Philatelic thief/mob/porn/murder/blackmail/suicide

Subject: BS: Philatelic story - interesting!
From: katlaughing
Date: 24 Jun 09 - 01:45 PM

Last week Kovel's email told about a Lincoln postage stamp which was stolen in the 1960s, resurfaced and was sold at auction, recently, for over $400,000(US). Now we hear a bit more of the story:

A reader, S.C., emailed to ask who gets the money for the stolen Lincoln stamp mentioned last week. The "Ice House" cover (envelope) that bore the stamp was stolen in 1967. Aetna Insurance paid the owner, J. David Baker, $86,000 to cover the loss of the Ice House cover and about 250 other covers that were stolen at the same time. Most of the stolen covers were found and returned in 1978. In 2006 a couple claimed to have found the cover while they were sorting through a dead friends' estate. Another source says the couple claimed they bought the stamp at a flea market twenty years earlier. Another source says the couple claimed they bought the cover at a flea market. The couple took the envelope to a stamp shop in Chicago where it was identified and the police were contacted. The statute of limitations had expired on the 1967 theft, so the case went to court. Who owned the stamp -- the finders, the original owners, the insurance company, or another collector who had offered to buy it when it surfaced? The insurance company had been involved in several mergers and the judge ruled it was no longer the same company that had insured the stamp. The collector had no proof he had purchased the rights to buy the stamp because those involved were dead. The ownership was finally awarded to the Baker estate in 2008. So the money, $431,250, went to the Baker heirs.

But the whole story is even more complicated. It is part of a real life detective drama involving a fine arts thief, the Chicago mob, a porn shop owner, a murder, a blackmail demand for the return of the stamp, and the suicide of a man who was accused of selling bogus collectibles. To this day no one admits to knowing where the stamp has been all these years.

I'd sure like to learn more about it!

Subject: RE: BS: Philatelic story - interesting!
From: gnu
Date: 24 Jun 09 - 01:52 PM

I wonder if Tom Hamnks already has the movie rights.

Subject: RE: Philatelic thief/mob/porn/murder/blackmail/suicide
From: Bat Goddess
Date: 24 Jun 09 - 04:07 PM

That's an even better story than that of the 13th century poinard stolen from us in the early '80s. It resurfaced when the fellow who bought it (almost 15 years later) in a box o' stuff at Brimfield walked into the ONLY place in the world (Victory Antiques in Portsmouth) where someone would know it was stolen and at the only time of the week when Tom was there and the fellow's son commented on the hilt's similarity to a sword that Tom had for sale. The guy was only killing time while his wife had her hair or nails done down the street. Tom sketched the knife (and the markings on the blade) for the shop owner while the guy went to the car to get it. Ayuh, same knife. Because it was stolen property, the fellow couldn't legally sell it or anything. I even managed to unearth all the police paperwork from the time of the break-in. We ended up paying him what he had paid for the knife plus a finder's fee and it's safe at home again.

Wonder where IT had been for 15 years!

Linn

Subject: RE: Philatelic thief/mob/porn/murder/blackmail/suicide
From: gnu
Date: 24 Jun 09 - 04:13 PM

Great story Bat!

Subject: RE: Philatelic thief/mob/porn/murder/blackmail/suicide
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 24 Jun 09 - 05:15 PM

BG, if you are in ENgland it was not necessary to pay.

As far as the original story is concerned, it is unlikely the judge was right. In most US states, if a company is dissolved the remaining property and rights vest in the shareholders per stirpes, and under the nemo dat rule the property in the items never passed. So they were not bona vacantia and the finder had no rights. The property of course vested in the then insurance company when it paid out. The thief could claim no prescriptive rights, for his possession was not "nec clam, nec vi, nec precario".

I find many US lawyers have trouble with the differences between legal and equitable ownership.

Subject: RE: Philatelic thief/mob/porn/murder/blackmail/suicide
From: heric
Date: 24 Jun 09 - 06:56 PM

After the Baker collection was nipped in 1967, Aetna paid him $83,000 for the loss, and in exchange got a contractual release and rights to the property. When 235 of the 237 stolen items were found in the 70's they were given to Aetna as the rightful owner. Baker sued. The court in 1975 said Baker doesn't have a contractual right to these items, but since (a) these are unique and irreplaceable, and (b) neither he nor Aetna had any clue that these would inflate so drastically in value, I am going, in equity, to let him have it all back, if he pays you the 86K back with interest. So he did, paying Aetna $143,000. Aetna got a release for ALL PROPERTY stolen in the December 10, 1967 incident. Baker auctioned the stuff off for $¾ million.

Fast forward to 2006. The Stephens family has possession of the one-of-a kind ice house Lincoln. FBI takes possession. Everybody goes to court.

Stephens family argued that they purchased it at a flea market or garage sale for fair value, as innocent purchasers. Facts don't look so good for them. Looks more like they stumbled upon stolen property, and nothing more.

Court told Baker estate and Aetna to battle there claims first, then we will have the winner take on the Stephens. Aetna says 1975 rationale now favors Aetna. The heirs don't give a crap about "unique and irreplaceable," they are into the money just as we are, they don't even collect stamps, and they have no right to a windfall now. Court says never mind all that. The 1975 judge ruling was not based on two missing stamps, it was that Baker should give you all of your money back with interest, and you have been made whole. And you were. The order did not reflect any deduction or calculation adjustment based upon the two items that were at that time still missing. They own the entire collection. Aetna says oh come on, we have a release and assignment of rights, AGAIN.

Court said: "It is true that, as Aetna contends, the last paragraph of the settlement agreement refers to the December 10, 1967, loss of Mr. Baker's collection without qualification or distinction between recovered and unrecovered items of the stolen collection. However, that paragraph cannot be read in isolation." "The settlement agreement by its terms did not preserve any interest for Aetna in the unrecovered stamps; it merely reflected the termination of the insured-insurer relationship between Mr. Baker and Aetna with regard to the recovered stamps."

Bullshit but there you have it.

Now, Baker Estate v. Stephens: Baker Estate says Stephenses have no greater right or title to the Ice House Cover than the thief who initially stole it, which is to say, they have no rights, and, besides, they voluntarily relinquished possessory rights by giving it to the FBI. Stephens say that's crap, we had to relinquish possession without waiving our rights, our possession is valid against any but a legal owner, and you, spoiled rotten Baker kids, can establish no legal right to it because the statute of limitations for a recovery action (replevin) ran a long time ago. Besides that, the property was abandoned before we got it.
Court says, no, statute doesn't start to run if they don't know where to find it. Stephens say ah yes but they would have, with reasonable diligence, have found it: An informant in the late 60's offered to disclose location for a mere $15,000.

All right, all right, said the court. You can go to trial against the Baker Estate and try to prove that they abandoned the property or did not exercise diligence to get it back. Trial to begin on July 18, 2008.

But – no trial took place. On August 11, 2008, the Stephens signed a stipulation and allowed a consent judgment stating that they had no ownership interest in the Ice House. Case dismissed. Everybody wins except the insurance company. (Note: the intervening subsequent merger and acquisition activity as Aetna was absorbed into Travelers was not the basis for them losing rights.)

Subject: RE: Philatelic thief/mob/porn/murder/blackmail/suicide
From: heric
Date: 24 Jun 09 - 07:10 PM

Richard and I can ruin any good story kat lol

Subject: RE: Philatelic thief/mob/porn/murder/blackmail/suicide
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 24 Jun 09 - 09:01 PM

The Stephens' story would seem to fall apart--according to Heric's narrative--when they claim knowledge that there was contact between Baker and a would-be informant back in the 1960s. Also, I did not understand that Aetna's merger would not have contained their accrued rights over the years...and heric indicates it had no bearing on the case.

I'm going to try to find more info on this for a presentation to my stamp club in July or August.

Subject: RE: Philatelic thief/mob/porn/murder/blackmail/suicide
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 24 Jun 09 - 09:03 PM

Dr. Arthur K. M. Woo, well-known collector of 19th c. stamps, is now the proud owner of the rare envelope with the $0.90 Lincoln stamp of 1869, paying $375,000 (Baker estate), plus $55,000 in auction fees to Siegel Auctioneers.
The stamp itself is not all that rare, but only this one is on the envelope on which it was posted. It is a wonder that it was preserved, since it had been sent to Calcutta, India.

The Star Press, Indianapolis, has the full story, June 14, 2009.
http://www.thestarpress.com/article/20090614/NEWS06/90614003/1002/NEWS01/140-year-old-Lincoln-stamp-sold-for--375-000

Note- If the item had been stolen in Quebec, which has remnants of the napoleonic Civil Code, an innocent purchaser at auction or other sale, must be compensated. This has been a problem in Canada; cars stolen in other provinces and sold to a buyer in Quebec came under this statute. The provinces were working toward a common ruling, but I don't know what the current situation is. The computer age, with full details of serial numbers, etc., known across the country, probably has cured the car situation, but many saleable items have scant records.

Subject: RE: Philatelic thief/mob/porn/murder/blackmail/suicide
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 24 Jun 09 - 09:15 PM

Thanks Q -- you did my research for me. Very interesting story.

Subject: RE: Philatelic thief/mob/porn/murder/blackmail/suicide
From: katlaughing
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 12:03 AM

Thanks, fellahs! heric, ya'll didn't ruin it, you just explained some of the nitty-gritty...just what I was hoping for!

Seems to me if the Bakers paid back the insurance company in full and the insurance company signed off on that, then the Bakers had rights to it...I think.:-)

Thanks, Q, that is quite a story!

Subject: RE: Philatelic thief/mob/porn/murder/blackmail/suicide
From: heric
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 12:44 AM

>Seems to me if the Bakers paid back the insurance company in full and the insurance company signed off on that, then the Bakers had rights to it...I think.:-) <

I think you may be right in that regard. I was writing very fast. Everyone made a mistake back in 1975.

Subject: RE: Philatelic thief/mob/porn/murder/blackmail/suicide
From: open mike
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 02:02 AM

wow this thread title sure e-x-p-a-n-d-e-d

and to think it was all done by stamp collectors...such
seemingly harmless innocents

Subject: RE: Philatelic thief/mob/porn/murder/blackmail/suicide
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 09:22 AM

It just goes to show the dangers of this pernicious, and antisocial pastime.

Obviously Philately should be STAMPED OUT!

I'll get me coat..........

Don T.

Subject: RE: Philatelic thief/mob/porn/murder/blackmail/suicide
From: katlaughing
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 11:17 AM

LOL!

Guess we got that licked!:-)

Subject: RE: Philatelic thief/mob/porn/murder/blackmail/suicide
From: Acorn4
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 11:31 AM

Who said philately will get you nowhere?

Subject: RE: Philatelic thief/mob/porn/murder/blackmail/suicide
From: Neil D
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 09:54 PM

C'mon Don, don't go all postal on us. ;=)

Seriously, this is fascinating so far but what about the fine arts thief, the Chicago mob, a porn shop owner, a murder, a blackmail demand for the return of the stamp, and the suicide of a man who was accused of selling bogus collectibles. I can't wait for the book.

Subject: RE: Philatelic thief/mob/porn/murder/blackmail/suicide
From: heric
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 11:14 PM

. . . and the sequel about the still missing 237th stamp, that's what I'm interested in.

Subject: RE: Philatelic thief/mob/porn/murder/blackmail/suicide
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 26 Jun 09 - 06:53 AM

Well, I'm very glad that we've had this frank exchange of views, and I'm sure that, in the course of time the missing stamp will make a collection.

Don T.

Subject: RE: Philatelic thief/mob/porn/murder/blackmail/suicide
From: katlaughing
Date: 26 Jun 09 - 11:26 AM

But will it receive a stamp of approval? Or just be cancelled out?