It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Judge rules treasure-hunters must return sunken booty to Spain

page: 2
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 18 2012 @ 03:22 AM
link   
Of course they did! You found something?! Give it to your all loving government or be thrown in a #ing cage for the rest of your life.




posted on Feb, 18 2012 @ 07:52 AM
link   
I say Spain can scream anything they want and they should get nothing but crap Spain stole gold and silver from the Caribbean Islands for years during the "invasion, exploitation, Implementing Slavery and colonization" during their Conquering years, how about returning all that Gold back to their rightful owners in the Caribbean Islands and Central America.

They deserve crap that is what they deserve.

edit on 18-2-2012 by marg6043 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 18 2012 @ 10:12 AM
link   
This is why if you find anything you keep your mouth shut. Pay the people working on the dive off good then split the rest with the investors. If these countries wanted these treasures then they should have retrieved them.



posted on Feb, 18 2012 @ 11:53 AM
link   
reply to post by stirling
 

back up there my friend american salvage experts didnt rape and pillage the people of peru to steal this peruvian gold and silver spain did. .but also our stupid us government signed a treaty with spain that reads we shall consider the sites of each others sunken warships to be considered grave sites and not to be disturbed . so according to that treaty once they determined it was a spanish site they were supposed to alert spain and stop diving on it. but if it was me and my crew i would say damn the spanish brigands and melt it down or sold it on black market and maybe gave some back to peru who it was originally stole from.



posted on Feb, 18 2012 @ 12:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


yeah funny how that treaty between us and spain came about after oddessy crew announced there find and spain came out and tryed to sue for it this has been an ongoing case for years. man should have claimed it was a pirate ship then he could salvage at will



posted on Feb, 18 2012 @ 04:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by proteus33
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


yeah funny how that treaty between us and spain came about after oddessy crew announced there find and spain came out and tryed to sue for it this has been an ongoing case for years. man should have claimed it was a pirate ship then he could salvage at will


Aren't Spaniards considered pirates of sorts for stealing gold that wasn't originally theirs?

A salvage team had to take the extra effort in repeated dives to retrieve the gold. The natives of America had to explore caves to retrieve gold embedded in the earth. Spain should have theft charges thrown at them because the coin proves their ancient guilt. Too bad lab studies can't reveal where gold is mined from the earth in the same way Jade is identified.



posted on Feb, 18 2012 @ 04:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by proteus33
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


yeah funny how that treaty between us and spain came about after oddessy crew announced there find and spain came out and tryed to sue for it this has been an ongoing case for years. man should have claimed it was a pirate ship then he could salvage at will


What treaty are you referring to??

AFAIK the Spanish ownership is governed by the Abandones Shipwrecks Act of 1987, and whether the ship hs been abandoned or not goes all the way back to a treaty between Spain, France and Great Britain in 1763!!



posted on Feb, 18 2012 @ 08:12 PM
link   
You know what?
This is going to make treasure hunters even more disinclined to be open about their finds and deeds.
If I was running a salvage outfit I'd run it tight-lipped.
Even if we found the fabled city of Atlantis down their I'd keep silent.
The ptb don't want the little guy to get any of the wealth, you can't legally win in treasure hunting unless you are tied-up with them.
£$^& 'em and go under-the-radar.
I bet the captain is kicking himself for going public with this now!
Much better to sell off the ware's under the table, which is what will have to happen or risk loosing it like this!



posted on Feb, 18 2012 @ 10:44 PM
link   
yes the treaty of 1987 it was in papers in my area because we have a lot of shipwrecks off our coast. the treasure was already found and our government sold this guy out . they should have lied and said it was pirate booty and sold it on the black market.



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 04:20 PM
link   
reply to post by proteus33
 


I don't think Odyssey had found this wreck before 1987 had they?



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 05:55 PM
link   
on further research it appears that spain has been targeting this company for years. this company has made aggrements with uk that if they find the hms sussex that they would share the salvage . spain since the sussex went down in straits or Gibraltar has declared that they consider it in their waters and that only spanish archaeologist would be allowed on site why because sussex was carrying 17 tonnes of gold . the coins that they were ordered to give back to spain came from ocean floor the ship remains have not been discovered so how can spain lay claim to them. if i find a gold doubloon on beach does that mean i must give it to spain if so why. maybe a drunk sailor dropped years ago
. these coins were originally were believed to be from the hms royal merchant that sunk off coast of Gibraltar.



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 05:58 PM
link   
reply to post by proteus33
 


I'm pretty sure you'll find the court case has gone over all those topics as they apply to the case itself, so it would probably be a better idea to go read about that rather than rely on 3rd hand info via ATS!

Even hte wiki page has a lot of info - en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 19-2-2012 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 06:06 PM
link   
Have a sunken boat off the coast of Florida from the 1800s = get your treasure back.

Have a sunken boat off the Florida coast in 2012 = get a fine and pay salvage fee.

Florida = FAIL



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 06:16 PM
link   
Treasure hunting is a huge gamble. He knows how the game is played. I hope he can rebound.



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 06:21 PM
link   
Course they do..
Spains broke.. they need the money.



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 06:48 PM
link   
Off the coast of Florida, espcially the "Treasure Coast" is loaded with Spanish gold from sunken galleons. Mel Fisher's family owns the right to most of Florida's waters. They have something like a 100 year lease that cost them almost nothing. Anything found in Florida waters is they have rights to. To get around it that non-sense most Floridians who find anything just say they found it washed up on the beach, where they can legally keep the loot.

The salvage law's in regard to sunken treasure is anything but fair imo. I am all for these guys keeping their treasure. If Spain want the gold they stole they need to sponsor their own salvage operations.



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 07:00 PM
link   
reply to post by jrod
 


Fisher's company and his hiers ahve the rights to the ships they have discovered - nothing more or less.

Of course through decades of searching they have discovered some extremely valuable ships - but they do not have any carte blanche rights any more than anyone else does.

the salvage laws are pretty much an extension of lost property laws on land - starting with the idea everything remains the property of its owner until and unless some conditions are met.



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 07:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by jrod
 


Fisher's company and his hiers ahve the rights to the ships they have discovered - nothing more or less.

Of course through decades of searching they have discovered some extremely valuable ships - but they do not have any carte blanche rights any more than anyone else does.

the salvage laws are pretty much an extension of lost property laws on land - starting with the idea everything remains the property of its owner until and unless some conditions are met.


No you are wrong on this one. They lease large area's off the coast for pennies on the dollar. The 1715 wrecks had about a dozen galleons that went down, the wreckage is so scattered that it is impossible to identify what boat any treasure came from.

Actually I believe they have sold some of the rights to other people, but it is based on area not an individual wreck, at least off the Treasure Coast.



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 07:10 PM
link   
reply to post by randomname
 


Alternative to putting the gold back in the ocean might be to take it back to South America and give it to the

native Americans that the Spanish stole it from. Let the spanish go to the World Court and make their case that

the gold was ever really theirs by a legitimate transaction.




posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 07:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by jrod

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by jrod
 


Fisher's company and his hiers ahve the rights to the ships they have discovered - nothing more or less.


No you are wrong on this one. They lease large area's off the coast for pennies on the dollar. The 1715 wrecks had about a dozen galleons that went down, the wreckage is so scattered that it is impossible to identify what boat any treasure came from.

Actually I believe they have sold some of the rights to other people, but it is based on area not an individual wreck, at least off the Treasure Coast.


you are right that it is not based on an individual wreck - but AFAIK it is also not actually an "Area" right - they have negotiated the rights to salvage the whole fleet with the State of Florida, and the area of their "claim" is a specified area - as I understand it they have the right to anything from the 11 specified ships within that area, but not necessarily to anything from any OTHER ships in the area...i'd be interested in finding out more info on this tho - specifics are pretty hard to come by.

and yes the claim was their property and they sold it to a 3rd party

FYI - 1982 Atocha Supreme court case judgement
edit on 19-2-2012 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join