Reagan son blasts purported sale of father's blood

A vial said to contain a blood sample from President Ronald Reagan is being auctioned online.

/ PFCAuction.com

(CBS News) An online auction house is accepting online bids for a glass vial purportedly containing a blood sample of the late U.S. President Ronald Reagan, a claim that was called "outrageous" by the former president's son.

According to PFCAuctions.com, the 5-inch glass vial contains dried blood residue from President Reagan, from a sample taken at the time of the assassination attempt on the president in 1981.

As of Tuesday afternoon, bidding for the vial passed 7,000 pounds (around $11,000). The online auction ends Thursday at 2 p.m. ET.

Reagan's son Michael condemned the auction but said he was confident it was not his father's blood.

"Whatever's in the vial — could be mouse blood — it's certainly not Reagan blood," Reagan said in a telephone call with the Associate Press. "And what an outrageous thing to do to (Reagan's widow) Nancy and the family. I hope the world calls on this organization to cease and desist because it's so bogus."

"Even if it were true, how dare they, how dare they do such a thing?"

The Reagan Presidential Foundation also expressed outrage.

"If indeed this story is true, it's a craven act and we will use every legal means to stop its sale or purchase," executive director John Heubusch said in a statement. "We've spoken to GW (George Washington) Hospital and are assured an investigation as to how something like this could possibly happen is underway.

"Any individual, including a president of the United States, should feel confident that once they enter into the care of a medical system their privacy and rights are held inviolable," he said.

PFC Auctions: Ronald Reagan Blood Vial

The tube was allegedly obtained by a woman who worked at Bio Science Laboratories in Columbia, Md., whose laboratory did the blood work and testing for Reagan while he was being treated at George Washington University Hospital.

The paperwork accompanying the blood vial indicates the lab work was to test for lead.

The sample's owner said his or her late mother had asked the director of her laboratory if she could keep the paper work and test tube and was told it was no problem.

On March 30, 1981 President Reagan was shot by John Hinckley Jr. as he was leaving the Washington Hilton Hotel. He suffered extensive internal bleeding but survived the assassination attempt. Hinckley was found not guilty by reason of insanity and has been confined at a psychiatric hospital, granted increasing time outside in recent years.

The Reagan shooting: A closer call than we knew

According to PFC, which is based in the Channel Islands between England and France, the owner contacted the Reagan National Library about selling the blood sample to them. They declined, but inquired about a possible donation. The owner, an Army veteran, was a fan of the president and of "Reaganomics," and suggested that "President Reagan himself would rather see me sell it rather than donating it."

Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation & Library

PFC Auction house told CBS News they have not been contacted by the Reagan Foundation or by anyone on its behalf regarding the sale of Reagan's blood. If PFC is contacted, they said they will discuss and consider the issue before proceeding.

Reuters reports that both George Washington University Hospital and the Reagan National Library declined to comment.

[caljack430]

This is just really really creepy. Not to mention there is no way ANYONE in a lab would be told that its 'no problem' for them to keep the blood sample and paperwork. So many moral and legal problems there.

[TimABZ]

This should be considered stolen goods since it was admittedly taken from the hospital. So why doesn't someone, like the hospital, pursue legal action?

[rwsmith29456]

If somebody got a piece of John Kennedy's scalp from the autopsy and is selling it online. Wouldn't that be about the same thing??

[margroks]

The very idea is creepy. Who would want a vial of his blood even if it was real? That's nutty.

[tmonta67]

Creepy and dehumanizing, but not surprising in a society whose values are circling the drain.

[josephp5]

I was not a fan of Ronald Reagan, but this is an outrage. Everyone should be guaranteed the right to privacy in all of their personal medical issues. I believe the person that claimed that the lab director said it was all right is lying. No lab director, even in 1981, would risk a possible lawsuit for such an inexcusable violation of privacy.

[chimike9607]

Boo Hoo Mikey! Your old man did a lot of egregious things, like selling government land to the private sector for cheap, and leasing land for Big Oil to drill on for next to nothing. So I hope someone pays $10,000,000 for that vial, and whoever sold it donates it to either the Democratic party of Planned Parenthood.

[unclebernies]

Michael isn't his real son he is adopted. His real son has alot more sense.

[nancy_naive]

A Saint Ronnie relic... the GOP must be chomping at the bit.

[matt6052]

Belongs to the Reagan estate. It's either fake and worth nothing, or real and does not belong to the person selling it.

The FBI once seized a fingerprint card containing John Lennon's green card applicaiton. The fingerprint card and its ink were worth no more than half a penny total. The card had been reported missing from Lennon's lawyer's documents since 1976.

[nancy_naive]

Ah, but that card, like your passport are property of the US gov't.

That blood belongs to whomever possesses it.

[matt6052]

No, the blood, vial, and label are owned by the patient for use by his or her medical professionals. There is no scenario possible where the blood, vial, label, and paperwork could possibly have been legally transferred to anyone.

Some works of art might transfer to others through time, because many works like Da Vinci paintings and Rembrandts are far older than the governments that designate who owns them. In these cases, the rightful owners are those who have assured the artworks safe delivery to us through the centuries. If you can steal a precious work, then someone wasn't guarding it appropriately, and their claim as rightful custodian is diminished, goes the thinking.