Von Nutball essentially walks, as least for now

[notorial dissent]

I think the judge must have been on something, von Nutball is an old and well known pot head, and I doubt seriously he has changed his patterns just because he has gotten older.

[Famspear]

Now for the forfeiture information. First, we need to get a flavor for what follows. Footnote 1 of the Court's December 1st order reads as follows:

The manner in which the Government has addressed these issues does not inspire confidence. The Government filed two new motions in November 2014 seeking much of the same relief requested in its original motion while also paring down its request for forfeiture of items as contraband pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 492. (Docs. 280, 281). On December 1, 2014, the Government submitted two additional filings – an Addendum to its November 2014 filings and an affidavit from the lead case agent, Special Agent Romagnuolo. (Docs. 283, 284). Together, the Government has submitted a total of eight filings on various forfeiture matters – in each instance, identifying evidence or advancing arguments that were not adequately addressed by the Government at the outset.

On to the Court's conclusions of law:

VIII. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

Based upon the evidence presented at trial, the forfeiture hearings, the Court’s review of the record as a whole, and the factual findings recited herein, the Court hereby finds the following as a matter of law:

1) The entities that were used by Bernard von Nothaus in connection with operating this conspiracy, namely, Shelter Systems, the Royal Hawaiian Mint, NORFED, Liberty Services, and the Liberty Dollar Organization were essentially one entity and the alter ego of Defendant.

2) The Government has not established by a preponderance of the evidence that ALL Liberty Dollar coins, or the eleven groups of coins specified within its most recent filing, associated with the Liberty Dollar Organization from 1998 through the present are subject to 18 U.S.C. § 4 forfeiture as “counterfeit” or “contraband per se."

3) With the exception of Hawaii Dala devices, the items identified within Government Trial Exhibit 71 and Exhibit F34 as “Dies Molds, and Casts Seized at Sunshine Minting, Inc. on November 14, 2007” are forfeited pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 492.

4) With the exception of Hawaii Dala devices, the dies identified within Government Exhibit 71B (dies not located in the original search but subsequently identified by Sunshine Minting and seized by law enforcement) are also forfeited pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 492. (3/10/11 Tr. 324).

5) The funds seized from the Liberty Services Integra Bank Account 2980 in the amount of $254,534.09 are forfeitable under both §§ 853(a)(1) and (a)(2); [Note: The statutory reference has been corrected by amended order to read: 18 USC sections 492 and 982.]

6) The 11 Silver Bars and Silver Scrap totaling 10,720.60 troy ounces (or approximately 800-900 pounds) is forfeitable pursuant to § 853(a)(2); [Note: The statutory reference has been corrected by amended order to read: 18 USC sections 492 and 982.]

7) With respect to the 16,000.05 troy ounces of raw and unminted silver, the Court finds as a matter of law that the Government has not shown by a preponderance of the evidence the requisite nexus between the Defendant's LDO [Liberty Dollar Organization] and the silver housed in this safekeeping account. The Government has not proven a “substantial connection” that indicates that this quantity of silver was intended to be used to facilitate the conspiracy. 21 U.S.C. § 853(a)(2). Likewise, the Government has not proven that this quantity of silver constitutes proceeds from the illegal activity or is derived from proceeds. 21 U.S.C. § 853(a)(1).

8 ) All seized items associated or stored via the Defendant's Royal Hawaiian Mint account are forfeitable pursuant to both §§ 853(a)(1) and (a)(2). [Note: The statutory reference has been corrected by amended order to read: 18 USC sections 492 and 982.]

9) To the extent they are not already designated as falling within the “counterfeit” category of jury-determined forfeited items, the copper coins seized from the residence of William Kevin Innes are forfeitable pursuant to both §§ 853(a)(1) and (a)(2). [Note: The statutory reference has been corrected by amended order to read: 18 USC sections 492 and 982.]

10) The items seized from the Liberty Services’ Fulfillment Office in Evansville, Indiana are forfeitable pursuant to §§ 853(a)(1) and (a)(2). [Note: The statutory reference has been corrected by amended order to read: 18 USC sections 492 and 982.]

11) The state monetary initiative Liberty Dollar coins are forfeitable pursuant to § 853(a)(1) [Note: The statutory reference has been corrected by amended order to read: 18 USC sections 492 and 982.]

---From Memorandum and Order, docket entry 285, Dec. 1, 2014, with my correcting notations inserted based on my reading of the Amended Order, docket entry 286, Dec. 2, 2014, in United States v. Bernard von NotHaus, case no. 09-cr-00027-RLV, U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina (italics and underscoring in the original).

[Dr. Caligari]

Forbes has come out on Von Nothaus's side:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/georgeleef/ ... haus-case/

[KickahaOta]

Forbes has come out on Von Nothaus's side:

Well, no. George Leef, a "contributor" -- someone with a blog on Forbes.com -- has come out on Von Nothaus' side. Only articles from "Forbes Staff", not "Contributor[s]", actually come from the reporting/editorial voice of Forbes.

Of course, one might say that by letting such a broad range of uncontrolled voices post under the Forbes brand, Forbes has largely given up on the concept of a brand to begin with; and in that sense they could be said to be 'on the side' of pretty much anything and everything. But that's a very different argument.

[Dr. Caligari]

Thanks for the correction.

[Famspear]

In the Forbes article, George Leef wrote:

Von NotHaus’ coins weren’t deceptive and although they could be used in exchange for goods or services, they aren’t a substitute for “current money” any more than are foreign coins or silver bars are.

Perhaps, but Bernard von NotHaus intended that the Liberty Dollars be used as "volunteer barter currency". If any of his "coins" in question were "Liberty Dollars," that would seem to imply that he believed that the coins were (or at least could be) a substitute for "current money". In July 2009, on his web site, von NotHaus wrote to his followers:

This is your opportunity to take a stand for a value based private voluntary barter currency vs. government money made out of fowl [sic] hot air.

[ . . . ]

These are tough times and it takes tough people to bring about a free and independent currency that provides us with "just weights and measures" and throw off the yoke of a manipulated monetary/tax system [ . . . ]

--as downloaded from:

libertydollar dot org

on August 2, 2009 (large font added).

Note: I don't think the link is good any more, after all this time.

EDIT: I deleted the link, and replaced it with "libertydollar dot org".