GOHO
Sr. Member
- Apr 13, 2008
- 299
- 35
Interesting Article......
- Thread starter GOHO
- Start date
Darren in NC
Silver Member
- Apr 1, 2004
- 2,780
- 1,574
- Detector(s) used
- Tesoro Sand Shark, Homebuilt pulse loop
- Primary Interest:
- Shipwrecks
Great article! The last paragraph was telling...
Not once in the last five years of relentlessly pursuing the ‘Black Swan’ silver has Spain and its American legal team requested a duplicate archive of the project science to try and really understand this shipwreck. Led by its US counsel and dogma, Spain has shown more interest in treasure than truth.
Not once in the last five years of relentlessly pursuing the ‘Black Swan’ silver has Spain and its American legal team requested a duplicate archive of the project science to try and really understand this shipwreck. Led by its US counsel and dogma, Spain has shown more interest in treasure than truth.
SEAHUNTER
Hero Member
Excellent article. Thank you Greg.
Hangingfor8
Hero Member
- Dec 16, 2007
- 513
- 54
- Detector(s) used
- Minelab and Aquapulse
- Primary Interest:
- Shipwrecks
I love it!!! Great find Greg.
This part caught my attention. Will the real thieves please stand up!
"The Tortugas shipwreck was considered so interesting that following its excavation the Spanish government requested Greg Stemm’s assistance for the Seville World Fair of 1992 because the city lacked locally discovered galleon artefacts for display. Stemm and his team happily loaned olive jars, pottery, coins and other valuable artefacts, even paying for the assembly of an exhibit in good faith. But when the fair finished and Stemm asked to collect the artefacts, the Spanish government announced that the fair’s security company had taken the collection because they had not been paid. No compensation or apology was ever forthcoming."
"The Tortugas shipwreck was considered so interesting that following its excavation the Spanish government requested Greg Stemm’s assistance for the Seville World Fair of 1992 because the city lacked locally discovered galleon artefacts for display. Stemm and his team happily loaned olive jars, pottery, coins and other valuable artefacts, even paying for the assembly of an exhibit in good faith. But when the fair finished and Stemm asked to collect the artefacts, the Spanish government announced that the fair’s security company had taken the collection because they had not been paid. No compensation or apology was ever forthcoming."
While there article is certainly biased, notwithstanding the authors reasons, being somewhat familiar with the legal proceedings, I would have to take exception to some of the content.
If one were to read through the legal docket, reference docket number 16, of 19 June 2007.
Spain is specifically requesting all of the images and information regarding the site, the Preliminary Site Assessment, and access to the artefacts. Several motions follow, regarding if, and how, Odyssey will provide this information.
Looking through the docket shows numerous requests from Spain, including the original research files, in addition to the submitted exhibits and written statements, coupled with direct visits to the artefacts and vessels.
Given that the legal battle, I am not sure how much more Spain could have requested, or how much more could have been provided.
If one were to read through the legal docket, reference docket number 16, of 19 June 2007.
Spain is specifically requesting all of the images and information regarding the site, the Preliminary Site Assessment, and access to the artefacts. Several motions follow, regarding if, and how, Odyssey will provide this information.
Looking through the docket shows numerous requests from Spain, including the original research files, in addition to the submitted exhibits and written statements, coupled with direct visits to the artefacts and vessels.
Given that the legal battle, I am not sure how much more Spain could have requested, or how much more could have been provided.
Darren in NC
Silver Member
- Apr 1, 2004
- 2,780
- 1,574
- Detector(s) used
- Tesoro Sand Shark, Homebuilt pulse loop
- Primary Interest:
- Shipwrecks
Images: for study or to build a case? Preliminary site assessment: so they can determine if it's the Mercedes. Access to the artifacts: who wouldn't want this? The silver or ALL the artifacts? Your response doesn't show that Spain wanted the 'science' of the wreck, which was the point of the article. You also miss the preponderance of historical references that show, until recently, Spain has never been interested in its cultural heritage. And even recently it seems to be lip service covering a greater motive.
I personally believe the greater motive is less from Spain than from those who profit themselves from creating controversy and fabricating an entire new legal dogma regarding sovereign immunity.
I personally believe the greater motive is less from Spain than from those who profit themselves from creating controversy and fabricating an entire new legal dogma regarding sovereign immunity.
MORE AND BEYOND OSSY
Bronze Member
You got to kidding Darren ! Spain has been asking Odyssey since 2007 for all the images and Photo mosaic images !!!!!! Odyssey only released what it wanted too or had too !!!
Now they are thinking how they can cash in on this. I'm sure they have already approached the Discovery channel !
Somehow I think they will edit it to make them look like the good guys LOL.
I would love to see the video untouched, Unfortunately it may show too much.
Ossy
Now they are thinking how they can cash in on this. I'm sure they have already approached the Discovery channel !
Somehow I think they will edit it to make them look like the good guys LOL.
I would love to see the video untouched, Unfortunately it may show too much.
Ossy
Darren in NC
Silver Member
- Apr 1, 2004
- 2,780
- 1,574
- Detector(s) used
- Tesoro Sand Shark, Homebuilt pulse loop
- Primary Interest:
- Shipwrecks
Ossy, read the first line in my post and you'll see your question is moot. I might pay attention more to your posts if you ever contributed anything else other than complaints about Odyssey. A few contributions about shipwrecks might go a long way with readers. It would with me. You really should get "more and beyond ossy."
Darren,
Spain asked for everything possible. If you read the docket, you will see that Odyssey did everything possible NOT to provide the data, and fought every step.
Historical reference, what about relevant historical reference? Citing historical reference without context is meaningless. We used to be able to recover US aircraft, not anymore. Environmentally, we used to dump raw sewage, not anymore.
In context, underwater archaeology has evolved with the technology and capability. Until just recently, only very well funded organizations such as Woods Hole, or government entities, had the ability to reach and recover to depth.
The legal issues have evolved, not as fast, until just recently, caught up very quickly. The original team that located the Titanic did so for scientific research, they did not take anything from the site but images and biological samples, they did not even file an admiralty arrest. Others did file arrests, and look at the case law that resulted.
Relevant to this discussion, the Juno and La Galga. Spain did not do anything until after the case was determined, and won the legal battle on Appeal. Spain then announced that all of its wrecks worldwide were off limits without express permission from them...the writing was on the wall.
As was noted, the Atocha. Spain did not file a claim at that time, but that is not necessarily a precedent that one can claim in perpetuity. Florida did file on the Atocha, and won, hence the 20% and other legislation regarding search and recovery permits. Florida allows the searching, but as you are aware, the search parameters are evolving due to environmental reasons.
While it has not been tested, searching is one thing, finding is another, and given the recent case law, one may be searching gratis for Spain.
While it is stated that Spain did not request the information, I disagree, and provide the docket information.
In regards to the "science" of the Mercedes, Odyssey Marine appears to consider that proprietary information, and as a publicly traded company, refuse to divulge. There was nothing special about the methodology of the find or the recovery, if that is your point of reference.
Odyssey, to my knowledge, has not published anything in any scientific journals in regards to the Mercedes, nor has anything been published on the SS Republic, recovered almost 10 years ago. (as a side note, I have not seen even a preliminary site assessment or any publication of scientific data from the Atocha).
I have found significant data from other entities such as INA and the sites they have worked on.
It would appear that most of the arguments in the article have a foundation, but the foundation is over 10 years old, with significant advances and case law and technology that hopelessly outdate the conclusion. There is simply no reason to bring up Spains history of 400 years, every country has its sorted history, and relevance, other than for spite, I dont see any.
Spain asked for everything possible. If you read the docket, you will see that Odyssey did everything possible NOT to provide the data, and fought every step.
Historical reference, what about relevant historical reference? Citing historical reference without context is meaningless. We used to be able to recover US aircraft, not anymore. Environmentally, we used to dump raw sewage, not anymore.
In context, underwater archaeology has evolved with the technology and capability. Until just recently, only very well funded organizations such as Woods Hole, or government entities, had the ability to reach and recover to depth.
The legal issues have evolved, not as fast, until just recently, caught up very quickly. The original team that located the Titanic did so for scientific research, they did not take anything from the site but images and biological samples, they did not even file an admiralty arrest. Others did file arrests, and look at the case law that resulted.
Relevant to this discussion, the Juno and La Galga. Spain did not do anything until after the case was determined, and won the legal battle on Appeal. Spain then announced that all of its wrecks worldwide were off limits without express permission from them...the writing was on the wall.
As was noted, the Atocha. Spain did not file a claim at that time, but that is not necessarily a precedent that one can claim in perpetuity. Florida did file on the Atocha, and won, hence the 20% and other legislation regarding search and recovery permits. Florida allows the searching, but as you are aware, the search parameters are evolving due to environmental reasons.
While it has not been tested, searching is one thing, finding is another, and given the recent case law, one may be searching gratis for Spain.
While it is stated that Spain did not request the information, I disagree, and provide the docket information.
In regards to the "science" of the Mercedes, Odyssey Marine appears to consider that proprietary information, and as a publicly traded company, refuse to divulge. There was nothing special about the methodology of the find or the recovery, if that is your point of reference.
Odyssey, to my knowledge, has not published anything in any scientific journals in regards to the Mercedes, nor has anything been published on the SS Republic, recovered almost 10 years ago. (as a side note, I have not seen even a preliminary site assessment or any publication of scientific data from the Atocha).
I have found significant data from other entities such as INA and the sites they have worked on.
It would appear that most of the arguments in the article have a foundation, but the foundation is over 10 years old, with significant advances and case law and technology that hopelessly outdate the conclusion. There is simply no reason to bring up Spains history of 400 years, every country has its sorted history, and relevance, other than for spite, I dont see any.
Darren,
I don't think it is fair to paint Jim Goold as the villain or to paint Odyssey as the innocent victims in this affair, as the article does. Goold did what he had to do as Spain's attorney and won the case for his clients. He didn't do anything that was dishonest or illegal, as far as I could tell. Meanwhile, Odyssey consistently tried to make out that the Black Swan was not the Mercedes, and I supect that among the artifacts still stored in Gibraltar are artifacts they recovered at the site, but did not make public because it would have gone against their initial attempts to claim that the source of the coins could not be identified.
Now that the legal tussle is over, it would be nice if both sides made all the information about the wreck and the site available to us the interested public, but I doubt that either will do so fully.
I do agree that Spain's past record at salvaging old wrecks doesn't appear to be good, but as the article appears to be heavily biased, so who knows if it is entirely accurate?
Incidentally, as in the SeaHunt case, the role of the US Government needs to be examined carefully here. It seems to be determined to undermine and eventually ban all treasure hunting. It was the US who intervened first in the SeaHunt case, and then after the Court insisted that only Spain had the right to intervene, the US overnment worked with Spain to agree an interpretation of the 1901 Treaty that guaranteed Spain's victory in that case. In the Mercedes case, it is clear that the US Government was working in the background to facilitate a victory for Spain. And when it comes to the UNESCO Treaty promoting "in situ" preservation, although the US abstained from voting for the Treaty, and had not ratified it, I suspect that its representatives played a key role in fashioning and promoting the Treaty.
Mariner
I don't think it is fair to paint Jim Goold as the villain or to paint Odyssey as the innocent victims in this affair, as the article does. Goold did what he had to do as Spain's attorney and won the case for his clients. He didn't do anything that was dishonest or illegal, as far as I could tell. Meanwhile, Odyssey consistently tried to make out that the Black Swan was not the Mercedes, and I supect that among the artifacts still stored in Gibraltar are artifacts they recovered at the site, but did not make public because it would have gone against their initial attempts to claim that the source of the coins could not be identified.
Now that the legal tussle is over, it would be nice if both sides made all the information about the wreck and the site available to us the interested public, but I doubt that either will do so fully.
I do agree that Spain's past record at salvaging old wrecks doesn't appear to be good, but as the article appears to be heavily biased, so who knows if it is entirely accurate?
Incidentally, as in the SeaHunt case, the role of the US Government needs to be examined carefully here. It seems to be determined to undermine and eventually ban all treasure hunting. It was the US who intervened first in the SeaHunt case, and then after the Court insisted that only Spain had the right to intervene, the US overnment worked with Spain to agree an interpretation of the 1901 Treaty that guaranteed Spain's victory in that case. In the Mercedes case, it is clear that the US Government was working in the background to facilitate a victory for Spain. And when it comes to the UNESCO Treaty promoting "in situ" preservation, although the US abstained from voting for the Treaty, and had not ratified it, I suspect that its representatives played a key role in fashioning and promoting the Treaty.
Mariner
It took me two minutes to find these papers on the Republic, so I guess you never looked. There were four papers published in 2009, and one in 2010. You really need to do your DD before making unimformed statements.
featuresarchpapers09
Self written papers on a company website are not published reference. Do your due diligence, (and get spell check) before trying to obfuscate the issue.
For your edification, published reference are papers that have been submitted for peer review and published in the relevant academic publications. Then the reference can be cited in and by other research.
The only documents referencing Odyssey Marine or any of its sites that I have found, that have been published and can be cited, are in case law.
Can you provide any links to any published work by Odyssey?
In response to Ossy, there was the 'Stolen Gold' television show on the Discovery Channel in the US. It was allegedly about the recovery of the Mercedes and the surrounding activity.
In review, I found it 'entertaining'.
I am curious, as the video and recovery of a cannon, with dolphins, were reportedly from the HMS Victory.
In addition, the episode showed a random image of a deep water fish, perhaps, not so random. I will reference the Court documents, and reference Dr Kingleys sworn statement to the Court, Exhibit 2, Annex 2 the photomosaic of the 'Black Swan' site. (submitted unaltered) ( I make the assumption that documents submitted into the public realm have the ability to be referenced)
In the lower right of the image, one will note the red fish. The identity and maximum depth of this creature are easy to determine.
I would invite the author to respond on the issue, but I am not aware if Dr Kingsley is a member.
I would also ask the moderators to PM if content is not within the scope or guidelines of the forum.
For your edification, published reference are papers that have been submitted for peer review and published in the relevant academic publications. Then the reference can be cited in and by other research.
The only documents referencing Odyssey Marine or any of its sites that I have found, that have been published and can be cited, are in case law.
Can you provide any links to any published work by Odyssey?
In response to Ossy, there was the 'Stolen Gold' television show on the Discovery Channel in the US. It was allegedly about the recovery of the Mercedes and the surrounding activity.
In review, I found it 'entertaining'.
I am curious, as the video and recovery of a cannon, with dolphins, were reportedly from the HMS Victory.
In addition, the episode showed a random image of a deep water fish, perhaps, not so random. I will reference the Court documents, and reference Dr Kingleys sworn statement to the Court, Exhibit 2, Annex 2 the photomosaic of the 'Black Swan' site. (submitted unaltered) ( I make the assumption that documents submitted into the public realm have the ability to be referenced)
In the lower right of the image, one will note the red fish. The identity and maximum depth of this creature are easy to determine.
I would invite the author to respond on the issue, but I am not aware if Dr Kingsley is a member.
I would also ask the moderators to PM if content is not within the scope or guidelines of the forum.
Last edited:
MORE AND BEYOND OSSY
Bronze Member
VOC
Sr. Member
"It's so refreshing to have a well informed and non bias reply
Ossy"
Ossy you are joking, AUVnav has an agenda we just need to work out what it is
Ossy"
Ossy you are joking, AUVnav has an agenda we just need to work out what it is
MORE AND BEYOND OSSY
Bronze Member
They are not complaints about Odyssey but facts ! You might see Odyssey as your hero's in Treasure hunting but with the Black Swan case they did it all wrong.
Odyssey has a lot to offer and has set new standard's in wreck recovery, But they played the Spanish for fools and lost !
The Game has changed forever now, Spain has awoken from it's lazy sleep on it's ship wrecks and more and more Spaniards are becoming aware of its lost history.
If you were to ask a Spaniard living in Spain at the moment, had he heard about the Atocha, He would say yes ! the train bombing in Madrid, If you asked him about the Galleon
he would not know what you are talking about ! Very sad, but true.
Darren for your information I am currently searching for a 1600 Spanish Nao, here in Australia. Due to my work commitments I have limited time in my hunt, but late next year
I should have more time.
My search of this wreck is not for Treasure but for History.
And Darren, Living in Australia I can't get any more and beyond
PS thanks for your prayers last year with our floods
Ossy
Last edited:
"It's so refreshing to have a well informed and non bias reply
Ossy"
Ossy you are joking, AUVnav has an agenda we just need to work out what it is
You can say that again, and Ossy talking about non biased is a real joke. As if all those Spanish press articles are non biased.
Last edited:
MORE AND BEYOND OSSY
Bronze Member
I do agree, the press have a way of making things look different, but that goes both ways including Odyssey press release's
Whats your problem with AUV , he has only stated facts !!! Do you feel threaten by his intellect ?
This is your usual welcome when anybody doesn't support Odyssey! THEY HAVE A HIDDEN AGENDA !
I got the same welcome Jeff .
Ossy
Whats your problem with AUV , he has only stated facts !!! Do you feel threaten by his intellect ?
This is your usual welcome when anybody doesn't support Odyssey! THEY HAVE A HIDDEN AGENDA !
I got the same welcome Jeff .
Ossy
VOC
Sr. Member
For your edification, published reference are papers that have been submitted for peer review and published in the relevant academic publications. Then the reference can be cited in and by other research.
AUVnav
If you think publishing in archaeological journals such as the INA Quarterly and IJNA, and having the very poor peer reviews from archaeological lightweights, friends, political back patters and vengeance venters is the best way of publishing underwater archaeological material, you are a bigger fool than I thought.
Archaeological material should be in the public domain and not just kept within the academic word and those who subscribe to the relevant journals.
Odyssey are running rings around the academics, and instead of listening and learning they are desperate to be negative about all that Odyssey do in a desperate attempt to preserve their tax paid cushy little numbers.
There is a very old saying “In the land of the blind the one eyed man is king” and for too long archaeologist have blagged their listeners into believing that they are the one eyed men who can see it all, but organisations like Odyssey are giving the public and governments their sight back, and they are now seeing archaeology can be done another way.
I look forward to the total demise of tax paid archaeologist, and it all going into the private and amateur sectors, like it always was.
AUVnav
If you think publishing in archaeological journals such as the INA Quarterly and IJNA, and having the very poor peer reviews from archaeological lightweights, friends, political back patters and vengeance venters is the best way of publishing underwater archaeological material, you are a bigger fool than I thought.
Archaeological material should be in the public domain and not just kept within the academic word and those who subscribe to the relevant journals.
Odyssey are running rings around the academics, and instead of listening and learning they are desperate to be negative about all that Odyssey do in a desperate attempt to preserve their tax paid cushy little numbers.
There is a very old saying “In the land of the blind the one eyed man is king” and for too long archaeologist have blagged their listeners into believing that they are the one eyed men who can see it all, but organisations like Odyssey are giving the public and governments their sight back, and they are now seeing archaeology can be done another way.
I look forward to the total demise of tax paid archaeologist, and it all going into the private and amateur sectors, like it always was.
Last edited:
Top Member Reactions
-
2350 -
1127 -
1048 -
887 -
824 -
797 -
753 -
751 -
606 -
500 -
491 -
473 -
465 -
423 -
385 -
383 -
381 -
381 -
376 -
O
375
Users who are viewing this thread
Latest Discussions
-
THE Random Chat Thread - AKA "The RCT" - No shirt or shoes required - Open 24 / 7
- Latest: Small Adventures
-
-
-
-
