Help keep this site ad free!
I receive very few donations. Where would your collecting efforts be without this site?
The court decision regarding forfeiture of precious metals seized in the raid on Liberty Dollar was filed on 12/1/2014. The entire PDF document is attached below. Judge Voorhees makes it very clear that many, many of the Liberty Dollar specie do not qualify as counterfeit. The first concrete statement confirming this fact is found at the bottom of page 15.
"Furthermore, because the Government’s evidence and argument concerning Defendant’s intent was premised upon the suggested “use” of the Liberty Dollar coins and thus an aspect of the “counterfeit” status, the Court, seeking to adhere to the strict construction mandate, declines to deem the entire array of seized coins contraband for purposes of Section 492 as proposed by the Government."
Further down the document at the top of page 18, judge Voorhees goes on to specify which pieces are clearly NOT counterfeit.
"10) Coins not subject to a mandatory forfeiture under § 492, and not properly designated as “counterfeit” or “contraband per se” include:
Early and less sophisticated versions of Liberty Dollar coins minted and dated from 1998 and through 2004;
Liberty Dollar coins having no denomination or dollar sign imprinted on the coin;
Liberty Dollar coins minted prior to the U.S. Mint / U.S. DOJ placing von Nothaus on notice in 2006 that the DOJ considered his activities illegal;
Liberty Dollar coins bearing competing insignia (imprinting representing at least two different origins) such as both Liberty and the Hawaii Dala;
Liberty Dollar coins with characteristics of multiple von Nothaus entities. For example, coins with the Liberty insignia on one side and Hawaii Dala on the other side. (Government Exh. F58)."
The statement makes it clear that the word "NORFED" does not designate a piece as a counterfeit. All pieces bearing that word were minted before 2004. The highlighted statement in the quote from page 18 makes it clear that all Liberty Dollar designs issued prior to the mint warning of 2006 are NOT counterfeit. That would include all Liberty Dollars listed in the Liberty Dollar Encyclopedia one ounce silver series from #1 through #43, since the state pieces dated 2006 (with the exception of double dated pieces #50 & #50.5) were produced prior to the mint warning. This statement is in conflict with the one on page 36, item 11 that says;
11) The state monetary initiative Liberty Dollar coins are forfeitable pursuant to § 853(a)(1).
I find it highly improbable that any orders for SMI were being processed or in possession of Sunshine mint or the Liberty Dollar fulfillment office at the time of the raid (all had been processed already, and none of them were ever shipped to the fulfillment office), so I doubt there were any of those to forfeit. I have to conclude that even if there were, they were forfeit on the grounds of proceeds contributing to the alleged 'conspiracy' rather than on a counterfeit status.
REGARDLESS
It is clear from the history of collecting of counterfeit items of any nation that collecting of counterfeit items for the sake of collecting is not a crime. Where counterfeiting is involved, the crime lies in the intended use of the counterfeit items. If the intent is to pass off the counterfeit as a genuine article, thereby defrauding the recipient of the item, then a crime has been committed. If the intent is to add the counterfeit item to a collection of similar items for historical and display purposes only, then no criminal intent is involved and the item itself is harmless. Many Liberty Dollar items bearing dates of 2007 and later are in the hands of the people. The vast majority (if not all) were acquired by their owners for the purpose of storing value. I submit that it would be virtually impossible to use those items to defraud a purchaser of value, even at the time when they were in current production, because of the inherent nature of their intrinsic value. This intrinsic value quickly outstripped the so called 'face value', or relative trading value with respect to US Federal Reserve Notes, making such an act of fraud impossible and any accusation that they were being used for such a purpose completely ludicrous.
The prosecution in the von NotHaus case stood on the claim that because the Liberty Dollar organization was 'selling' silver and gold specie at a price in US dollars that was above their market metal value at the time they were sold, that fraud was being committed. I submit that if that were true, then every company manufacturing goods is committing fraud by charging a price that is above the intrinsic value of the material from which the product is made. That accusation lends no consideration to the concept of enhancing the value of a product by molding, making, or manufacturing it through use of labor for the end goal of making a profit by selling it for the added value with which it has been embellished.
There is a further distinction between the Liberty Dollar products and other manufactured products that makes the fraud accusation even more ludicrous. With conventional manufactured products, the maximum value of the item is at the time when it is freshly made, or 'brand new'. From that point forward in time, the items depreciate in value and they lose their added value through aging and use. With the Liberty Dollar products, however, the very intent of its existence was to confer upon the people not only a value added through manufacturing, but to protect their investment of value by providing them a product unique in its ability to resist losing value through time depreciation. That, my friends, was the true INTENT behind the Liberty Dollar. Only a moron or a devious cheat would try to contort that intent into its opposite, or an intent to defraud. It is irrelevant that along the way the Liberty Dollar organization made a normal, standard percentage of profit for manufacturing a valuable, useful product. If that is a crime, then every corporation in existence is guilty.
The von NotHaus case remains one of the glaring miscarriages of justice in modern times. Just read some of the commentaries on the case on the internet. People who understand the money issue knew the prosecutors were protecting the government/banking complex fiat money scheme. Unfortunately, the majority of common people still do not understand fiat money fraud, so the prosecution had no trouble seating a jury that could not see the truth. Judge Voorhees was put between the proverbial 'rock and a hard place' by the jury verdict. Considering the complexity of the case, he did about the best that could be expected of him considering his position, but that does not excuse the fact that he knowingly allowed the theft of millions of dollars of hard earned money from von NotHaus and his customers over a political issue that had no victims and no criminal intent.
EBAY
It is apparent that some time in late November of 2012, someone from the US justice department contacted Ebay officials about NORFED/Liberty Dollar products being sold on the internet. The justice department presumed that since the jury had found von NotHaus guilty on the counterfeiting charges in 2011, all of his products were by definition counterfeit. The problem is just that. It was a PRESUMPTION. There had been no official court statement on the issue, nor would there be until December 1, 2014. In spite of that, Ebay was contacted and instructed to cease allowing such products to be sold on their site. Ebay was intimidated into compliance (or should I say they capitulated without bothering to verify) and they removed all related items from the ebay stores of many sellers, including my own.
In spite of that, sales of Liberty Dollars on Ebay continued on a daily basis. Neither Ebay or the justice department had any idea how many people there were out there who owned Liberty Dollars. As fast as Ebay could remove listings, new sellers would pop up with new listings. There was some resistance to the new listings for a while, but I think Ebay personnel realized how futile it was to try and keep up with it and they just gave up. I have a strong suspicion that there were also some very logical and convincing protests made that Ebay could not deny. If they didn't remove ALL listings, allowing some sellers to remain while banning other sellers, they might be guilty of discrimination and lack of equal opportunity. But they couldn't keep up with it, so they simply relaxed. When the justice department didn't follow up, they just let it go. That's my best guess.
Now, however, we have the official court decision as to what is counterfeit and what is not. They no longer have any justification for banning specie that judge Voorhees specifically pointed out as not fitting under the counterfeit umbrella. And they also do not have any justification for banning collection of so called 'counterfeits' where no criminal intent is present. It is their prerogative to refuse to list them, but it would require them to employ someone very knowledgeable about which pieces were counterfeit and which ones were not. It simply would not be worth their trouble, not to mention lost profits. It is very doubtful at this point that the justice department would bother them about it any further.
Help keep this site ad free!
I receive very few donations. Where would your collecting efforts be without this site?