Liberty Dollar Update

[fortinbras]

You can read that decision here:

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case? ... 3450143032

[Gregg]

I just came across this quote on the Von Nuthaus wiki page

On Nov 11th, 2014 Judge Voorhees denied von NotHaus' Motion for Acquittal. On December 2, 2014 he was sentenced to 6 months house arrest, with 3 years probation.As part of his reasoning for delivering a greatly reduced sentence from what Federal Prosecutors demanded, Judge Richard L. Voorhees stated:

...if anything is clear from the evidence presented at trial, it is that the last thing Mr. von NotHaus wanted was for Liberty Dollars [to] be confused with coins issued by the United States government...His intention – to protest the Federal Reserve system – has always been plain. The jury's verdict conflates a program created to function as an alternative to the Federal Reserve system with one designed to [deceive] people into believing it was the very thing Mr. von NotHaus was protesting in the first place...the Liberty Dollars was not a counterfeit and was not intended to function as such. The verdict is a perversion of the counterfeiting statutes and should be set aside.

I cannot believe that the Judge wrote that, if he truly believed it, could he not have set the conviction aside? Is it falsely attributed to the Judge when its, as i think more likely, from the defense argument in either a motion to set the conviction aside or the sentencing hearing?

FWIW, the whole page looks as if its been edited by one of NORFED's cheerleaders, it minimizes all the reasons he was convicted and rationalizes throughout.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_von_NotHaus

[Famspear]

I have corrected the article. The source material actually attributed the quotation to something the defendant filed with the Court -- not to any statement made by the judge.

[Gregg]

I had thought so. The "Liberty Dollar'' article contains the same quote.
Thanks for reassuring me, I've been looking for the actual quote since I read the article.

[fortinbras]

Here is the decision of Nov. 10, 2014, offered by a (now dead) link approx 10 messages up.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar_ca ... yhi=2014

[Famspear]

I went back, checked the Court docket, and found the verbiage in question. As noted before, it was not a statement by the judge. It was a statement from a document filed by Noell P. Tin, the lawyer for NotHaus. Here's an excerpt:

Mr. von NotHaus stands convicted of various statutorily-defined forms of counterfeiting. The irony of this is that if anything is clear from the evidence presented at trial, it is that the last thing Mr. von NotHaus wanted was for Liberty Dollars to be confused with coins issued by the United States government. That would, as witness Vernon Robinson testified, have defeated the whole purpose- - to demonstrate to citizens and communities that there is a way to engage in commerce and not use the Federal Reserve system. Whether writing scholarly papers on value-based currency, attracting media attention, or selling t-shirts saying “The Fed can bite me,” Mr. von NotHaus has always operated out in the open. His intention- - to protest the Federal Reserve system- - has always been plain. The jury’s verdict conflates a program created to function as an alternative to the Federal Reserve system with one designed to deceive people into believing it was the very thing Mr. von NotHaus was protesting in the first place. Whatever one’s opinion about the merit of value-based currency, the fact remains that the Liberty Dollar was not a counterfeit and was not intended to function as such. The verdict is a perversion of the counterfeiting statutes and should be set aside.

--from DEFENDANT’S SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTIONS FOR JUDGMENT OF ACQUITTAL OR NEW TRIAL PURSUANT TO RULES 29 AND 33 OF THE FEDERAL RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, docket entry 267, March 25, 2013, United States v. Bernard von NotHaus, case no. 09-cr-00027, U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina (footnote not reproduced).

[fortinbras]

Von NotHaus may pretend in his pleadings that he didn't want his silver stampings to be confused with real US coins ... but his own product - and the advertising for it -- made clear that he had used the images of genuine US coins of the past for his stampings (such as the "Walking Liberty" image from the Silver Dollars of a century earlier).

But, at heart, the counterfeiting law does not absolutely require that the funny money be a look-alike to real money, but only that it be of such a configuration that it might deceive someone into thinking that it's usable as real money. Von NotHaus advertised his stampings as legal, as currency, as an acceptable and accepted substitute/replacement for real US money. Since (until the very last year or two) he didn't offer smaller stampings than the one pretended to be $10 (and worth about $8 in bullion), anyone foolish enough to accept it in payment would be expected to make change, in real US money, as if paid a real $10, which was a swindle.

If anyone can resurrect the puff articles and the display ads from the old issues of Media Bypass, you can see how von NotHaus was hyping his stampings as if they were (or would become) real money.

[AndyK]

Does anyone else recall VonFruitcake advocating "the drop?"

In short, he told LD holders to attempt to use them as currency.

[fortinbras]

I'm serious when I say that von NotHaus called his stampings "currency".

He was very euphoric about describing his product in the first couple of years; his ads and puff pieces called it "currency" and "coins" (which legally applies only to real money). Somehow he found a lawyer (in Hawaii) who was willing to be quoted that his silver stampings (with a denomination of "$10 USA" - silver bullion market price then about $8) were "legal". I sent that lawyer a note about 18 USC §486, and, suddenly, von NotHaus became much more restrained in his announcements. But he was coasting on his initial, flamboyant and more-fraudulent, claims to the RWNJ audience.

[notorial dissent]

Does anyone else recall VonFruitcake advocating "the drop?"

In short, he told LD holders to attempt to use them as currency.

Yes, he went in to great detail about how to do it, passing the rounds, and several of his fools did so, until one of them got busted, you guessed it, for passing counterfeit. Things went down hill rapidly from there.

[morrand]

Does anyone else recall VonFruitcake advocating "the drop?"

In short, he told LD holders to attempt to use them as currency.

Quatloos! always remembers.

[grixit]

Have a cookie!

[Pottapaug1938]

Does anyone else recall VonFruitcake advocating "the drop?"

In short, he told LD holders to attempt to use them as currency.

Yes, he went in to great detail about how to do it, passing the rounds, and several of his fools did so, until one of them got busted, you guessed it, for passing counterfeit. Things went down hill rapidly from there.

The most recent issues of "Liberty Dollars" now available on eBay now carry "MSRP" above the stated dollar value. I immediately envision the following scenario:

Storeowner: "Okay, Sir; that will be $47.95, please."

Von Nuthouse Acolyte, tendering a Liberty Dollar with a MSRP of $50: "Okay -- here you go."

Storeowner: "This isn't $50."

Von Nuthouse Acolyte: "Oh, yes it is -- it says so on the reverse 'Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price $50'. It's worth $50."

Storeowner: "Well, I know what I would get for this if I took it to my local coin dealer. The spot price for an ounce of silver is $15.83; but he'll give me less than that, of course, and there's also the value of my time and of the gas my car uses to get me to the dealer. $47.95 in regular money, please...."

I'll skip the rest of the dialogue; but you all can guess what would follow.

[apefarms]

But, at heart, the counterfeiting law does not absolutely require that the funny money be a look-alike to real money, but only that it be of such a configuration that it might deceive someone into thinking that it's usable as real money. Von NotHaus advertised his stampings as legal, as currency, as an acceptable and accepted substitute/replacement for real US money.

I suspect this false. Care to prove your statement?

None in their right mind could ever confuse liberty dollars with US obligations. So the only thing Nothaus could be charged with is fraud for his statements regarding its veracity as US legal tender.

[Famspear]

[ . . . ]So the only thing Nothaus could be charged with is fraud for his statements regarding its veracity as US legal tender.

Bernard von NotHaus was found guilty by a jury of violating 18 USC section 485 ("Coins or bars"), which provides:

Whoever falsely makes, forges, or counterfeits any coin or bar in resemblance or similitude of any coin of a denomination higher than 5 cents or any gold or silver bar coined or stamped at any mint or assay office of the United States, or in resemblance or similitude of any foreign gold or silver coin current in the United States or in actual use and circulation as money within the United States; or

Whoever passes, utters, publishes, sells, possesses, or brings into the United States any false, forged, or counterfeit coin or bar, knowing the same to be false, forged, or counterfeit, with intent to defraud any body politic or corporate, or any person, or attempts the commission of any offense described in this paragraph—

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than fifteen years, or both.

For section 485, the jury was asked by the judge to answer additional questions and to indicate whether the verdict was unanimous as to one or both of two specific avenues of proof. The first avenue of proof was “Making Counterfeit Coins”. The second avenue of proof was “Passing / Uttering Counterfeit Coins With Intent To Defraud.” The jury indicated that it based the guilty verdict under section 485 on both avenues of proof.

Von NotHaus was also found guilty of violating 18 USC section 486 (“Uttering coins of gold, silver or other metal"), which provides:

Whoever, except as authorized by law, makes or utters or passes, or attempts to utter or pass, any coins of gold or silver or other metal, or alloys of metals, intended for use as current money, whether in the resemblance of coins of the United States or of foreign countries, or of original design, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

Von NotHaus was also found guilty of violating 18 USC section 371 (“Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United States”), which provides (in part):

If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or an agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both [ . . . ]

See generally the Court’s Memorandum and Order, docket entry 270, Nov. 10, 2014, United States v. Bernard von NotHaus, case no. 09-cr-00027, U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina (Statesville Div.).

[morrand]

As for the second part of the claim, that

Von NotHaus advertised his stampings as legal, as currency, as an acceptable and accepted substitute/replacement for real US money.

you need only look at the front page of the Liberty Dollar site, which on February 9, 2003, proclaimed:

The Liberty Dollar
America's inflation-proof currency
100% backed and redeemable in gold & silver

It's real money, better than Federal Reserve Notes! Just as FedEx brought competition to and improved the U.S. Postal Service, NORFED brings competition to America's most basic economic unit, its currency.

NORFED, a national non-profit organization, offers a simple, fun, and legal solution to the problem of the Federal Reserve's inflationary currency: Just stop using their money and start using The Liberty Dollar. Help return America to value, one dollar at a time.

For, like Quatloos!, the Wayback Machine never forgets.

[fortinbras]

A link to one of the Wayback Machine's files of early Liberty Dollar propaganda:

https://web.archive.org/web/200303190 ... ar.org/

and Wayback's index to Liberty Dollar archives:

https://web.archive.org/web/200605010 ... ar.org/

[The Observer]

And Von Nothaus is trying to push Liberty Dollars again.

And a couple of links to sites that appear to be related to the Liberty Dollar:

http://libertydollar.org/ld/information ... tement.htm

http://libertydollar.org/ld/information ... tement.htm

[notorial dissent]

Speaking of someone with zero learning curve. He must like prison food.

[The Observer]

At 77 years of age, you would think that he might have learned at least something. At this point, however, I don't see that as happening. This link still shows the following:

3. Although prudence would seem to indicate that people would refuse a currency they've never seen, this is simply not the case. After thousands of transactions, the Liberty Dollar is readily accepted most of the time. It is meant to be circulated voluntarily as barter, accumulated and collected.

4. Simply offer The Liberty Dollar with the confidence that it will be accepted. After all, why wouldn't it? When you offer the American Express Card, if it is not accepted, they tell you. Likewise, if the store does not accept Liberty Dollars, the cashier will tell you and you can simply pay another way.

5. "Do the Drop!" The best way to introduce the Liberty Dollar is to drop the Silver Liberty in someone's hand. Do not hand it to the cashier, Drop it! Hold a one-ounce Silver Liberty a couple inches above the outreached palm and drop it so it lands flat in the person's palm.

6. Now the hardest part - don't say anything! Just wait. Let the person marvel at its beauty, weight, and discover it says TWENTY DOLLARS. When asked "Is it real?" Answer: "Yes, one ounce of silver PRIVATE currency valued at 20 dollars." Do not rush. Just stand there and wait, patiently. No need to smile. Just wait.

7. After 30 seconds, say, "I have US government legal tender money too [show the cashier FRN cash], but would prefer to pay with silver." If the cashier hands it back immediately, you may ask her to show the currency to the manager, or just pay some other way.

Isn't this what got him into trouble the first time around?