[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: The Fight for Truth, Justice & the American Way

Hi List,

Does anyone else want to tag team with me on this one (regarding Baalke's last
post, below)?  I seem to be repeating myself over and over.  I am afraid no
one else out there cares about what Ron thinks, or what I think for that
matter, on this subject anymore!

If there are any lawyer types out there that could set us straight, please do.
If not, I guess we will need to let a judge settle this for us all!  Maybe I
was right, this issue may indeed be ripe for reversal in the courts!

Anyone???  Please!?!?!?

Steve Arnold
-----------------------------
In a message dated 6/2/98 10:41:06 AM Central Daylight Time,
BAALKE@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov writes:

<< 
 >The Old Woman Meteorite Case dealt with Federal law about meteorites on
 >Federal lands.  Yes, I do think it was a bad decision, but I think it is
 >totally irrelevant to the Monahans (1998) case.  In Texas, state law is more
 >important!  
 
 Hi Steve,
 
 Federal laws do take precedence over state laws, even in Texas.
 
 >Especially since there ARE NO FEDERAL OR STATE LAWS ABOUT
 >METEORITES!  And the last time I checked, there wasn't a Meteorite Amendment
 >to the Constitution!  The judgment in the Old Woman case was just that, a
 >judge's opinion on how the ACTUAL LAWS apply to that specific situation.
 >There were NO STATUTES passed in that decision!  No Laws written.  Just a
 >ruling for that specific case.
 
 But a court ruling was made about meteorite ownership in the Old Woman
course.
 
 >Now, yes, it could be correctly stated that a precedence was established for
 >meteorites found on federal land (but not necessarily meteorites that would
 >FALL on federal property).  But this case is VERY different.
 
 The Old Woman case dealt with the meteorite ownership issue. The Monahans
 meteorite case is a meteorite ownership issue as well.  
 
 >There are other laws and previous judgments involving other cases in Texas
 >that give us a strong belief that a judge will agree that the boys are the
 >rightful owners!  
 
 The Old Woman judgement dealt specifically with meteorite ownership.
 The other cases you've presented did not.  Also, since the Old Woman
 judgement was done at a federal level, it carries more weight than
 something done at a state or city level.
 
 >We just think, just because it landed on city property, does
 >not mean it automatically belongs to the city!  
 
 That's fine, that is your opinion.  The Old Woman case
 has already set the precedent in meteorite ownership.  
 
 Has it been determined yet precisely where the Mohanans meteorite landed?
 
 Ron Baalke
  >>