?
Maybe we could get Michael Lantz to come here on this forum and answer a few questions ?
BUT, the Langbord's coins were voluntarily surrendered, without coercion, to the Treasury Department for "authentication". There were no strong armed tactics used by the Secret Service.
The 1974-D Aluminum Cent, graded and destined for auction by Heritage, was, from what I understand, displayed at the Long Beach Coin Show.
The name is LEE!
I'm having difficulties in constructing replies with two of them already going to the bit bucket.
BUT, the Langbord's coins were voluntarily surrendered, without coercion, to the Treasury Department for "authentication". There were no strong armed tactics used by the Secret Service.
The 1974-D Aluminum Cent, graded and destined for auction by Heritage, was, from what I understand, displayed at the Long Beach Coin Show.
So what do you suppose may have happened had you told the Feds that you were in the Langbord's jewelry store and you saw and heard them show the 10 1933 DEs to another party?
Those that believe Kennedy's assassination was performed by a lone shooter = those who believe there are no 1964 Peace dollars still in existence.
I'm having difficulties in constructing replies with two of them already going to the bit bucket.
BUT, the Langbord's coins were voluntarily surrendered, without coercion, to the Treasury Department for "authentication". There were no strong armed tactics used by the Secret Service.
The 1974-D Aluminum Cent, graded and destined for auction by Heritage, was, from what I understand, displayed at the Long Beach Coin Show.
So what do you suppose may have happened had you told the Feds that you were in the Langbord's jewelry store and you saw and heard them show the 10 1933 DEs to another party?
That has absolutely nothing to do with the conversation Bajjer.
The name is LEE!
BUT, the Langbord's coins were voluntarily surrendered, without coercion, to the Treasury Department for "authentication". There were no strong armed tactics used by the Secret Service.
They were sent to the US Mint for authentication...NGC as well. While the US Mint is under the umbrella of the USTreasury, your wording of this is confusing. The Langbords would not have surrendered the coins directly to the USTreasury Dept (ie the Secretary of Treasury for one). Had they not sent the coins to the USMint and word got out about 10 more coins out there, possibly in the Langbord's possession, you can bet "strong arm" tactics would have been used. Do you think the UST would have sent them a letter to turn in the coins if they had them? $20-$40 MILL is worth a few door knocks....lol. And if they didn't respond favorably to said letter, wouldn't agents have been knocking on their doors in short order.
I didn't realize that whether the US Treasury is still performing strong arm tactics or not is somewhere important to the existence of 1933 $20 Saints or a 1964-D Peace Dollar. Amazing what can be passed offed as "proof" to support one's arguments.
I'm having difficulties in constructing replies with two of them already going to the bit bucket.
BUT, the Langbord's coins were voluntarily surrendered, without coercion, to the Treasury Department for "authentication". There were no strong armed tactics used by the Secret Service.
The 1974-D Aluminum Cent, graded and destined for auction by Heritage, was, from what I understand, displayed at the Long Beach Coin Show.
So what do you suppose may have happened had you told the Feds that you were in the Langbord's jewelry store and you saw and heard them show the 10 1933 DEs to another party?
That has absolutely nothing to do with the conversation Bajjer.
If the Langbords had not surrendered them, but the Feds got wind of them by other means, do you thing they would have used strong arm tactics to seize the coins? Methinks they might well have done just that.
I can't prove it but I know they exist.
BUT, the Langbord's coins were voluntarily surrendered, without coercion, to the Treasury Department for "authentication". There were no strong armed tactics used by the Secret Service.
They were sent to the US Mint for authentication...NGC as well. While the US Mint is under the umbrella of the USTreasury, your wording of this is confusing. The Langbords would not have surrendered the coins directly to the USTreasury Dept (ie the Secretary of Treasury for one). Had they not sent the coins to the USMint and word got out about 10 more coins out there, possibly in the Langbord's possession, you can bet "strong arm" tactics would have been used. Do you think the UST would have sent them a letter to turn in the coins if they had them? $20-$40 MILL is worth a few door knocks....lol. And if they didn't respond favorably to said letter, wouldn't agents have been knocking on their doors in short order.
I didn't realize that whether the US Treasury is still performing strong arm tactics or not is somewhere important to the existence of 1933 $20 Saints or a 1964-D Peace Dollar. Amazing what can be passed offed as "proof" to support one's arguments.
One report says the US Mint at Philadelphia, one report simply says the US Mint while others report the Treasury Department.
The entire point being, the Langbord's voluntarily submitted the coins for validation.
From what I've read, the authentication request was in conjunction with a request for payment of the coins that same as Farouk specimen received. (i.e. 50% of Auction sales price)
In response to your letter question: Yes. I expect that ANY "rumor" that 10 1933 Saints were floating around would have prompted an investigation followed by a legal response once it had been determined that it was not a rumor.
The name is LEE!
I'm having difficulties in constructing replies with two of them already going to the bit bucket.
BUT, the Langbord's coins were voluntarily surrendered, without coercion, to the Treasury Department for "authentication". There were no strong armed tactics used by the Secret Service.
The 1974-D Aluminum Cent, graded and destined for auction by Heritage, was, from what I understand, displayed at the Long Beach Coin Show.
So what do you suppose may have happened had you told the Feds that you were in the Langbord's jewelry store and you saw and heard them show the 10 1933 DEs to another party?
That has absolutely nothing to do with the conversation Bajjer.
If the Langbords had not surrendered them, but the Feds got wind of them by other means, do you thing they would have used strong arm tactics to seize the coins? Methinks they might well have done just that.
Some would like to believe this. I do not.
The name is LEE!
Those that believe Kennedy's assassination was a grand conspiracy = those who believe there are 1964 Peace dollars floating out there.
Those that believe Kennedy's assassination was performed by a lone shooter = those who believe there are no 1964 Peace dollars still in existence.
yes and yes
no and no
1964-D Peace Dollars are much like BigFoot's & Aliens,,,,,,,,
I can't prove it but I know they exist.
The name is LEE!