[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: The Fight for Truth, Justice & the American Way, in Monahans!
- To: Met List <meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com>
- Subject: Re: The Fight for Truth, Justice & the American Way, in Monahans!
- From: Gene Roberts <eroberts@ntplx.net>
- Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 00:03:43 -0400
- Old-X-Envelope-To: <meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com>
- References: <18114af9.356dcbdb@aol.com>
- Resent-Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 00:09:08 -0400 (EDT)
- Resent-From: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
- Resent-Message-ID: <"orH7jD.A.WpC.gSjb1"@mu.pair.com>
- Resent-Sender: meteorite-list-request@meteoritecentral.com
Hello all, again,
I've done a little cutting and snipping from the quotes from Steve's and
my messages, but I think the thread is intact.
MeteorHntr@aol.com wrote:
> However, many cities DO in fact have laws governing treasure hunting and in
> particular, metal detecting on public property. I doubt the State of Texas
> has such laws, however, I believe the State of Florida does when it comes to
> sunken treasure. But yes, that does need to be researched more closely. Our
> point at this time is, "It is NOT an established fact that the city does own
> the specimens without question, just because they may have landed on city
> property!"
>
Be careful with this, Steve. In a court of law, what other cities and
states do or don't do is not considered when there are controlling laws
that cover the state of venue. Unless Texas specifically has a "finders,
keepers" law for public property that addresses a category that would
include meteorites, it is an established fact by 500 or 600 years of
precedent, that the Monahans specimen belongs to the people (i.e. City)
of Monahans if it was found on public property. You would do well if you
focus your research on Texas law concerning access to and acquisition of
natural material and material of significant historic value on public
lands. That is where the city will focus it's claim and you need to
counter argue if there are any laws that would support the kid's claim
of ownership. (Assuming it was even on city property to start with.)
> I think it is easier to compare finding an 1895 Silver Dollar in the city park
> worth $20,000 to the finding of a meteorite, than fossils or Native American
> artifact finds. Especially since in many cases, those have been specifically
> addressed in legislation due to other pressing legal issues (i.e., tribes
> legal rights to own ancestral artifacts, especially from burial sites.)
The 1895 silver dollar would be lost personal property and subject to
different laws. Judges don't like to mix apples and oranges. Look for
cases where natural material found on public property was awarded to the
finder to justify the kid's claim.
>
> < finders, but that was decided under the laws governing lost and found
> personal property. >>
>
> Were these "laws governing lost and found" clearly established before that
> case? If so, why did it go to court? Or were these laws established AFTER
> the courts ruling in that case?
>
As Phil and I pointed out, those laws have been established for hundreds
of years, first as common law, then as written law. You are more
familiar with the find of $500,000, so you might be able to find out why
it went to court. My guess is that the county thought $500,000 would be
worth a roll of the dice, even if the odds were against them. People do
funny things for money.
> I agree that it is slightly different but not entirely different. Apparently
> the course of action taken by the City Manager of Monahans was partly
> attributed to the fact that "The Federal Government Official from NASA" had
> misinformed the media and the City Council that the meteorite was only worth
> about $1,000. This was reflected when the Mayor of Monahans told me
> personally and again to one of the TV reporters after the council meeting,
> that now that they know it is worth so much more, "This really changes
> things!" I think they thought that since it supposedly was worth so LITTLE,
> that they could sway public opinion and let them get away with keeping it.
>
I don't know that the Monahans specimen would be worth enough to really
change things. The salts may actually be a detriment to the specimen,
causing it to corrode rapidly in terrestrial humidity unless stored in
an inert, dry environment. They may be uncommon in meteorites because
those that contain them crumble away in a few years.
Whatever the outcome, let's hope you're able to get something for the
kid's if not the entire specimen. Part of their action was a result of
being at the right place at the right time, but everyone has gained as a
result of them taking the proper action after the fall. They should be
rewarded for it.
Gene
References: