Posted on 12/06/2006 1:51:05 PM PST by grjr21
The family of a late Center City jeweler sued the federal government yesterday seeking the return of 10 extremely rare 1933 gold U.S. coins that could fetch millions each at auction.
The daughter and grandsons of Israel Switt contend the government illegally seized the "double eagle" coins after they brought them to the U.S. Mint to be authenticated in 2004.
The 1-ounce coins, each with a face value of $20, were among more than 445,000 that were minted but never circulated after the United States went off the gold standard in 1933. The entire supply - except for these 10 and at least 10 others known to exist - was melted into bullion.
The government contends the coins - considered the Holy Grail among some collectors - were stolen property of the United States.
Michael White, a spokesman for the U.S. Mint, said government lawyers had not seen the suit and could not comment immediately.
In their court filing, Joan Langbord, 79, who still runs her father's business, I. Switt, on South Eighth Street, and her sons Roy and David noted that the government in the previous seizure of another 1933 double eagle split the proceeds with its owner, Stephen Fenton, after the coin sold for a record $7.59 million at auction in 2002.
In 1944, the government also allowed King Farouk of Egypt to own and export a 1933 double eagle without questioning how it came into circulation, said the suit, filed in U.S. District Court in Philadelphia.
Nine other coins, which were traced back to Switt, were seized over the years, not returned and melted. The government later also sought - unsuccessfully - the return of the Farouk coin.
The Langbords do not say how Israel Switt obtained the double eagles but said he collected coins and that it was common practice at the time for collectors and jewelers to exchange old coins and gold for new coins at the mint.
"The Langbord family was forced to bring this case to vindicate one of the most basic principles of American law: that the government cannot permanently confiscate property from its citizens without proving its right to do so in court," said their attorney, Barry H. Berke of New York.
"Here, the mint's lawless position is that by merely claiming the coins were somehow removed from the mint unlawfully in the 1930s, they can take the Langbord family's property without proving it in a court of law," said Berke, who represented Fenton in the earlier case. "The mint has taken that position because it knows it cannot prove how the 1933 double eagles left the mint over 70 years ago."
He said the government would not have known about the 10 coins if the Langbords, aware of the Fenton case, had not brought them to the attention of the mint and delivered them for authentication in 2004.
Israel Switt died in 1990 and his daughter found the coins while inspecting a safety deposit box at a Center City bank in 2003, the suit said.
Since confiscating the coins, the government has not filed any legal claim for them, a violation of federal law, said the suit, which seeks a jury trial.
Read the lawsuit via http://go.philly.com/coins
(2) They were stolen regardless. If I secretly take a flatscreen from work and replace it with another flatscreen surrpetitiously I have still committed theft and my employer has every right to press charges against me in a court of law for theft. There is no legal right to take someone else's property and then replace it with something that should pass for equal value.
(3) The value was not equal. When he stole the coins they were already among the rarest coins on earth.
McCanin was not playing a prank. he was violating his responsibilities as a Treasury officer and risking his career and his freedom for a reason: ill-gotten gain.
(4) The 1933 Double Eagles and the 1932 were no longer of equal value starting 9 days before he stole them.
Nothing was stolen but a potential 'collectors value'.
No, actual coins that did not belong to him were stolen.
George McCanin committed, at worst, a misdemeanor in 1933, and is long dead.
He committed at least two felonies: (1) fraud, (2) grand theft.
As long as people are still trafficking in the valuables that he stole from the US taxpayer, the case is not closed.
I'm confused. Is the Fenton the "Brit" to whom you later referred?
Also, you're implying that Fenton got 1 of Farouk's coins. Whereas the article says the US never got either of the 2 back, and implies that Farouk & Co. still have too.
I'm confused. Is the Fenton the "Brit" to whom you later referred?
Also, you're implying that Fenton got 1 of Farouk's coins. Whereas the article says the US never got either of the 2 back, and implies that Farouk & Co. still have 2.
Sorry, how stupid. I meant "two", not "too".
The fact that the US government was willing to settle with him was predicated on the assumption that the farouk coin was the coin in fenton's possession.
If Farouk had more than 1 coin, he never disclosed that fact to customs or any of his family members.
Poor research and execution. There are coin experts in Brazil, too. ;)
Fascinating thread. Some great thought-provocation going on here. I'm gonna have to go back up and read it again.
Isn't there also an equal protection angle? Seems that the government has already let two go without prosecution. Picking on this one, then, is a bit capricious.
I guess they had a chance of sneaking a pound or so of rare coins out of the US without tripping a metal detector at the airport.
You'd have to be confident enough to just throw them along with a handful of quarters and pennies and your house keys into one of those grey bins in the airport that the metal detector guys use for pocket change.
If they stowed it in their luggage chances of detection would go up astronomically.
The government did prosecute Fenton and later acquiesced to a plea deal.
The Langbords have not been charged with any crime.
I wonder if there shouldn't be, or in practice if there isn't already, some de facto statute of limitations on stolen property. There is a de jure statute for the perpetrator of a theft, but the property itself I think reverts to the pre-theft owner pretty much in perpetuity.
But it isn't enforced evenly, especially for various historical artifacts. I wonder if maybe there ought to be some amount of time after which, since the crime is no longer prosecutable that the property itself has a new legal owner. Don't know.
I shouldn't have said prosecution. What I mean is that they let go of the property and didn't pursue it. They didn't "prosecute" the case to the completion of the return of the property.
If somebody hands me a 1943 copper penny in my change, it's mine.
And I doubt very much the government would contest it.
Same principle. The burden of proof is on the government.
I'm sorry, I got confused. Farouk did have only 1 coin. Too bad the article didn't indicate it ever left him and his heirs.
If McCanin was never prosecuted, the coins belong to the owner. The case appears to stand on a guess, at best.
I'm sure theft has a statute of limitations.
We're not talking about coins that were legally circulated.
We are talking about coins that were stolen from the US Treasury.
On what basis? Certainly not any legal one.
There is no guess. The coins are stolen property.
I do not know if there are any statutes of limitations for defrauding the federal government or stealing from the US Treasury, though.
In a criminal case, the burden of proof rests upon the prsoecution, while the defendant is presumed innocent.
Were the government prosecuting the Langbords, the burden of proof would rest on the government.
There is no burden on the owner of stolen property to prove that his property is his own.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.