• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Great story about recently discovered gold coin stash in California

220 posts in this topic

Can you imagine the discoverers losing their claim to the coins after all of the dreaming and planning and work that has gone into getting the coins to this point? I imagine PCGS would still get paid, but what about the (multi-million dollar?) commissions that the coin broker was going to charge?

 

I bet the Justice Department is in the process of drafting the Emergency Injunction motion asking the court to stop any further marketing or sale of these coins that appear to belong to the taxpayers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The circumstantial evidence is overwhelming, the puzzle fits. The Langbord case was probably a weaker case by the Feds. than this one if they can just connect some of the dots which should not be that hard to do with all the attention this case has aroused.

 

Not to me, 6 missing bags from the San Francisco mint? I do not understand why there would be Philadelphia coins in the group and mintage stopped 7 years before theft. Isn't wikipedia information submitted by any joe who can type?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The more I think this through, the more I think the US Govt has a good claim to these coins assuming they can convince a judge or jury that these were the stolen coins. There is legal precedent with the Langbord double eagles. Another example of the legal precedent might be nazi looted art work. You cannot take title to stolen property.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah---I'm wondering if this will be another Langbord Family-type lawsuit?? My thinking is that it would be tough to prove the ORIGIN.

 

The coins probably are the property of the Mint. So the owners should probably have to re-pay the U.S. Government the $30,000 face value or so, with or without interest (I guess the interest could make the coins conceivably worth $2 MM or so).

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The circumstantial evidence is overwhelming, the puzzle fits. The Langbord case was probably a weaker case by the Feds. than this one if they can just connect some of the dots which should not be that hard to do with all the attention this case has aroused.

 

Not to me, 6 missing bags from the San Francisco mint? I do not understand why there would be Philadelphia coins in the group and mintage stopped 7 years before theft. Isn't wikipedia information submitted by any joe who can type?

 

I would just stay tuned to the discussions at the PCGS board. They have a number of lawyers and accountants who know the subject well.

 

http://forums.collectors.com/messageview.cfm?catid=26&threadid=911538&STARTPAGE=9

 

Until, PCGS pulls the thread....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And Kagins is selling them on Amazon, how smart is that?

 

Are they on sale yet ?

 

The coins I have seen listed by other sellers seem to be 30 - 50% over market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Wikipedia has suggested that this hoard might be connected to the mint employee who was charged with stealing around $30K in gold coins:

 

Wow! You have been everywhere on this story and now you seem to have done the "Impossible", as you referred to my implication earlier that the they could have been thieves.

 

Maybe you just misunderstood what I had said. I will give you the benefit of the doubt on that one, but to call these people un-ethical for not sharing with a previous landowner is absurd.

 

It would be akin to me finding oil while digging on my property and then being considered an un-ethical person because I did not go back through and trace every ownership of this property and share the windfall with them simply because they owned the land at one time.

 

I have to wonder what would cause someone, such as yourself, to take such a anti landowner rights position when you have no dog in the hunt?

 

Why do you want to pee on someones cornflakes so badly?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand why many of you just don't wish this couple the good fortune they deserve, but look for some nefarious reason for the coins being buried on their property.

 

There is no way to prove the coins in their yard came from the SF Mint theft. I swear, half of you didn't even read the whole story based on your posts. There were coins from the DAHLONEGA mint in those cans. Sheesh. Others calling them unethical because they didn't share with either previous home owners or find the person who buried the coins! OMG.

 

Why don't you just wish them well and be done with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I don't understand why many of you just don't wish this couple the good fortune they deserve

 

Why don't you just wish them well and be done with it.

 

My point exactly!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand why many of you just don't wish this couple the good fortune they deserve, but look for some nefarious reason for the coins being buried on their property.

 

Why don't you just wish them well and be done with it.

 

Short answer - jealousy.

 

This is typical. Dare I say, civilized compared to the drama firehose I've seen with discoveries like this over the years.

 

The only people I haven't heard complaining yet are the archeologists. They'll probably be around shortly to complain about the way the find disturbed the soil and/or land features which blanketed the long dirtnap these coins took. :eyeroll:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand why many of you just don't wish this couple the good fortune they deserve

 

Why don't you just wish them well and be done with it.

 

My point exactly!

 

Ditto!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand why many of you just don't wish this couple the good fortune they deserve, but look for some nefarious reason for the coins being buried on their property.

 

Why don't you just wish them well and be done with it.

 

Short answer - jealousy.

 

This is typical. Dare I say, civilized compared to the drama firehose I've seen with discoveries like this over the years.

 

The only people I haven't heard complaining yet are the archeologists. They'll probably be around shortly to complain about the way the find disturbed the soil and/or land features which blanketed the long dirtnap these coins took. :eyeroll:

 

Ridiculous. This story has been suspicious from the start. In the case of the Shipwreck hoards, the finders were entitled to the compensation they received.

 

If this "hoard" proves to be stolen as the forensic sciences are brought to bear, etc., it could prove to be the Dimmick stolen loot, and there is no statute of limitations on cases like that if established. There is a huge difference between justice and the law and jealousy/envy and greed. Should the government be accused of being "jealous" or "greedy" as they investigate this? I think not!!

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2568952/Could-newly-discovered-gold-coins-haul-stolen-disgraced-San-Francisco-Mint-employee-1901-Treasure-hunting-enthusiasts-weigh-origins-couples-10-million-find.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The linking of this hoard of gold coins with a theft by a mint employee in the late 1890s is, if you will excuse the expression, is "bull droppings." It seems that there are Choice Mint State double eagles in this hoard that date from the early 1870s. At least that's what I have seen in the brief clips on a TV. Somehow we must believe that this employee was able to steal coins dating almost three decades before that in MS-63 or better? That story simply does not hold together.

 

Even if these coins had sat in the San Francisco mint for all of those years, it is hard to believe that they would have been left so pristine. Thy almost certainly would have been moved around which would have scared the coins. That's what happened to virtually all of the Mint State Type II double eagles that are available to us today. It also was what happened to the GSA hoard of Carson City silver dollars.

 

Somehow I detect more that a little jealousy in the tone of the accusations that flying around here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand why many of you just don't wish this couple the good fortune they deserve, but look for some nefarious reason for the coins being buried on their property.

 

There is no way to prove the coins in their yard came from the SF Mint theft. I swear, half of you didn't even read the whole story based on your posts. There were coins from the DAHLONEGA mint in those cans. Sheesh. Others calling them unethical because they didn't share with either previous home owners or find the person who buried the coins! OMG.

 

Why don't you just wish them well and be done with it.

 

Am I a "Doubting Thomas"? Yes! The internet has made me become accustomed to that, but don't misunderstand me. I do hope, for the sake of the finders, that I am wrong.

 

However, one photo from the OP's link does show a photo of a few certified coins.

 

http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Gold-Country-couple-discovers-millions-in-buried-5266314.php#photo-5937201

 

It's interesting to note that all of the SF coins are uncirculated while the lone Dahlonega coin is circulated.

 

Isn't it possible that the SF Mint Cashier's Office took in other gold coins as part of routine transactions? Perhaps this would explain why there were circulated coins from Dahlonega.

 

It's also interesting to note that the gold coins stolen from the SF Mint were never recovered, and the Sierra Nevada range is not that far away.

 

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand why many of you just don't wish this couple the good fortune they deserve, but look for some nefarious reason for the coins being buried on their property.

 

Why don't you just wish them well and be done with it.

 

Short answer - jealousy.

 

This is typical. Dare I say, civilized compared to the drama firehose I've seen with discoveries like this over the years.

 

The only people I haven't heard complaining yet are the archeologists. They'll probably be around shortly to complain about the way the find disturbed the soil and/or land features which blanketed the long dirtnap these coins took. :eyeroll:

 

Ridiculous. This story has been suspicious from the start. In the case of the Shipwreck hoards, the finders were entitled to the compensation they received.

 

If this "hoard" proves to be stolen as the forensic sciences are brought to bear, etc., it could prove to be the Dimmick stolen loot, and there is no statute of limitations on cases like that if established. There is a huge difference between justice and the law and jealousy/envy and greed. Should the government be accused of being "jealous" or "greedy" as they investigate this? I think not!!

 

Look I have no dog in this race. I'm of the opinion that the finders have a right to their privacy, and it shouldn't be construed as them acting "unethically" or "hiding" the facts from coming to bear. If this find is somehow connected to stolen coins (and at this point, the provenance of some coins coming from the DAHLONEGA mint might disprove any connection to Dimmick and the heist he staged from the SF mint over 100 years ago) then I can see the merit in voicing concerns over the sale of these coins.

 

As far as your assertions about having a willy-nilly attitude toward recovering stolen property, I was one of the only voices who expressed disapproval about the sale of an OA piece, involving an artist who was battling a terminal illness, and who had discovered one of his pieces which he had originally donated to the JFK Memorial Library showed up for sale at Heritage.

 

It was particularly distressing as the overlay on the OA which clearly noted the intentions of the artist was removed from the piece when it appeared up for auction (this link shows the published cell versus the OA).

 

Unfortunately the artist passed away before his wishes of having the art returned to the JFK Library were fulfilled. The story did have a happy ending, but consider that from the time this all unfolded, there were many who believed the artist really had no right to even ask what he did, and those opinions persisted despite the possibility the artwork was stolen. Similarly the consignor insisted on remaining anonymous probably because he anticipated the backlash of this artwork surfacing, and not once did the consignment house waver on the concerns the work was stolen.

 

The happy ending was only achieved because DC wanted to avoid embarrassment, and while I am content with the outcome, this situation with the coins (and any links to Dimmick and/or stolen loot) is nowhere nears as open and shut a situation as your making it out to be. I'd hold off on casting any aspersions against this couple's fortunes until there is solid proof that a find which took place on land they rightfully own turns out to be anything other than a lottery windfall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will be up to the governments that have jurisdiction over this to make their case.

 

As to the connections, it is just too compelling to ignore and as for the arguments that the dates or the coins are somehow out of synch with what would have been expected in the stolen bags, the arguments are just not good.

 

From the other site:

 

 

"OF COURSE there were bags there with mixed dates! They could have had open bags with random lots from the cashier, etc. That's easy to explain.

 

He was the last guy OUT of the vaults every time they were opened!

 

HE was the "tally man". It was his job to verify the amount of coins.

 

He was there starting in 1898. Grab 6 bags and that's that. How could he have a lavish lifestyle when the coins were buried?

 

"He was accused and convicted and the coins were NEVER FOUND...well, not for about 114 years worth of "never"!

 

"One thing I kept marveling at when I heard of this hoard was how freaking amazing it was that anyone could even FIND coins like this back in the 1800's. Well now I think we know!

 

"I guarantee that the Treasury Dept. is already scrambling, looking for enough ties to warrant a seizure. Here we go again!

 

"THIS SO ADDS UP.

 

 

"WOW.

 

"I don't think he fixed anything. He wasn't a collector he was a thief. Maybe all six bags were re-sealed mixed bags. Maybe he thought that resealed mixed bags would be less traceable than pristine bags of all one date. And perhaps the 54 mixed $5 and $10's could have been in a loose bag? Makes sense.

 

"All I believe is that this find was as fantastic as a dream and all of a sudden there's a huge Unsolved case that is missing a few answers and this sure seems to fit 80%!! Too bad, really. It seems that every 30 years there's some scandal rather than a great one with a few exceptions.

 

"If a claim is made by the government that the coins are the one's stolen by the mint employee, it will be necessary to as best as humanly possible reconstruct what happened with/to the coins since they were stolen from the mint.

 

"The metal cans that the coins were found in last year will be subjected to CSI like scrutiny to determine how old they are. If the metal cans date to back the time of the theft from the mint, that would make the required proof a little easier [i.e. the age of the cans demonstrate that the coins were stolen from the mint. placed into metal cans and buried around the time of the theft; and were left where they were buried until last year when the property owners found the cans while walking their dog]. If the metal cans date from the 1920's, 1930's or later, then tracing the history of the coins since they were stolen becomes more difficult [they passed through multiple hands before they were buried].

 

"If instead of almost 1,500 coins only 200 were found, would the idea of linking them to the Walter Dimmick theft be less intriguing?

 

"If instead of MS coins being found, only circulated coins were found, would that make the idea of linking them to the Walter Dimmick theft be less intriguing?

 

"If the government decides that these coins are the ones Walter Dimmick stole from the mint, then it would be likely that the government may be required to do something similar to what the trial court in the Langbord case ruled the government must do [file a CAFRA forfeiture action against the coins]. If so, then the government attorneys handling any legal case against the almost 1500 coins found last year would likely get a complete copy of the Langbord lawsuit papers and use that as a starting point.

 

"The outcome of the pending Langbord appeal in the 3rd Circuit DCA may have immediate impact on any new case involving these newly found coins.

 

"Interesting, very interesting.

 

"Occam's razor, guys. Don't make a simple story complex.

 

"Dimmick was NOT a numismatist. This was not a date set. Since this case has been buried for 114 years we know nothing yet of the mint ledgers. they keep meticulous records. I have seen accounting from the Philadelphia mint of every $20 1932 that was purchased at the cashier's window. Mint bags are numbered. For all we know they could find records of the contents of the six missing bags. Thieves don't collect. If he did he would have taken more 1866-S'!

 

"I'm not one to jump to conclusions but it's beyond conjecture to me that the puzzle pieces of both sides of this mystery fit together perfectly. Kiss them goodbye. "

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The linking of this hoard of gold coins with a theft by a mint employee in the late 1890s is, if you will excuse the expression, is "bull droppings." It seems that there are Choice Mint State double eagles in this hoard that date from the early 1870s. At least that's what I have seen in the brief clips on a TV. Somehow we must believe that this employee was able to steal coins dating almost three decades before that in MS-63 or better? That story simply does not hold together.

 

Even if these coins had sat in the San Francisco mint for all of those years, it is hard to believe that they would have been left so pristine. Thy almost certainly would have been moved around which would have scared the coins. That's what happened to virtually all of the Mint State Type II double eagles that are available to us today. It also was what happened to the GSA hoard of Carson City silver dollars.

 

Perhaps Roger can shed some light on this.......

 

Was it customary for the SF Mint to pay out all gold coins struck each year or did some bags remain from one decade to the next?

 

Given the softness of gold, was it common for the bags to be moved around as often as, say, Morgan dollars?

 

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only dog I have in this race that the value of my 1873 double eagle in MS-63 will probably drop in value because of this hoard.

 

Beyond that, when I see an 1866-S double eagle in MS-62+, do I think that a crooked mint employee would be able to pull a coin like that out of bag of double eagles in 1898? NOT LIKELY! Why is the Dahlonega coin circulated and the San Francisco coins in Mint State? The Dahlonega coin was minted before 1862 and chances are it was in circulation for time on its 19th century trip to California. Do I have to state the obvious?

 

Why do you people always want the government involved every time a private citizen does well or gets a lucky break? Do you think you are entitled to a cut because that person did well, and you deserve a piece of it? What is wrong with you? Aren't the taxes these people are going to have pay from the profits they make enough for you? This "share the wealth" mentality is ruining this country.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only dog I have in this race that the value of my 1873 double eagle in MS-63 will probably drop in value because of this hoard.

 

Beyond that, when I see an 1866-S double eagle in MS-62+, do I think that a crooked mint employee would be able to pull a coin like that out of bag of double eagles in 1898? NO LIKELY! Why is the Dahlonega coin circulated and the San Francisco coins in Mint State? The Dahlonega coin was minted before 1862 and chances are it was in circulation for time on its 19th century trip to California. Do I have to state the obvious?

 

Why do you people always want the government involved every time a private citizen does well or gets a lucky break? Do you think you are entitled to a cut because that person did well, and you deserve a piece of it? What is wrong with you? Aren't the taxes these people are going to have pay from the profits they make enough for you? This "share the wealth" mentality is ruining this country.

 

That might very well be part of it. But I think it's a neurosis fed by the media's unrelenting desire to find dirt on anyone that achieves their share of celebrity or fame. Coming out and revealing these discoveries unfortunately runs the risk that you might join the ranks of the Lindsay Lohan mud slingers club. Again, it's a shame because hearing about these kinds of finds shouldn't be about turning over every rock to find fault or blame on the finders. 2c

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My main concern is that the Dimmick robbery was not properly investigated before the press release was issued and the coins were processed. That should have jumped out even with a basic search.

 

"<< Would'nt the coin dealers involved in this been fully aware of a possible Dimmick connection thereby advising the couple accordingly? >>

 

 

 

"Not so sure that the possible Dimmick connection was even considered by anyone until after the publicity regarding the Hoard came out. Below is a reporting from yesterday suggesting that the Dimmick theft was an obscure story that took some digging within the last day or so to piece together. Of significance, when these investigative reporters contacted

 

"the U.S. Mint itself they were assured there was no connection to any theft of which they were aware. Had those acting on behalf of the Hoard finders made a similar inquiry they would have likely been told the same thing.

 

 

"Quoting from the Mashable.com posting:

 

"'Considering that these coins had probably been buried for more than a century, we dug through microfiche files from old California newspapers, ones that were in print in the 19th century, like the San Jose Mercury News. Luckily, Google has been digitizing a tremendous amount of dead-tree media, including out-of-print books, magazines and newspapers.

 

"A search on Books.google.com for “stole,” “1000,” “gold,” “coins,” “from” “San Francisco.” brings up a curious note from an the Bulletin of The American Iron and Steel Association, an industry newsletter published every two weeks by an organization now known as the American Iron and Steel Institute.

 

"Tucked into the Aug. 10, 1901 issue, between political and financial notes and the latest obituaries was this little tidbit:

 

“'The sum of $30,000 in gold coin has recently been stolen from the vault of the cashier of the San Francisco Mint. No trace has been found of the missing gold.”"

 

 

"And here was the response to Mashable's investigative reporters when they contacted the U.S. Mint themselves even after the Hoard story first broke:

 

 

"'When we contacted the U.S. Mint to see if they have any records of such a theft, Adam Stump deputy director, Office of Corporate Communications quickly deflated our balloon, “We have no information linking those coins to any thefts at any United States Mint facility. Surviving agency records from the San Francisco Mint have been retired to the National

 

Archives and Records Administration (NARA), under Record Group 104. Access to the records is under NARA’s jurisdiction: http://www.archives.gov/”"

http://forums.collectors.com/messageview.cfm?catid=26&threadid=911538&STARTPAGE=10

 

As for people who want to play judge of other's motives, I would just say that the serious problem is not "jealousy" or other deadly sin but rather a lack of intellectual or professional rigor. Sometimes those breaches are just unfathomable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only dog I have in this race that the value of my 1873 double eagle in MS-63 will probably drop in value because of this hoard.

 

Beyond that, when I see an 1866-S double eagle in MS-62+, do I think that a crooked mint employee would be able to pull a coin like that out of bag of double eagles in 1898? NO LIKELY! Why is the Dahlonega coin circulated and the San Francisco coins in Mint State? The Dahlonega coin was minted before 1862 and chances are it was in circulation for time on its 19th century trip to California. Do I have to state the obvious?

 

Why do you people always want the government involved every time a private citizen does well or gets a lucky break? Do you think you are entitled to a cut because that person did well, and you deserve a piece of it? What is wrong with you? Aren't the taxes these people are going to have pay from the profits they make enough for you? This "share the wealth" mentality is ruining this country.

 

That might very well be part of it. But I think it's a neurosis fed by the media's unrelenting desire to find dirt on anyone that achieves their share of celebrity or fame. Coming out and revealing these discoveries unfortunately runs the risk that you might join the ranks of the Lindsay Lohan mud slingers club. Again, it's a shame because hearing about these kinds of finds shouldn't be about turning over every rock to find fault or blame on the finders. 2c

 

Nobody wants the government involved, but let's face facts and keep from burying our heads in the sand. The government is going to do whatever they want whenever they want!

 

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All connections to the Dimmick theft are supposition, coincidence and speculation. The numbers don't exactly match, there are additional coins that weren't stolen in the hoard ($10 $5). Dimmick also stole from his colleagues paychecks. Now if the couple found 6 bags of $20 Double Eagles buried in eaten away burlap bags, then maybe you've got a connection. Sure Dimmick might have transferred them to tin cans and buried them, but there are SO many holes tying the theft with the hoard, you could drive a bus through them.

 

All I saw posted as "proof" there is a link is other people's "opinions". If that's what you take as fact, well, good luck in any court.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the government might have had some chance to claim the loot a hundred or more years ago in the Dimmick case had this gold been discovered then. Today, that trail has grown cold and testimony would all be complete heresay.

 

Without a connection of Dimmick to the site in question the task of connecting the dots becomes harder. You can bet your that the FBI is researching archives to determine that connection, should it exist.

 

If the mint kept meticulous records there should be an accounting of how many $20, $10 and $5 went missing. An EXACT accounting. By now that should be a matter of public record. If the amount discovered were less, well that's explainable as spent. If however the discovery revealed even more gold than mint records indicate, that's a problem. I'll bet there's been a book written on the subject already, if not, Roger, get crackin".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My main concern is that the Dimmick robbery was not properly investigated before the press release was issued and the coins were processed. That should have jumped out even with a basic search.

 

"<< Would'nt the coin dealers involved in this been fully aware of a possible Dimmick connection thereby advising the couple accordingly? >>

 

 

 

"Not so sure that the possible Dimmick connection was even considered by anyone until after the publicity regarding the Hoard came out. Below is a reporting from yesterday suggesting that the Dimmick theft was an obscure story that took some digging within the last day or so to piece together. Of significance, when these investigative reporters contacted

 

"the U.S. Mint itself they were assured there was no connection to any theft of which they were aware. Had those acting on behalf of the Hoard finders made a similar inquiry they would have likely been told the same thing.

 

 

"Quoting from the Mashable.com posting:

 

"'Considering that these coins had probably been buried for more than a century, we dug through microfiche files from old California newspapers, ones that were in print in the 19th century, like the San Jose Mercury News. Luckily, Google has been digitizing a tremendous amount of dead-tree media, including out-of-print books, magazines and newspapers.

 

"A search on Books.google.com for “stole,” “1000,” “gold,” “coins,” “from” “San Francisco.” brings up a curious note from an the Bulletin of The American Iron and Steel Association, an industry newsletter published every two weeks by an organization now known as the American Iron and Steel Institute.

 

"Tucked into the Aug. 10, 1901 issue, between political and financial notes and the latest obituaries was this little tidbit:

 

“'The sum of $30,000 in gold coin has recently been stolen from the vault of the cashier of the San Francisco Mint. No trace has been found of the missing gold.”"

 

 

"And here was the response to Mashable's investigative reporters when they contacted the U.S. Mint themselves even after the Hoard story first broke:

 

 

"'When we contacted the U.S. Mint to see if they have any records of such a theft, Adam Stump deputy director, Office of Corporate Communications quickly deflated our balloon, “We have no information linking those coins to any thefts at any United States Mint facility. Surviving agency records from the San Francisco Mint have been retired to the National

 

Archives and Records Administration (NARA), under Record Group 104. Access to the records is under NARA’s jurisdiction: http://www.archives.gov/”"

http://forums.collectors.com/messageview.cfm?catid=26&threadid=911538&STARTPAGE=10

 

As for people who want to play judge of other's motives, I would just say that the serious problem is not "jealousy" or other deadly sin but rather a lack of intellectual or professional rigor. Sometimes those breaches are just unfathomable.

 

I think this is a balanced post. Further to the comment on the robbery not properly being investigated, is there any reason to believe the handlers of this hoard, from hand-off to their slabbing, did not consult with the US Mint on the possibility it might be stolen? To me, and given the passage of only one day from the time the story broke to the time speculation about the Dimmick heist surfaced, is far too narrow a timeframe - as such one might have expected the deputy officers response to have been versed differently if they hadn't known anything about the find.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All I saw posted as "proof" there is a link is other people's "opinions". If that's what you take as fact, well, good luck in any court.

 

The trouble is the mental gymnastics and tortured logic that some people are pedaling here, which is that based on nothing but assumptions, trumped up evidence and jealousy, might just be enough to get the government involved. Then there will be a court case with legal fees that will take a substantial part of the money, and only the lawyers and government bureaucrats will be the winners. Even if the defendants win they lose because their money has been spent defending their case. That's the way it works with the government. The government has infinite resources and does not care what it spends.

 

Here's another story you might chew on. Suppose there was a gentleman in the 19th century who had a gold mine in California who didn't trust banks. He takes his gold to the San Francisco mint to have it made into coins, mostly $20 gold pieces that he hoards and never spends. Along the way he acquires some more gold coins. Since he doesn't trust banks and fears someone might break into a safe in his house he buries it in the ground. Maybe he dies without telling anybody, now it's been discovered.

 

I know that is not nearly as nice as the theft story. The "stolen government property" opens up the possibility of having this windfall end up going to "the common good of the people" by giving it to the government. But it makes as much sense as the convoluted stuff I'm reading here.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are several possible scenarios on the hoard, but the nagging question that I would come back to is why high grade mintstate coins were hoarded, instead of circulated issues? Certainly the circs. would attract less attention and spent the same, who collected $20 gold coins by date or condition in those years? The coins are fresh from the mint like some of the shipwreck hoard coins only better.

 

As for government, pro or con, I have a healthy respect for them especially on the federal level. If they would do their job right crime would be prevented or after it occurred would be properly prosecuted. The alternatives to the rule of law are sadly in evidence in other countries, care to spend time in Mexico or other SA country with their "legal" system? Check out the US Attorney press releases from jurisdictions around the country; there are few indictments I disagree with. But for every crook they catch, dozens get away.

 

This case will be thoroughly investigated and if the mint robbery can be shown to not be connected to the hoard then fine, the couple keeps their hoard.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's another story you might chew on. Suppose there was a gentleman in the 19th century who had a gold mine in California who didn't trust banks. He takes his gold to the San Francisco mint to have it made into coins, mostly $20 gold pieces that he hoards and never spends. Along the way he acquires some more gold coins. Since he doesn't trust banks and fears someone might break into a safe in his house he buries it in the ground. Maybe he dies without telling anybody, now it's been discovered.

 

 

 

Does he get to choose which dates and denominations?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's another story you might chew on. Suppose there was a gentleman in the 19th century who had a gold mine in California who didn't trust banks. He takes his gold to the San Francisco mint to have it made into coins, mostly $20 gold pieces that he hoards and never spends. Along the way he acquires some more gold coins. Since he doesn't trust banks and fears someone might break into a safe in his house he buries it in the ground. Maybe he dies without telling anybody, now it's been discovered.

 

 

 

Does he get to choose which dates and denominations?

 

No. He was basically a hoarder who just had some gold converted into coins and stored them in a bunch of cans.

 

It was suggested ATS that these pieces may have been buried in the 1930s to avoid the Gold Surrender Order. The trouble with that is that the coins are too nice from what I can see.

 

Until we can see a full inventory of the dates and mints, it's hard to say if this guy might have been a collector, but I kind of doubt that. If he has an example of every or most dates, maybe. Before the 1890s when Heath published his article about mint marked coins in The Numismatist collectors didn't care about mint marks, only dates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites