| Author |
 Replies: 102 / Views: 14,690 |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
686 Posts |
http://canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/197...canlii22.pdfThis is a 1973 Supreme Court decision in a matter related to counterfeit US coins (which is still a crime in Canada). The case is quite different from what we are discussing with reference to coins marked "COPY" or "REPLICA". However, Justice Laskin (who became Chief Justice soon after this decision) did offer an opinion that if the intent of the owner was not to use them as currency, then he would have lawful excuse. "The offence with which the accused was charged is a 'currency' offence, so captioned in the part of the Criminal Code in which it appears; and it is clear from the associated sections of the Code that what is aimed at by all of them is the prohibition of having or using counterfeit money for currency purposes." "What was contested by the accused... [was] the want of intention to use the counterfeit coins as currency. In my opinion, this, if established on a balance of probabilities, is as much within the scope of lawful justification or excuse as proof that the accused was unaware that the coins were counterfeit". While this opinion was not the question at bar (and as such doesn't establish law), it would go a VERY long way in court, and I suspect it would still be the opinion of the court.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
1844 Posts |
It is my understanding that in the US they are allowed, In Canada we all know its a no no , but I am curious as to how those would be viewed as they are not Canadian coins ? Does the same law apply ? anyone ?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
686 Posts |
And for the record Mike, I have just discovered the remarkable work you have done in the combatting of counterfeits, and I appreciate it as much as anyone else. My remarks are not aimed at counterfeit coins that are marketed as the real deal, they are strictly towards copies that are clearly marked and sold as such - and more specifically the law around this matter. I would also like to add that I do not own any copies or replicas, nor do I have any interest in them - I just strongly disagree that they are illegal.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
686 Posts |
artdio - The law doesn't care if they are Canadian. They can be legal in Canada, or anywhere else.
It falls under the definition of "current":
"current" means lawfully current in Canada or elsewhere by virtue of a law, proclamation or regulation in force in Canada or elsewhere as the case may be
Edited by jg86
08/28/2013 12:26 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
4227 Posts |
Even marked/stampled/etc "copy" or "replica" they should be illegal. By removing said mark, the potential is there to try and pass them off as legal tender. Now, if they were marked 'copy' and were a size that couldn't be mistaken for the original item, that would be fine. Working for the Bank of Montreal a teller got in a bit of hot water for taking a photocopy of a note and sending in through the interoffice mail. She was notified that is she was ever going to do this again, for whatever reason, make the photocopy either larger or smaller than the note and it would be okay.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Canada
2301 Posts |
The law dictates the size of an acceptable "Replica note".
jg, I have identified 3 1921 5 cent coins which came from a private mint in the USA. When made, the word copy was there. The coins were tumbled to G4-G6 and sold as the real deal. I believe the Law is written as it is to prevent this from happening. British Law states exactly the same thing as ours (worded a tad more flowery tho). Our Law tho very strict, is much better and much easier to apply than the Hobby Protection Act of the USA which people of evil intent go around, through and over everyday. I feel a picture of a key or rare date will fit in an album as well as a counterfeit and no one will try to paste a picture on a planchet and sell it. There is just no NEED for imitations. IMO
|
|
Moderator
 Canada
10460 Posts |
Quote:
I feel a picture of a key or rare date will fit in an album as well as a counterfeit... That might work with coins Mike, but sadly, a picture of a Lamborghini just does not feel the same... especially after driving one...  "Discovery follows discovery, each both raising and answering questions, each ending a long search, and each providing the new instruments for a new search." -- J. Robert OppenheimerContent of this post is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses...0/deed.en_USMy eBay store
Edited by SPP-Ottawa
08/28/2013 2:03 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2301 Posts |
I notice you took your shoes off before getting in it.......and you hid the shoe horn..........
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
686 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
632 Posts |
SPP photoshoped that pic using this one as a starting:  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
Canada
10743 Posts |
I also, would like to join the majority of coin collectors that thinks 'nickelsguy' is doing an excellent job of trying to keep counterfeit coins from reaching us collectors..  I am sure he stays up longer then most some nights.  |
|
Moderator
Canada
10460 Posts |
Mike, those are massive front wheels, making a massive wheel well. The three pedals were crammed in a tight space designed for little Italian men and not Canadians with big feet - the car was easier to drive barefoot...
If you think I scared you driving a little 6-cylinder Mercedes, imagine the look on your face if I took you for a drive in that beast!
Keep up the good work with the counterfeits - this hobby would be in a horrible mess without everything you have done so far!
"Discovery follows discovery, each both raising and answering questions, each ending a long search, and each providing the new instruments for a new search." -- J. Robert OppenheimerContent of this post is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses...0/deed.en_USMy eBay store
Edited by SPP-Ottawa
08/28/2013 3:55 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
519 Posts |
I reviewed the case of Robinson V R. I can't understand why the trial judge would think that American dimes were not "money". This point was successfully appealed in the Ontario court of appeal. The subsequent appeal being dismissed by the Supreme Court of Canada.
What I find interesting is that possession of the counterfeit currency shifted the burden of proof onto Mr. Robinson. Him simply saying he was not aware they were counterfeit was not sufficient in this case.
Lets say you have a counterfeit coin in your possession which resembles a true version in every way except the stamp of copy or replica.
The RCMP arrive: "I didn't know it was..." Your guilt might just be stamped right on the coin. The RCMP site makes it very clear they feel these coins are counterfeit so if anyone wants to be the one to set a precedent be my guest.
I really don't know how this would play out in court. In my own experience I've shaken my head at a few litigation and arbitration decisions (I am not a barrister). Personally I will be avoiding all black, white and gray areas of law concerning counterfeit currency. Even if there was case law supporting it that doesn't make it right and only small changes in circumstances could yield precedent to the contrary.
What I mean by that is a court could find in favour of the defendant (not guilty). Then later another judge could rule a guilty verdict if they felt the circumstances were different. Basically if they either disagreed with the first judge and/or felt their findings were not applicable to the new case. More weight is always given to decisions rendered in the same jurisdiction and higher levels of court.
I like reading decisions so anyone feel free to post more that are applicable.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
686 Posts |
o-train - I read a lot of decisions as well. I read up on virtually everything out there related to counterfeit money last night. Apart from fake $100 bills, this is the only case I could find! Crazy that it made it to the Supreme Court at that.
By the sounds of it though, the defendent didn't enter any evidence at all. They were hoping that his ONE statement would suffice, but it was too vague to be stretched into anything more. The higher courts aren't allowed to make inferences about the evidence, they have to rule on law alone.
As for whether the coins were or were not "money", the trial judge ruled based on an old definition that was acceptable to him, which stated that money is designed to be used as currency (or something to that effect). I would agree that these coins were not money by that standard, but I don't think I would have accepted that definition as the only (or proper) definition.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1581 Posts |
Quote:
What I find interesting is that possession of the counterfeit currency shifted the burden of proof onto Mr. Robinson. Him simply saying he was not aware they were counterfeit was not sufficient in this case. So, if Tims hands you a fake $2, and it is spotted at some point, are you guilty? |
| |
Replies: 102 / Views: 14,690 |
First Page
Previous Page
Posted 08/28/2013 12:17 pm
