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

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

Hello Gene and the List,

In a message dated 5/28/98 1:00:39 PM Central Daylight Time,
eroberts@ntplx.net writes:

<
 Steve, this is a worthy cause you've undertaken and I wish you luck, but
 I felt that I should point out a few problems with your examples so you
 can avoid painting yourself into a corner.>>

All contributions (especially if don't charge for them) are eagerly accepted!
 
<< First off, it's of no import whether the Monahans city statutes mention
 meteorites, treasure hunting, etc. or not. I doubt they mention murder
 or bank robbery either, so the statutes of the State of Texas will be of
 concern to you. >>

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!"

<>

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.)
 
 <> 

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?  

<>

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.
 
<>

Yes, if it fell on personal property, the Mayor has expressed, without any
objection by any of the Council members that they will turn it over to the
land owner without hesitation.  So that should be real easy.  We are just
trying to position ourselves for the court fight (or possible settlement out
of court) in the event the rock did land on public property.

Which this brings up a real interesting question, If the meteorite hit first
on private land but then bounced onto public land (or for argument sakes lets
say it bounced onto on another piece of private property owned by someone
else) who should get to own it?  Both the Old Woman and the Williamette cases
involved meteorite FINDS and not falls, which did not involve moving objects!
 
<< Study the Texas case law well on relevant cases. Again, I wish you luck,
 and hope you will keep us all informed of the developments.
 
 Gene
  >>

Thanks Gene!  I do agree we need to look at this from every angle possible.
Also, there is an important point here, I think the City Council really does
want to do the "right thing!"  We are hoping that a solid argument that indeed
the "right legal thing to do" is also "the right moral thing to do" too!
After all, it seems that close to 100% (give or take a few) of the citizens of
Monahans, want the kids to get the rock!  So when you throw the "politically
correct thing to do" into the mix, our chances of prevailing increase even
more.

Steve Arnold
www.meteoritebroker.com
Follow-Ups: