So in 2006 the Mint notified Bernard von Nothaus to stop minting and circulating his coins. Then in 2007 the Mint began making Presidential Dollars. The case against Mr. Bernard von Nothaus then comes about because his coins are supposedly similar to those newly minted coins from the Mint. This seems like entrapment to me; counterfeiting charge is flimsy at best, like I said.

Whether or not the coins are similar is not the issue. The issue is the representations made during the coins’ circulation. Mr. von Nothaus is not accused of representing his coins as legal tender. The coins are only as that which they appear to be, an object of art reminiscent of a once great nation, which may be traded in such ways that people may exchange when bartering.

It seems there is nothing improper in the actions of von Nothaus, though the jurors’ imaginations turn towards the palming off of coins on the unknowing. The prosecution uses the issue of similarity as a side show to distract the jurors from the real issues. Even if an unknowing person would receive the coin, they are not defrauded if Mr. von Nothaus makes good on promises for monetary exchange. If not for the actions of the government, Mr. von Nothaus would have been able to continue to make good on his promises.

A) that they have value beyond the value of the metal such as history, artistry, and/or rarity – generally this would involve antique coins. Some may be legal tender – however, the face value of the coin is much less than the collectors value (in those cases, the metal value is zero because it is illegal to melt down U.S. currency).

There are also some collectable coins designed solely for the collectors market – genreally they are commorative coins. They are often sold as investment instruments in that the investor bets on the value of the materials (generally gold) to go up – but they are not intended as currency.

B) that they are intended to be used as money. the value thus comes from the fact that it can be used for other goods. A new quarter is a legal example – the materials are worth less than 25 cents, but a quarter has a value set at 25 cents, so the price of a quarter is set by the face value.

An illegal example is this – making his own currency which is supposedly backed by the silver coins (which were priced above monetary value – but since the buyer did not actually receive the coins there was no collectors or investment value) – however, the value was above the value of the value of the metal.

Unlike the metal speculators and coin collectors, these silver coins have no value other than monetary value (which is almost useless because they are not legal tender) – hence, that is why it is illegal.

even if not classic counterfeiting, its still fraud.

But how do you tell which one’s which, Bachmann or the rattler?

Funny!
Personally, I’d trust the rattlesnake rather than Meechelle.

As does the e-mail I just received from this nice young man from Nigeria.