[meteorite-list] Cold hunting question

From: joseph_town_at_att.net <joseph_town_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu Apr 22 10:29:54 2004
Message-ID: <20030914002145.BED8B5382B_at_pairlist.net>

Mark,

The police make plenty of bad decisions. That's why we have a system of
checks and balance. The police can only get away with things if they go
unchallenged.I've found that it's sometimes best to let them have their way,
as much as it urks me. It's always a choice made from a financial point of
view not an admission of any kind of wrong doing. Maybe some cops have
aspirations of sainthood when they sign up but reality has a way of tempering
stuff like that. Right or wrong you have to have them.

Sorry for the ot,

Bill

 
> Hi Joseph
>
> I believe, basicly, the cops had Mike in between a rock and a hard spot.
> They were pulling a scam much like the FBI did with Sue, the T. Rex on
> Larsen. And, they had the backing of a museum offical which placed the city
> in a position of where do we place our loyalties. And of course, they are
> going to go with local offical (even though he wasn't anything close to an
> expert), not some out of state expert. Also, there was the insurance claims
> by those who's houses were damaged. The police easily collected stones this
> way for "evidence" which then became city property until and unless
> challenged by the insurance company (and we know how evidence can easily
> disappear when there isn't any real case filed).
> As far as legalities go of found items, there is, in fact many local laaws
> which the police usually go with. A typical one is to publish a ad in local
> papers for 30 days of something found (even cars), and if no one comes

> forward, the finder can keep it. But, when things like treasures and
> antiquities are concerned, that all can change at the whim of any local
> "authority" such as a museum offical or university professor.
> And they will be covered under some vague law the lawyer will say, which
> really doesn't apply but the court will go with it because any univeersity
> or museum has more credibility in the court's eyes.
> It sucks, but its the same as going against big business in court, or city
> hall.
> Mark
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <joseph_town_at_att.net>
> To: <joeeval_at_excite.com>
> Cc: <meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com>
> Sent: Saturday, September 13, 2003 3:45 PM
> Subject: RE: [meteorite-list] Cold hunting question
>
>
> > The federal court says that anything found on a parkway, the strip of land
> > between the sidewalk and the curb, the sidewalk itself, the street and any
> > public property designated as such by the village will be the legal
> possesion

> > of the one who has taken it. If the contents of a household are discarded
> on
> > the curb as trash, they become public domain. Anyone can help themselves.
> > That's the law but there is an ordinance specific to Park Forest that
> denies
> > this right. As far as I know, noone has ever been to court to defy this
> > ridiculous law but it is a village ordinance. Mike Farmer displayed a lot
> of
> > restraint in that situation. I have no idea what the police were thinking
> but
> > it was obviously disgraceful. Bad/dumb cops do things like that
> everywhere.
> >
> > Bill Kieskowski
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Marcie and list,Having grown up in South Carolina and now Florida I am
> just
> > > familiar with the fact that if you don't have permission, then you
> better not be
> > > on someone's property. Even on state lands you had better have a reason
> for
> > > snooping around... especially with a metal detector. Either way, being
> where

> > > you're not invited arouses a lot of suspicion here which it doesn't seem
> to
> > > raise out west. Is the only difference that there is just too much land
> to
> > > supervise, or is it understood that if it isn't fenced then you are
> welcome on
> > > it? Is hunting meteorites on state/federal land legal in western parks?
> Because
> > > it sure isn't here.I am looking forward to when I can visit out west for
> some
> > > real "cold hunting" but have never been too clear on how those of you
> that do it
> > > regularly handle the property ownership issues.Warren
> > > IMCA 3602
> > > From: Marcia Swanson [mailto: MJSOfArc_at_webtv.net]To: joeeval@excite.com,
> > > meteorite-list_at_meteoritecental.comDate: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 16:11:22 -0500
> > > (CDT)Subject: RE: [meteorite-list] Cold hunting questionHello Warren and
> > > List,Warren your question about property locale ownership, brought to
> mind
> > > aquestion of my own that I would appreciate an answer to, on or
> off-list,by

> > > yourself or other list members.I understand that when hunting on private
> > > property, you are supposed toget (written?) permission. I know that
> different
> > > Countries havedifferent rules on whether or not a meteorite is property
> of
> > > finder orconfiscated by government, or percentage of it taken for
> > > identificationand record and display at museum, ect.My questions are
> regarding
> > > meteorites found in USA. What EXACTLY areth e rules to guarentee that if
> you
> > > find one, say on public land ( StatePark, lakeshore, river-bed,
> dry-lake,
> > > abandoned gravil pit, ect.) youcan claim it without fear of
> confiscation, by
> > > State or Localauthorities? I know this was an issue with the F.P. that
> > > supposedly"bounced" off the public sidewalk before hitting a home and
> > > wasconfiscated by local authorities ( Sorry to bring that unfortunate
> issueup),
> > > and there have been other instances. Is it the amount of money (it's
> worth) that

> > > determimes whether or not a counter-claim is laid on itby local, state,
> or is it
> > > the classification of the fall or find thatagain,makes it confiscatable?
> To be
> > > classed, especially if it weresomething really significant, you do have
> to say
> > > where it was foundright ?How does this work? When something is found on
> private
> > > property, afterhaving been given permission to look, what is the
> obligation of
> > > thecollector in regards to payment to land- owner , should a
> possiblemeteorite,
> > > or a meteorite be found, or land owners right tocounterclaim pwnership
> rights? I
> > > would truly appreciate guidelineanswers on some of these questions
> please, or
> > > reference readingmaterial? Thank-you and Best Regards, Marcie&gt; ---
> Begin
> > > Attached Message---
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Just wondering who owns these areas you "cold hunters" are searching?
> Are areas
> > > like the Gold Basin and Bonneville Salt Flats publicly owned or do you
> make

> > > arrangements with individual land owners?
> > >
> > > Warren
> > >
> > >
> > > Join Excite! - http://www.excite.comThe most personalized portal on the
> Web!
> > > &gt; --- End Attached Message---
> > >
> > >
> > > Join Excite! - http://www.excite.comThe most personalized portal on the
> Web!
> > > &gt; --- End Attached Message---
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
> > > The most personalized portal on the Web!
> >
> > ______________________________________________
> > Meteorite-list mailing list
> > Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
> > http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> >
> >
>
>
Received on Sat 13 Sep 2003 08:21:42 PM PDT