A rare 1967 survivor has surfaced!
ppw3o6r
Great BritainPosts: 2,271MI6 Agent
I won't go in to a great deal of detail because someone else on this forum has done a great deal of research on the piece and I'm sure in due course he may wish to post his own warts and all write up?
Last year a rather tatty helmet with a dummy camera and a bolted on lense was posted on ebay. It was painted black and claimed to be the one Connery wore in Little Nellie. The seller was in France and this location tied in nicely with the location where Ken Wallis had his own flight helmet stolen. It received little interest and those who had seen it believed it was a bad fake. Skip forward a year and the seller posted the enclosed image on three James Bond forums although suprisingly NOT Ajb007. These postings were met by great excitement by all including myself although there was a question over legal ownership of the piece. It is believed that The Wallis Family Estate own all intellectual properties for inventor Wing Commander Ken Wallis. This would mean unlike the Live And Let Die torture chair EON Productions would have no rights of repossession on the piece?
I contacted the seller and suggested he may wish to return the piece to The Wallis Family Estate and either myself or EON could certainly make this happen. I even suggested a compensation fee, in the thousands to enable this to happen. It is clear some have suggested some high end valuations for the piece. This item is a Wallis Family heirloom and as such should be displayed for posterity on the pilots seat of Wallis's autogyro ....Little Nellie! -{
As the prop first appeared on ebay
More than familiar after the black paint was easily removed?
Wallis on location in 1967 with the "other" helmet -{
Last year a rather tatty helmet with a dummy camera and a bolted on lense was posted on ebay. It was painted black and claimed to be the one Connery wore in Little Nellie. The seller was in France and this location tied in nicely with the location where Ken Wallis had his own flight helmet stolen. It received little interest and those who had seen it believed it was a bad fake. Skip forward a year and the seller posted the enclosed image on three James Bond forums although suprisingly NOT Ajb007. These postings were met by great excitement by all including myself although there was a question over legal ownership of the piece. It is believed that The Wallis Family Estate own all intellectual properties for inventor Wing Commander Ken Wallis. This would mean unlike the Live And Let Die torture chair EON Productions would have no rights of repossession on the piece?
I contacted the seller and suggested he may wish to return the piece to The Wallis Family Estate and either myself or EON could certainly make this happen. I even suggested a compensation fee, in the thousands to enable this to happen. It is clear some have suggested some high end valuations for the piece. This item is a Wallis Family heirloom and as such should be displayed for posterity on the pilots seat of Wallis's autogyro ....Little Nellie! -{
As the prop first appeared on ebay
More than familiar after the black paint was easily removed?
Wallis on location in 1967 with the "other" helmet -{
Comments
The two undisputable facts are the matching serial number of the Asahi Optical Co. Takumar-Quartz lens that sits on the brim of the helmet. It matches the number seen in a studio shot of Connery.
Additionally, there is a slight V-shaped dent on the rear left side of the Cine-cam that sits atop the lens.
Interestingly, a similar Asahi lens can be see spotted on the right side of the Video TV screen in the Toyota GT.
At first I thought it to be the same lens but then noticed the serial number on the Toyota was slightly earlier than the one of the helmet. Coincidently it was the same number with just the exact two last numbers being transposed.
Connery Helmet Lens Serial Number: 949621
Toyota Lens Serial Number: 949612
I whole-heartedly agree that this helmet needs to be displayed alongside its mom...."Little Nellie"
the spyboys Facebook page
And I concur this should be displayed with "Little Nellie" -{
Well done Ed and Donk for rescuing THE HEMET -{
Has the sale agent been identified?
It should be then be possible to alert authorities and/or EON
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
If this seller is selling as genuine and the Wallis estate rightfully own it then is the seller not committing a crime by selling stolen property?
If I where Donk, I‘d contact the Wallis family and ask, if the helmet has been reported stolen and where. Then I‘d give the local police the infos that I know.
Selling stolen property is a crime and it would be good if the thief could get what he deserves in punishment.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
The only reason any of us are talking about this is because Ed noted certain details which others had not....well done that man! -{
-{
Agent's duty is to check provenance (which means researching Wallis Family etc), authenticity and legal possession.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Trust me I've spoken to the individual in question & he is fully aware of how this is now likely to progress. EON have said they will deal with the Wallis Family contact so from this point on the Donkey has taken a back seat except to push the importance of this being a posterity piece and not a personal collection piece! -{
And who doesn’t love a shiny helmet
Well done!
As Donk has noted and I myself can confirm, the representative's position is the owner is in the clear to sell; regardless of whether that's true, I'm concerned the buyer could find themselves paying the real penalty: purchasing only to surrender to the Wallis Estate.
I hope it will progress the way we think it will, as for what you say Chris, its hard to define French legislation, as i failed my GCSE french miserably, but i can say with confidence that UK law, specifically the Theft Act is clear with handling stolen goods, and the key sentence is "knowing or beliveing the goods to be stolen" still means the current possessor has the mens rea to commit the offence of handling stolen goods. He need not have been involved in the orignal offence, and they may have aquired it innocently. This holder knows from Donkey that they goods are most likley stolen, so it would be hard to argue he didnt know or believe, unless he has some credible COA or provenance that discounts all the excellent detective work demonstrated here in this thread thats barly 24 hour hours old! I guess we can only hope french law has a similar burden.
Moderate tangent: The Toyota was also supposedly fitted with cameras at the front and rear as well. Likely also Asahi (better known as Pentax) as the lens to the left of the rear deck screen is too, though of all of different types to the helmet.
Not an expert in french law, but I have some first hand experience how german laws* are about stolen goods and they are very similar to french law.
When it comes to ownership of stolen goods, there are 2 aspects:
1. Criminal offense - which means that you can get charged for a criminal offense with all consequences
2. Liability and regress. You must refund someone who did buy stolen goods from yourself.
Let's say, thief (T) sells the stolen item to buyer (B) who then sells to another buyer (AB).
If B was buying in good faith from T, he will not be charged by criminal law.
However, B will have to compensate AB still - good faith or not - in full and can be forced to return the item to the rightful owner without any further compensation.
So, good faith or not - you buy stolen goods, you may lose the item AND your money.
You may not be criminally charged if you acted in good faith though, but the money is gone - unless you are getting money from the thief.
*I've had a watch stolen from me some time ago.
I've seen the watch on ebay and forced the owner to return me the watch without any compensation in a court trial.
The watch was back with me within a week!
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
The right-hand side lens is exactly the same lens as used on the “Little Nellie” helmet.
Interestingly, that particular lens is a VERY rare lens specifically designed to be used for Ultra-Violet & Infra-red photography. It is mostly used by the Scientific community as well as Forensics Teams.
One of these lenses, along with various filters, sold on ebay for $4,999.00
the spyboys Facebook page
Perhaps a sticky thread "AJB Helps You Identify" would draw Google to draw folk here?
The version worn by Wing Commander Ken Wallis while filming the flying sequences is quite different than the more finished “Hero” helmet worn by Sean Connery for his “on set” close-ups in the studio.
While it is the same helmet, the camera lens and Cine’ camera are not the same.
As I previously mentioned, the Asahi Takumar-Quartz lens is very rare and expensive. The fact that they had two (one for the helmet & the other for use in the Toyota 2000GT) is surprising.
The camera lens used on the Wallis flying helmet is larger ( 3 ) than the Connery Quartz lens which causes the Cine’ camera to sit much higher on the helmet ( 5 ).
Also, unlike the Connery helmet which has the lens bolted to the helmet, the Wallis helmet appears to have a wire ( 2 ) going around the lens and through a hole drilled into the bottom of the camera. Presumably, it is what is holding the camera to the lens.
The lens on the Wallis helmet appears to have a rear protective lens cover bolted unto the helmet that the lens screws into to hold it in place. This causes the lens to extend further away from the helmet and point slightly upwards.
The Connery helmet has the rear portion of the lens itself bolted on without any protective lens cover which gives it a straighter profile.
The aluminum Cine’ camera on the Wallis helmet is unfinished in that it has not had the front top & bottom portions rounded (1 ) nor the rear bottom rear shaped to fit the contour of the helmet.
The milled in front circle has not been painted-in ( 4 ).
--Ed Maggiani
the spyboys Facebook page
8-) 8-)
The helmet is clearly the version used at Pinewood for Connery's close-ups and blue screen work, Ed has demonstrated that.
The provenance here includes a Wallis "connection" (as it has been expressed to me) and unless that can be further clarified, I find it all too murky too think a sale should move forward.
Evidence suggests there being two helmets (this hero and what we'll call a "stunt" version) both of which appear to have been in Wallis' possession. We know one was stolen in about 1990. Regardless of which was stolen, I question under what circumstances Wallis would have liquidated the other.
Something is amiss here.
the spyboys Facebook page