Possible 58-59 Les Paul No Serial No.

GeeJay

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2007
Messages
3,557
Reaction score
1,880
The OP said early on that they thought that it was Marc Bolans, not a replica.
Ah, must have missed that.

For sure I would not have bought it myself if I thought it had been stolen.
 

ajory72

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2010
Messages
1,226
Reaction score
595
I'm assuming we at least agree it's a 1958-59 Gibson Les Paul Standard, with all the changes etc and let's say we are only talking about just the body, no hardware included....also ignore any possible pedigree

How much would it be worth on the open market now?

(To answer my own question I'm thinking this would be a rare case - seeing as no real burst bodies come onto the open market..... With no proven provinence would it be $30,000? )
 

chasenblues

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
21,326
Reaction score
32,280
I'm assuming we at least agree it's a 1958-59 Gibson Les Paul Standard, with all the changes etc and let's say we are only talking about just the body, no hardware included....also ignore any possible pedigree

How much would it be worth on the open market now?
Not sure how much it really matter's in the case of this particular guitar in its current state because of all the other stuff that has been changed/fixed.
But if the neck Zebra pickup was original to the guitar when MB got it then the guitar would've been a 59.

Valid question though..

How much would an "Old Wood" if confirmed as a 59 LP body, Be worth?

Edit..Just saw your guess, 30 G's?

Wow a lot higher than i would have guessed.
 

ajory72

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2010
Messages
1,226
Reaction score
595
How much would an "Old Wood" if confirmed as a 59 LP body, Be worth?

Edit..Just saw your guess, 30 G's?

Wow a lot higher than i would have guessed.
30 grand probably is a bit high? It's a tough one in my mind, as these things probably rarely come on the open market, making it hard to judge. 30g's is the price I thought it'd go for as once whole could top at 100 grand? [not including any provenance of course]
 

ajay

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2015
Messages
843
Reaction score
556
I asked my attorney when I was there today. The Statute of Limitations (in New York anyway) is 7 years, and that's IF the police even kept the report on file that long, which he said is doubtful. I think the OP and his Dad have no worries with this one, and especially if someone else had possession in the meantime. I would really love to have that guitar just for the mojo. Put on some Leopardskin tights and some make-up and jam away on that sucker!
 
Joined
Oct 12, 2015
Messages
71
Reaction score
124
There is no statute of limitations in the UK on stolen items (especially if they can be considered artistic). There are a few loop holes,but none that clearly apply here. The estate family would have a pretty good leg to stand on, but needs to prove that the guitar was indeed owned by his dad and then misappropriated.

It seems to me this would be the tough part - proving that this guitar had been stolen. Even in the UK, would not the burden of proving that fall on the accuser?

Given that the neck has had several swaps, and hence there's no serial number, I doubt any police report or original bill of sale could be legally linked to this guitar. There are any number of ways this guitar could have left Marc's possession. He could have sold it, given it to a groupie, abandoned it after tossing it across a stage, traded it for pharmaceuticals,.....

Thoughts?
 

Bill Hicklin

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2014
Messages
13,704
Reaction score
28,513
I asked my attorney when I was there today. The Statute of Limitations (in New York anyway) is 7 years, and that's IF the police even kept the report on file that long, which he said is doubtful. I think the OP and his Dad have no worries with this one, and especially if someone else had possession in the meantime. I would really love to have that guitar just for the mojo. Put on some Leopardskin tights and some make-up and jam away on that sucker!
True enough for New York, but this guitar is in England and was (allegedly) stolen in England. It's my understanding that England has no statute of limitation on an action to recover stolen goods (what used to be called replevin); BUT in order for the goods to be considered "stolen" in the eyes of the law then the theft has to have been reported to the police, and the window for that closes after 10 years.

Another complication would be if Bolan made an insurance claim and it was paid; in that case the insurance company would have a valid claim to ownership.
 

Cookie-boy

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2009
Messages
16,720
Reaction score
10,981
I asked my attorney when I was there today. The Statute of Limitations (in New York anyway) is 7 years, and that's IF the police even kept the report on file that long, which he said is doubtful. I think the OP and his Dad have no worries with this one, and especially if someone else had possession in the meantime. I would really love to have that guitar just for the mojo. Put on some Leopardskin tights and some make-up and jam away on that sucker!
You know, you can still put on those leopardskin tights!:naughty:
 

Lefty Adams

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2012
Messages
1,434
Reaction score
688
Great thread and subject Paulg2uk, thanks for this amazing discovery, good luck to you and your dad, just hope this amazing discovery stays in our beloved Essex, fab stuff!
 

Rblackmuir

Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2015
Messages
68
Reaction score
4
Great thread but what amazes me is how many so called "People in the Know" thought this was Fake and not even a Gibson! just reading the first few pages !! and it ends up being an Historic piece of rock history!!l LOL
Forums ay!!! just shows you....worth much more than 30k too,,i had Gary Moores old Heritage Les Paul and that sold for more...so???....

Regards
 

Rikky R

Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2015
Messages
34
Reaction score
35
Given that the neck has had several swaps, and hence there's no serial number, I doubt any police report or original bill of sale could be legally linked to this guitar. There are any number of ways this guitar could have left Marc's possession. He could have sold it, given it to a groupie, abandoned it after tossing it across a stage, traded it for pharmaceuticals,..... [/QUOTE]

If this guitar is what remains of Marc's original LP - the one on the cover of the 1970 T Rex album - i.e. pretty much just the body - and I emphasise 'if', then there is only one way it left Marc's possession: it was stolen from him early in January 1977. This is not a conjecture, as I've stated before in the thread. Sometime after that, but before Marc's death, his Les Paul had already been worked on and came to the attention of the police who had a number of high quality photographs of it for identification purposes. I guess the chance of them surviving after all this time is small.

I don't want to say more about this at present as it is ongoing research for my book. For reasons which are not clear the Les Paul in its changed state did not find its way back to Marc. At this point the LP had a new neck and the front was sprayed black. It is possible the story then leads to an auction house sale and perhaps that was the point the guitar disappears. I'm estimating sometime in the early 1980s (?).

If the Les Paul being discussed in this thread is not Marc's no 1 and is in fact another that he owned then the statement quoted about 'many ways' could then be true. I'm not sure that anyone has opened up such a possibility and there has not been any evidence thus far, though we know Marc owned a number of Les Pauls.

I know from my research that Marc would never have let that first Les Paul go carelessly out of his possession. He still cared about it. It's not difficult to imagine why. Think of what happened to him creatively and career-wise when it came into his life, fortuitously, in 1970. There are sometimes deep and profound elements in the relationship between a professional musician and his or her no 1 instrument. You can feel it in the London Rock film clip previously cited on the thread.

I hope people find this interesting and useful in keeping the strands of the story in focus.
 
Joined
Oct 12, 2015
Messages
71
Reaction score
124
Ricky R wrote

I know from my research that Marc would never have let that first Les Paul go carelessly out of his possession. He still cared about it. It's not difficult to imagine why. Think of what happened to him creatively and career-wise when it came into his life, fortuitously, in 1970.
No doubt.

But would a court accept that as legal proof?

Or would a court require a police report that clearly identifies this guitar? Would a court need to see Marc's bill of sale that also clearly shows him being the original and legal owner of this particular guitar?

Photographs, anecdotal stories, interviews, whatever, might be enough to convince me, maybe enough to convince a collector, but they probably don't meet the threshold of legal proof that would convince a judge in a courtroom.
 

Rikky R

Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2015
Messages
34
Reaction score
35
Rikky R wrote

No doubt.

But would a court accept that as legal proof?

Or would a court require a police report that clearly identifies this guitar? Would a court need to see Marc's bill of sale that also clearly shows him being the original and legal owner of this particular guitar?

Photographs, anecdotal stories, interviews, whatever, might be enough to convince me, maybe enough to convince a collector, but they probably don't meet the threshold of legal proof that would convince a judge in a courtroom.
Legal proof of what? I think there is a misunderstanding here. My previous post does not address the issue of 'legal proof' since I am not primarily concerned with the debate over the identity of the OP's Les Paul. My focus is only the actuality of how and when Marc's Les Paul left him - a historical question - and no court would be interested in that question unless the guitar it was discussing had been proved to be the same guitar. Then it could tackle issues about how such an instrument had become separated from its original owner.

It would be great to think the 1970 bill of sale survived somewhere, but the odds are against it. (Great for historical reasons, not legal ones, for those fascinated by the early history of an inspiring instrument.)
 
Joined
Oct 12, 2015
Messages
71
Reaction score
124
Rikky, if you'll read back through the thread, you'll find that there was a discussion of who the legal owner is, UK law, and statutes of limitations. That was the context of my original comment, with which you seemed to disagree.

It appears you now agree with me that it would be very difficult for someone to use the courts to take the guitar away from the present owner.
 

tymj2112

Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2015
Messages
57
Reaction score
107
A Question for Rikky:

In your research, have you come across anything indicating that an insurance claim was filed and/or paid out for the stolen guitar? That's where it might get interesting...
 

Skerries1

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2013
Messages
116
Reaction score
148
The 53 Goldtop refinished to black that Marc gave to Ringo Starr just sold for 27,500 USD plus 25% auction fee. I bid on it, but was a bit uncomfortable going up too high on a guitar I haven't seen and haven't had any questions answered on it. Maybe if I was there in person I would have been more aggressive. Whoever got it just got a very nice piece of musical history.
 

Latest Threads



Top