Welcome guest, is this your first visit?
Member
Discoveries
 
Page 18 of 19 FirstFirst ... 816171819 LastLast
Results 256 to 270 of 274
Like Tree258Likes

Thread: Placing a value on the French monument removed by the Spanish and lost at Sea.

« Prev Thread | Next Thread »
  1. #256

    May 2018
    Gainesville, FL
    19
    14 times
    All Types Of Treasure Hunting
    Highly doubtful, in my opinion. I think the only plausible related scenario is if they purposefully omitted the translation of the rest of Alva's letter because it included context to suggest the ship carrying the monuments was not the Trinite. I haven't read all the case documents yet, but I believe I exhausted all those to include evidence of additional monuments being onboard the Trinite. If my memory serves correct, the most conclusive court document presented (that I was trying to find) was from the Spanish archives documenting a French survivors account of there being additional monuments onboard [one or more of] the wrecked ships. I would interpret the Alva letter to be such, but it would be great if the entire letter was translated.
    huntsman53 likes this.

  2. #257
    us
    ARC

    Aug 2014
    De Tampe Bahia - La Florida
    JW 8X - ML X2
    16,344
    29434 times
    All Types Of Treasure Hunting
    Quote Originally Posted by huntsman53 View Post
    I wonder if any of the documents/letters were forged or added to after the State of Florida notified France after GME filed for a salvage permit and or arrest of the shipwreck. Sorry but I don't trust the French any further than I can throw them as they got us into the Vietnam War and then bailed on us, they kicked U.S. Troops out of France in 1967 after we demanded some repayment of War debts for what the U.S. spent on rebuilding many cities in France and especially Paris and also because they treated us (myself and fellow soldiers from my' Unit) like dirt when we spent nearly a week in Paris on Leave. Paris is a nasty city with nasty people!
    Hence why I would have told em to go pound sand.
    huntsman53 likes this.
    Have permission... Fill holes... Dispose of trash. - The Random Chat Thread - AKA -" TNet Under Ground " http://www.treasurenet.com/forums/ev...l-welcome.html

  3. #258
    br
    Jul 2018
    117
    107 times
    All Types Of Treasure Hunting
    Bull Shiite!! If a factual not made up document can show that the monument found by GME was not on the Trinite and in turn proves that the ship is not the Trinite, then it has a lot of bearing on the decision.
    There were matches to cannon and other artefacts, not just the monument, that made it a perfect match for the manifest of the Trinity.
    As others have suggested reading the court ruling details everything very distinctly.
    or you can just keep guessing.

  4. #259
    us
    Jun 2013
    East Tennessee
    6,250
    5218 times
    Quote Originally Posted by QuartermasterD View Post
    Highly doubtful, in my opinion. I think the only plausible related scenario is if they purposefully omitted the translation of the rest of Alva's letter because it included context to suggest the ship carrying the monuments was not the Trinite. I haven't read all the case documents yet, but I believe I exhausted all those to include evidence of additional monuments being onboard the Trinite. If my memory serves correct, the most conclusive court document presented (that I was trying to find) was from the Spanish archives documenting a French survivors account of there being additional monuments onboard [one or more of] the wrecked ships. I would interpret the Alva letter to be such, but it would be great if the entire letter was translated.
    Due to the amount of cargo that the La Trinité was carrying, your theory is highly plausible per the items listed on her' Manifest by NOAA (i.e. A significant amount of munitions, armament, and supplies are listed on its 28 April 1565 manifest. Iron objects which are likely preserved include 20 berches (large faucons or falcons, a class of cannon); four chiens (another artillery class); 977 cannon balls; 300 iron pikes; 1,300 nails; 100 corsets of armor; 3,153 pounds of stock iron; two anvils; a large iron bowl; a sheet of iron; and a variety of small items including tongs, hooks, pincers, and other hand tools.). It is quite possible that the L’…mérillon (2) was carrying the Monuments because her' cargo was somewhat of a mystery or secret per her' manifest also listed by NOAA (i.e. Her cargo and armament remains somewhat of a mystery, as her full manifest is not extant and the surviving receipt signed by her captain Vincent Collas lists only 48 cannon balls and 56 pounds of gunpowder.). It appears that the L’…mérillon (2) would have had plenty of room for the Monuments and would not have been overloaded.
    Last edited by huntsman53; Jul 12, 2018 at 03:43 PM.
    Blak bart likes this.

  5. #260
    us
    da book worm--researcher

    Feb 2007
    callahan,fl
    delta 4000 / ace 250 - used BH and many others too
    16,589
    3234 times
    Honorable Mentions (1)
    sadly ---the French won the wreck by claiming rights under the "sunken military craft act" ...by claiming all of the French fleet vessels that left fort caroline were on a "military mission" at the time of thier sinking being they were headed to attack the Spanish at St Augustine when they was struck by a hurricane / strong storm ...sadly for GME … it did not need to be sunk by enemy action to be thought of as "sunk while on a military mission" ….much like the Spanish Armada that sank while enroute to attack England by bad weather is thought of as "war graves" even thought they were not sunk by combat ---- the French in my view should at least have to at least pay a "finders fee" to cover the finding cost ...but we all know that's not happening ….

    and if one claimed it was a "looted" monument from fort caroline on a Spanish vessel headed back to St Augustine --the Spanish would then step in claiming it as a "military craft on a mission" (returning proof that the French had tried to claim florida --thus justifying the attack on fort caroline--the monument would be the "proof" spain needed) --so basically your screwed either way ...esp when your own govt is working against you …
    Last edited by ivan salis; Jul 22, 2018 at 06:04 AM.
    Blak bart likes this.

  6. #261
    us
    Jun 2013
    East Tennessee
    6,250
    5218 times
    Quote Originally Posted by ivan salis View Post
    sadly ---the French won the wreck by claiming rights under the "sunken military craft act" ...by claiming all of the French fleet vessels that left fort caroline were on a "military mission" at the time of thier sinking being they were headed to attack the Spanish at St Augustine when they was struck by a hurricane / strong storm ...sadly for GME … it did not need to be sunk by enemy action to be thought of as "sunk while on a military mission" ….much like the Spanish Armada that sank while enroute to attack England by bad weather is thought of as "war graves" even thought they were not sunk by combat ---- the French in my view should at least have to at least pay a "finders fee" to cover the finding cost ...but we all know that's not happening ….

    and if one claimed it was a "looted" monument from fort caroline on a Spanish vessel headed back to St Augustine --the Spanish would then step in claiming it as a "military craft on a mission" (returning proof that the French had tried to claim florida --thus justifying the attack on fort caroline--the monument would be the "proof" spain needed) --so basically your screwed either way ...esp when your own govt is working against you …
    ivan...You are right are right if the shipwreck turns out to be a Spanish ship and not the La Trinite as the Spanish were on a military mission but as I noted in the other Thread (see the link below), Ribault's Fleet was on a relief mission, so France's claim that the La Trinite was on a military mission holds no water. However, like you said, when your own government is working against you as well as the State of Florida, you are screwed.

    US Court: Shipwreck Found off Florida Belongs to France

  7. #262
    us
    da book worm--researcher

    Feb 2007
    callahan,fl
    delta 4000 / ace 250 - used BH and many others too
    16,589
    3234 times
    Honorable Mentions (1)
    yes the French fleet WAS on a resupply mission --but once under attack by the Spanish fleet --its " mission status" changed ,,,it had to become a military attack force --to defend the settlement and themselves from Spanish attack by taking he fight to the Spanish at St Augustine ….it is known as "change of orders due to military necessity" where your forced to attack others due to being attacked by enemy ships ..

  8. #263
    Charter Member
    us
    Pirate of the Martires

    Feb 2005
    Port Richey, Florida
    Aquapulse, J.W. Fisher Proton 3, Pulse Star II, Detector Pro Headhunter, AK-47
    3,390
    1457 times
    Shipwrecks
    It doesn't matter what the mission was, the French fleet are still warships.

  9. #264

    May 2018
    Gainesville, FL
    19
    14 times
    All Types Of Treasure Hunting
    Quote Originally Posted by huntsman53 View Post
    ivan...You are right are right if the shipwreck turns out to be a Spanish ship and not the La Trinite as the Spanish were on a military mission but as I noted in the other Thread (see the link below), Ribault's Fleet was on a relief mission, so France's claim that the La Trinite was on a military mission holds no water. However, like you said, when your own government is working against you as well as the State of Florida, you are screwed.
    Genuine question: are there legal definitions of these terms (e.g., military mission, relief mission, etc.)? I would assume Ribault's mission was intended to serve both purposes, but from reading this thread there appears to be an unwritten rule of dichotomy.

  10. #265
    us
    Jun 2013
    East Tennessee
    6,250
    5218 times
    Quote Originally Posted by QuartermasterD View Post
    Genuine question: are there legal definitions of these terms (e.g., military mission, relief mission, etc.)? I would assume Ribault's mission was intended to serve both purposes, but from reading this thread there appears to be an unwritten rule of dichotomy.
    Well, on Treasure Net we are allowed to have a different take, interpretation or opinions on things as long as we keep it civil. Besides, the State of Florida and some countries involved in this and other shipwreck matters, all too often skew the facts to meet their needs. Call it distrust on my part which I have had ever since the State of Florida personnel removed the 3 cases of Brown Bess Rifles, barrels of Black Powder, Flints and other items from under the West Martello Towers Fort in Key West and all but one to three disappeared into the night. I was the one that located the void under the arched entrance way into the Fort which was being leased and used by the Key West Garden Club at the time. I found it while metal detecting but was not allowed to dig to see what was there. After 3 months of the State trying to decide what to do, they finally showed up and excavated the entrance way and found an underground bunker containing the items noted above. They covered it over, then came back in the middle of the night with a truck, loaded the items on the truck and left. No one knows or even seems to care where all of the other Brown Bess Rifles and other items found went to.
    releventchair and Salvor6 like this.

  11. #266
    Charter Member
    us
    "WP"

    May 2012
    11,162
    14208 times
    Quote Originally Posted by QuartermasterD View Post
    Genuine question: are there legal definitions of these terms (e.g., military mission, relief mission, etc.)? I would assume Ribault's mission was intended to serve both purposes, but from reading this thread there appears to be an unwritten rule of dichotomy.
    Manifest of April 28th 1565 for La Trinite contains no mention of pillars. If smuggling pillars and other non-manifested cargo was it then a pirate ship? Subject to such treatment of it's contraband? L.o.l..
    huntsman53 likes this.

  12. #267
    us
    da book worm--researcher

    Feb 2007
    callahan,fl
    delta 4000 / ace 250 - used BH and many others too
    16,589
    3234 times
    Honorable Mentions (1)
    by todays standards ..if you find a ship ... always say its a oirate / unknown ship ..so no nation can claim it out from under you ...pirate ships are by definition "ships of no nation" … let them prove otherwise...just because coinage of a certain nation is aboard does not mean that is the vessel's country of ownership / origin ---Spanish coins on it do not make it a Spanish ship -per si
    Last edited by ivan salis; Jul 25, 2018 at 05:28 AM.
    huntsman53 likes this.

  13. #268
    us
    Apr 2004
    Tesoro Sand Shark, Homebuilt pulse loop
    2,668
    1186 times
    Shipwrecks
    Is this a new lawsuit? It was posted last week on this site...

    Treasure hunting exploration company, Global Marine Exploration - Crossroads Today

  14. #269

    Feb 2007
    U.S.
    Garrett, Minelab, Aqua-Pulse
    746
    170 times
    All Types Of Treasure Hunting
    Yes.

  15. #270
    Charter Member
    us
    The continuing adventures of Ropesfish -

    Jun 2007
    Sebastian, Florida
    A sharp eye, an AquaPulse and a finely tuned shrimp fork.
    984
    1405 times
    Shipwrecks
    [QUOTE=Darren in Louisiana;5969979]Is this a new lawsuit? It was posted last week on this site...

    Treasure hunting exploration company, Global Marine Exploration - Crossroads Today[/QUOTE

    Where are statements 1 through 11? This starts with 12.

    Bobby Pritchett CEO of Global Marine Exploration "You cannot trust the State of Florida, or at least the people whom run it, very dishonest and misleading.IMO
    CAPE CANAVERAL, FLORIDA, BREVARD, October 16, 2018 /EINPresswire.com/ -- THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE EIGHTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
    IN AND FOR BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA
    Over a period of time, the Division issued GME six exploration permits with dig addenda for different three-square areas off the coast of Cape Canaveral. These turned up shipwreck evidence (anchors) but mostly resulted in identification of rocket debris.
    12. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Division of State Lands, provided salvage easements for GME to use State-owned submerged lands for the areas and time periods for which the Division agreed for GME to explore for and recover shipwreck sites.

    13. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection and the Federal Corps of Engineers contemporaneously issued construction permits to GME for it to use the designated submerged lands and navigable waters above for exploration and salvage.
    14. On August 14, 2015, upon detailed application by GME, the Division issued a seventh Exploration Permit (# 2015-03) for GME to explore another three-square mile area of State waters in the Cape Canaveral vicinity to locate and report information about shipwreck sites in that designated area.
    15. In proceeding with respect to Permit # 2015-03, as amended, GME discovered at least five separate locations of apparently distinct shipwreck sites which GME reported to the State as agreed. The locations of the discovered shipwreck sites and the methods used to identify those locations were proprietary, confidential trade secret information, and there is no requirement or agreement for public disclosure of such information.
    16. GME provided site locations to the Division only after the Division repeatedly assured GME that this proprietary information would be maintained confidential and not disclosed to third-parties or used without GME’s consent.
    17. On August 19, 2015, the Division issued Amendment One of Exploration Permit # 2015-03, recognizing GME’s successful completion of sensing survey within the designated area, allowing activity to identify newly uncovered cultural materials and limited test excavation and diagnostic artifact recovery for shipwreck identification purposes, and specifying that recovered artifacts would be included in the pool of artifacts considered for transfer to GME if a recovery permit is issued in the future for the same area. This Amendment explicitly authorized recovery of shipwreck artifacts, and promised to pool their value with the value of all ultimately recovered objects to calculate 80% thereof to be paid to GME.
    18. On September 9, 2015, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection issued Notice of Modification of its construction permit to include areas approved by Exploration Permit # 2015-03, reciting that the modification includes amendment of the easement for treasure salvage investigations to include the new approved area.
    19. On December 7, 2015, the State executed a Modified Sovereignty Submerged Lands Cultural Resource Recovery Easement for Salvage Exploration and Operation Purposes, stating that it was “for salvage operations only,” that “any artifacts or materials recovered by the applicant shall be disposed of pursuant to the contract issued by the Department of State;” and that the easement was “valid only after the Department of State has issued a contract for exploration or salvage and shall remain valid only so long as the Department of State’s contract is in full force and effect.”
    20. Copies of the Division’s Exploration Permit # 2015-03, Amendment One, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection Salvage Work Permit Modification, and the State’s “Modified Sovereignty Submerged Lands Cultural Resource Recovery Easement for Salvage Exploration and Operation Purposes” for the approved area are attached as Exhibits A-1, A-2, A-3, and A-4, respectively.
    21. GME recovered certain items and provided recorded identification of certain cannons and monuments to the Division by photograph and video.
    22. GME made proper application for a recovery permit to authorize full recovery of artifacts from the discovered shipwreck sites.
    23. The Division had never raised an issue nor made any negative response as to any work not having been done, or done improperly, in connection with any GME permit requirement.
    24. GME became concerned when it learned that the Division considered that identified artifacts from one of the sites were from an old French naval ship and was negotiating the shipwreck finds with France for it to claim without GME’s involvement or consent.
    25. GME filed a federal court complaint in admiralty in rem against “The Unidentified, Wrecked and (for Finders-Right Purposes) Abandoned Sailing Vessel,” seeking to establish its ownership under the Law of Finds.
    26. Incident to its filing of this action, GME was required to deposit recovered artifacts under the federal court’s control.
    27. The Division demanded that GME turn over those recovered artifacts, but GME could not comply because the federal court controlled the property.
    28. The Division then suspended GME’s exploration permit and would not issue a recovery permit to GME, stating that the only cure was for possession of the artifacts recovered for identification purposes to be delivered to the Division.
    29. The federal court transferred control of the identified artifacts to the Division, fulfilling this demand; however, the Division still refused or otherwise failed to reinstate GME’s exploration permit so it could identify artifacts at the other discovered sites, and refused to issue a recovery permit for it to complete recovery of the finds.
    30. The Division’s actions caused GME significant loss and deprived GME from realizing compensation value from shipwreck sites and artifacts it discovered, contrary to GME’s investment-backed expectations in undertaking salvage operationsRobert Pritchett
    Global MArine Exploration Inc
    772-205-8184

    Bill Black
    Search and Salvage/Caribbean Treasure Salvors
    Sebastian, FL
    ropesfish@gmail.com

    Subcontractor on the 1715 Plate Fleet "C-31"
    “You can either be a victim of the world or an adventurer in search of treasure. It all depends on how you view your life.”
    Paulo Coelho, Eleven Minutes

    https://www.facebook.com/searchandsalvage.net/


    https://www.facebook.com/groups/1467407956647367/

 

 
Page 18 of 19 FirstFirst ... 816171819 LastLast

Remove Ads

Home | Forum | Active Topics | What's New

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Spanish Master Monument
    By Thernewbie in forum Treasure Marks/Signs
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: Oct 22, 2016, 03:49 PM
  2. Spanish trail & monument markers book ????
    By Frankn in forum Jesuit Treasures
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Feb 06, 2016, 02:18 PM
  3. French treasure map removed.
    By Mr.T in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Nov 02, 2013, 11:49 PM
  4. Spanish Alpha monument or Phonecian?
    By Thernewbie in forum Treasure Marks/Signs
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Jun 29, 2011, 12:57 AM
  5. Spanish monument 6 ft high with a treasure map on it:
    By SabeSix in forum Treasure Marks/Signs
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: Oct 28, 2009, 11:57 AM
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v4.3.0