Leu knowingly selling stolen coins?

[John Conduitt]

One question I have is what an auction house's position is legally with the sale of stolen goods, since I don't believe they take title at any point. eBay must get accused of this every day, and simply advise people to contact law enforcement agencies, who they say will contact eBay. Most law enforcement agencies can't be bothered, not least because they'd have to act quickly before the sale. If someone innocently buys stolen goods, the normal route is to seek a refund if and when they're told to return them, which must rarely happen.

Obviously, there must be something around profiting from the sale of stolen goods, but if it's simply an accusation, would they not continue as normal until told otherwise by the police? If the police don't do this, then would they withdraw items simply on the basis of an unofficial allegation?

Edited August 28, 2023 by John Conduitt

[filolif]

1 hour ago, Rand said:

Otherwise, the post reads as an allegation.

I have no idea what you're talking about.

My point is that more people minimize the allegations against Beale because they can't conceptualize being the victim of that crime. As a collector, it's much easier to imagine having your coins lost/stolen in the mail and then ending up for sale elsewhere. Hence why I imagine fewer people would minimize that.

Does that make sense? Do you see my point?

[Rand]

Thank you, and I see your point. Your comment referred to fellow forum members, even though I cannot see who has been affected personally by the issue discussed in this thread.

I have not felt any members purposefully tried to conceptualize anyone being the victim of that crime, even though the language may not have been precise. The forum includes people of different backgrounds. I cannot see the harm in clarifying what people mean - I can see the potential harm in using the word ’stealing towards other people.

Please correct me if my views are wrong:
- Encouraging to wait for the outcomes of a criminal investigation is not the same as supporting stealing.
- Understanding motives are not the same as supporting stealing.
- Discussions of how possible changes in the law may support the preservation of heritage and trade transparency are different from supporting stealing.
- Noting that collectors were likely to keep buying from a company under investigation is not the same as supporting stealing.

If we use strong statements every time we do not agree with someone, we will push people away from speaking out.

I do hope my comments are not seen as offensive. No offence meant.

[filolif]

27 minutes ago, Rand said:

Your comment referred to fellow forum members

It does not refer to fellow forum members, it refers to anyone who would minimize Beale and think it's entirely different from Leu potentially selling stolen coins. While the two are not the same, they are not entirely different either. I don't think people should minimize either issue. I see both as very serious.

Its not clear to me why you took personal offense at my characterization as it seems relatively tame and self-evident to me. People are much more concerned with things that would affect them personally.

[kirispupis]

1 hour ago, filolif said:

It does not refer to fellow forum members, it refers to anyone who would minimize Beale and think it's entirely different from Leu potentially selling stolen coins. While the two are not the same, they are not entirely different either. I don't think people should minimize either issue. I see both as very serious.

Its not clear to me why you took personal offense at my characterization as it seems relatively tame and self-evident to me. People are much more concerned with things that would affect them personally.

Well, the two issues are quite different.

• The Beale case involves an actual criminal case and an arrest. There are documents that explain the exact crimes that occurred and include testimony from Beale himself.
• The Leu issue involves a few comments made on the Internet, offered without proof.

My suggestion is to stick to a legal discussion on Swiss vs US law involving the sale of stolen goods. That discussion, especially @DonnaML's detailed response, has been fascinating, whether or not Leu is even involved.

Carrying the discussion over into assumptions and expectations on how others view these cases personally is a slippery slope and is bound to offend.

[filolif]

21 minutes ago, kirispupis said:

The Leu issue involves a few comments made on the Internet, offered without proof.

Is there a reason you aren't being accurate about this? It's not "a few comments made on the internet". It's a single comment, made by the owner of another major auction house. That context matters quite a bit, wouldn't you agree?

23 minutes ago, kirispupis said:

Carrying the discussion over into assumptions and expectations on how others view these cases personally is a slippery slope and is bound to offend.

Totally nonsensical. I simply made a statement about human nature. I'll state it a third time. People are much more likely to be concerned about things that affect them personally. That's it. That's all I said. There is absolutely no reason to be offended by that.

[Rand]

2 hours ago, filolif said:

It does not refer to fellow forum members, it refers to anyone who would minimize Beale and think it's entirely different from Leu potentially selling stolen coins. While the two are not the same, they are not entirely different either. I don't think people should minimize either issue. I see both as very serious.

Its not clear to me why you took personal offense at my characterization as it seems relatively tame and self-evident to me. People are much more concerned with things that would affect them personally.

Well. Few people are interested in coins and fewer so are aware of Roma or Leu. If the post did not refer to specific people, it was reasonable to imply forum members. The topic has been most extensively debated on the forum - this is how I found out about it.

I am passionate about preserving knowledge of coin finds, and it pains me greatly how few coins have find provenances. I am more relaxed about who keeps them, providing they are in safe and legitimate hands. I have commented on this; one can never be sure how others may interpret your comment, and I wanted to be clear about my standing on the matter. I do not take offence to critics and happily admit when I am wrong. 

I am generally not interested in forums, but I like Numis Forums and would rather stick around and hope it continues as a friendly space.

[kirispupis]

26 minutes ago, filolif said:

Is there a reason you aren't being accurate about this? It's not "a few comments made on the internet". It's a single comment, made by the owner of another major auction house. That context matters quite a bit, wouldn't you agree?

I'm not sure how I can be accurate about something I know nothing about. I do hold CNG in great respect, but we don't know:

• Which coins CNG was referring to
• What exactly happened with those coins (for all we know the seller received them but then claimed them as stolen)
• Whether CNG was directly involved with those coins
• Whether these were the same coins someone else mentioned
• Whether Leu truly did nothing, or simply didn't provide details to CNG on what they did
• Whether these coins were actually stolen, or whether CNG was missing some key details that led them to the wrong conclusion

I also recognize that these two firms of fierce competitors, both for coins and for talent.

32 minutes ago, filolif said:

Totally nonsensical. I simply made a statement about human nature. I'll state it a third time. People are much more likely to be concerned about things that affect them personally. That's it. That's all I said. There is absolutely no reason to be offended by that.

I'll repeat my exact comment since it appears to have been misconstrued: Carrying the discussion over into assumptions and expectations on how others view these cases personally is a slippery slope and is bound to offend. 

[kirispupis]

7 minutes ago, Rand said:

I am generally not interested in forums, but I like Numis Forums and would rather stick around and hope it continues as a friendly space.

I do hope no conversation here has been unfriendly to you. While I was interested in the legal aspects of the discussion, since our experts in legal matters have educated me a great deal on the subject, I do worry that the conversation is trending to the personal. I hope it doesn't continue in that direction.

[Rand]

Not at all. I have never felt offended and do enjoy debates, even when everyone disagrees with me!

 

I am cautious about some discussions could hurt others. For example, I am careful pointing out fakes in sales as I have not examined the coins, nor an expert and may be wrong. Still I do feel strongly about something needed to be done about the fake industry (I pointed out possible fakes to auction houses directly). 

Edited August 28, 2023 by Rand

[filolif]

14 minutes ago, kirispupis said:

I'll repeat my exact comment since it appears to have been misconstrued: Carrying the discussion over into assumptions and expectations on how others view these cases personally is a slippery slope and is bound to offend. 

A good rule of thumb when you think you're being misunderstood is to rephrase what you said instead of just copy-pasting the original words and italicizing them. Certainly I wouldn't be capable of misinterpreting them if they were italicized! 🙄

I don't have any issue with your statement in general, only as it corresponds to what I've said, which should be in no way offensive to anyone. It's simply a fact of life. One that everyone would do well to recognize and accept. And in some cases, be aware of their own personal tendencies so they can navigate to a more morally defensible position.

[John Conduitt]

1 hour ago, filolif said:

People are much more likely to be concerned about things that affect them personally. That's it. That's all I said. There is absolutely no reason to be offended by that.

What you said is true, but perhaps the context could've caused it to be misconstrued.

7 hours ago, filolif said:

I have a feeling that fewer would excuse Leu selling stolen coins since it would be stealing from the collector and not stealing cultural heritage from a country. Funny how people's opinions change when they can imagine it affecting them personally.

It's a bit like saying 'I wish people had more common sense.' No-one would argue, except the person whose post it came after.

I don't think I agree anyway in this case. Yes, people feel more strongly about things that affect them. But do they feel more about someone else's stolen coins than the theft of cultural heritage? I think I'm more annoyed with the latter. It affects me more than someone else losing their coins, which are insured anyway. I think I'd only be more concerned if the stolen coins were very rare, which is actually to do with the loss of cultural heritage and not coins as personal possessions.

The issue with cultural heritage, however, is that the definition of 'cultural heritage' is much more subjective than 'theft'. Not many people are in favour of theft of personal possessions under any definition but you can easily disagree with what counts as cultural heritage.

[filolif]

27 minutes ago, John Conduitt said:

It's a bit like saying 'I wish people had more common sense.' No-one would argue, except the person whose post it came after.

It didn't "come after" anyone's post. Did you actually read the context? An entirely third party decided to be offended because they apparently thought I was referencing them. There was zero intention on my part to call anyone out personally.

It's not just about stolen coins. It's about an auction house receiving stolen coins, listing them for sale and when told they're stolen, ignoring the warning. This is the allegation. Sure, it's unproven but if it's true, that would likely be of much greater concern to many people than Beale's escapades. It's not just about how much it affects them personally, it's whether or not they can imagine a scenario where it could.

[SimonW]

1 hour ago, filolif said:

It's not just about stolen coins. It's about an auction house receiving stolen coins, listing them for sale and when told they're stolen, ignoring the warning. This is the allegation. Sure, it's unproven but if it's true, that would likely be of much greater concern to many people than Beale's escapades. It's not just about how much it affects them personally, it's whether or not they can imagine a scenario where it could.

Talking about what is likely a greater concern for many people is an interesting way of expressing your own opinion. If that's your opinion, that's fine, but are you speaking for anyone else other than yourself?

The main issue IMO really is that you are comparing what someone allegedly did (no evidence provided whatsoever) with what someone admittedly did. That's quite a difference, don't you think? What's the point of comparing the two?

Edited August 28, 2023 by SimonW

[Väinämöinen]

12 minutes ago, SimonW said:

Talking about what is likely a greater concern for many people is an interesting way of expressing your own opinion.

I am also willing to guess that an auction house receiving stolen coins, listing them for sale, and when told they're stolen, ignoring the warning, and proceeding to sell the coins in question, would be a bigger issue to most people than faking the provenances of a few high value coins. 

It's not like many people here aren't presenting their subjective feelings as objective facts.

15 minutes ago, SimonW said:

But the main issue really is that you are comparing what someone allegedly did (no evidence provided whatsoever) with what someone admittedly did. That's quite a difference, don't you think? What's the point of comparing the two?

He's talking about the scenario where this is proven factually true, so this part of your message is irrelevant.

[SimonW]

5 minutes ago, Väinämöinen said:

He's talking about the scenario where this is proven factually true, so this part of your message is irrelevant.

I understand what he is talking about. But again, what's the point of comparing the two in this thread? If someone is accused of murder, what's the point of saying "murder is worse than burglary"? Does it add any value to a discussion about whether the person is guilty or not?

[filolif]

6 minutes ago, SimonW said:

I understand what he is talking about. But again, what's the point of comparing the two in this thread? If someone is accused of murder, what's the point of saying "murder is worse than burglary"? Does it add any value to a discussion about whether the person is guilty or not?

Weren’t you just slamming me for saying that this was all just my opinion and now you’re saying it’s so blatantly obvious that it doesn’t even bear discussing? 😵‍💫

Its a forum thread, my friend. We discuss things and not all of them are 100% perfectly proven. And they don’t need to be before we’re allowed to speculate.

I was not the one who originally brought up the Roma comparison. 

[TheTrachyEnjoyer]

11 minutes ago, SimonW said:

Does it add any value to a discussion about whether the person is guilty or not?

I think that is more comparing business practices and allegations of wrong doing in the industry with the long term well being of us, the collectors, and our purchases in mind - well, at least allegations for Leu as it would appear Beale has confessed to numerous felonies recently. 
 

Obviously, I would not support a firm knowingly selling coins stolen from other collectors. This has not been proven with Leu. As for Roma, I will not do business with them anymore. I don’t buy from criminals

[SimonW]

1 hour ago, filolif said:

Weren’t you just slamming me for saying that this was all just my opinion and now you’re saying it’s so blatantly obvious that it doesn’t even bear discussing? 😵‍💫

Change the position of the two crimes in my example if you like. All I am saying is that IMO your comparison adds nothing helpful to this discussion other than deliberately stirring the pot.

1 hour ago, filolif said:

Its a forum thread, my friend. We discuss things and not all of them are 100% perfectly proven. And they don’t need to be before we’re allowed to speculate.

You can speculate all you want, and that's all you're doing, my friend! 🙂

Edited August 28, 2023 by SimonW

[CPK]

Perhaps we all should take a bit of a break from this thread, at least until we have more information. Doesn't seem like the discussion is going anywhere, anyway.

 

[Ricardo123]

On 8/26/2023 at 5:37 PM, Kaleun96 said:

Given Mike's comment in the Facebook group, it sounds like CNG might know more about it

Maybe someone should ask Mike where the « siren collection » they sold  couple of years ago come from:  many unpublished coins, zero specimens with a pedigree, never one catalog reference…..for extra rare greek coins. Check acsearch and see what i meaning…

[David Atherton]

41 minutes ago, Ricardo123 said:

Maybe someone should ask Mike where the « siren collection » they sold  couple of years ago come from:  many unpublished coins, zero specimens with a pedigree, never one catalog reference…..for extra rare greek coins. Check acsearch and see what i meaning…

Can you tell me where the "Sierra Collection" CNG sold a decade ago comes from? I know for a fact it's legit, but Google doesn't know that. Sometimes a consignor wishes to be anonymous, nothing nefarious about that!

Edited September 13, 2023 by David Atherton

[filolif]

59 minutes ago, Ricardo123 said:

Maybe someone should ask Mike where the « siren collection » they sold  couple of years ago come from:  many unpublished coins, zero specimens with a pedigree, never one catalog reference…..for extra rare greek coins. Check acsearch and see what i meaning…

Are you saying the coins from the siren collection were stolen from another collector? If not, what exactly is the relevance to this thread?

[David Atherton]

The cloak and dagger crap gets old really fast. But people love conspiracy theories!

[Ricardo123]

My point: we have thread bashing Leu started by a guy from cng. So this auction house is saint and perfectly honest ? @David Atherton you don’t like conspiracy theory, but you maybe like fairy tail. Here one for you: once upon a time, a new collection of 480 coins from Mysia Kyzikos arrived on the market. Incredibly rare variant in the batch, even never seen specimens, also many die match. 480 coins. How many have pedigree ? ZERO. How many can we track from previous sale ? ZERO. How many of the rareties have been discussed, or analysed in any publications or litterature in the world ? ZERO. How many are in plates somewhere ? ZERO.  How many have been seen before except by the seller ? ZERO. Your conclusion David ? Sleep well sweet dreams with this cute story !