23 year old woman who found coin at age 9 Prosocuted

[jeff of pa]

A woman who found a 700-year-old silver 'coin' whilst digging in her garden as a child has become the first in the country to be convicted of failing to hand in suspected treasure.
Kate Harding, 23, was prosecuted under the Treasure Act after she ignored orders to report the coin-like artefact to a coroner.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/wor...secuted-reporting-treasure.html#ixzz0gfXNIR51

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

How to Research for Treasure Hunting and Metal Detecting From Lead Generation to Vetting - Grab it through Amazon!

[thepackrats]

Wow...

 

[jimcor]

Hope 'His Oness' does not see this.

 

[allen]

that just stinks !!!

 

[HCW]

that just stinks !!!

And she's cute!

 

[stefen]

Apparently, 'ignorance of the law is no excuse' in the UK also.

 

[MalteseFalcon]

I can see her reluctance, due to sentimental value, but what the heck.

Just as with the IRS, you report it to the author-itah! and you risk finding yourself knee-deep in a bunch of BS!

 

[Gator-Flea]

That's scary!!

 

[veronasteve]

yes this has been well discussed on uk forums...these items are referred to everywhere as coins..and a single coin doesn't need to be declared
to anybody.....but the waters are now muddied now it's been described an artefact(which it's clearly not)....knock on affect of this is theres now talk of other 'coins' being considered artefacts and property of the state....the thing thats really wrong is they picked on a soft target with a nice find to prosecute ....watch out.

 

[jeff of pa]

yes this has been well discussed on uk forums...these items are referred to everywhere as coins..and a single coin doesn't need to be declared
to anybody.....but the waters are now muddied now it's been described an atrefact(which it's clearly not)....knock on affect of this is theres now talk of other 'coins' being considered artefacts and property of the state....the thing thats really wrong is they picked on a soft target with a nice find to prosecute ....watch out.

how about if everyone in the UK
lined up at their Office(s) each with a single Coin find ?

How long before they say Look !
"This is Rediculous" ! We want artifcts not Coins,
Your waisting our time here"

After all anything they take they have to
Compensate for.

 

[Prime]

And the esteemed Archaelogist will spout the tired mantra: "A single coin can date a whole site, and THEY are removing them"

Of course you and I BOTH know the real reason is esteem and prestige that they lose when some guy with a HS education beats them to a fantastic discovery.

And the sad fact remains that their real motivation is the threat of losing territory to "rank amateurs" So they take advantage of their University/Government connections to sway regulations in their favor and villify all those who DARE touch THEIR artifacts and don't have a bunch of letters behind their names.

Spooky, that statement carries a modern treasure hunter's sentiments that I fully embrace as well.

Now then, there must be a country or countries somewhere in the world that are more treasure-hunter friendly. Maybe in the Caribbean, or somewhere in the Pacific? A country that doesn't have a big lobby of snobby archies?

There must be some nations out there that would see a profitable side to dealing directly with amateur treasure hunters.

Lets outline the benefits, shall we?

1.) Archies don't have the manpower or time to follow every treasure story out there. For one thing, a lot of these stories are shrouded in folk-lore and end up being a wild goose chase. The amateur treasure hunter has the time and willingness to pursue these because they're free to do so. They don't have to report to anyone or justify spending "x amount of money" on a fruitless treasure chase. Furthermore, we travel either solo or in small groups, and we don't have to pay anyone to dig up an area for us, we do it ourselves. This = cost savings for the government.

2.) When one of "us" spends money on said fruitless treasure chase, it doesn't cost the government anything. We fund the costs out of our own pocket.

3.) Most treasure sits buried for eons, if we don't find it, chances are that it will lie in the dirt for ages and then nobody will benefit from it. The current generation and the next one, and so forth, will pass and that "history" that the archies are so worried about will sit there for the benefit of no one.

4.) If a government was to honestly and fairly deal with TH's then more history would be recovered and shared with the public(instead of being secretly sold off). The government could get a cut of the loot as well. It would be free money for them, money that they otherwise would have never made because they would have had no knowledge of the loot if it wasn't for us. Win-win situation.

Feel free to add to this list.

 

[Prime]

Furthermore, rapists, burglars, murderers, drug dealers, extortionists, scam artists who dupe investors out of millions and ruin many peoples entire lives, are the ones worthy of prosecution. Yet I've heard and read many times about real criminals getting away with it, or getting out on bail and doing more harm(which is completely idiotic). So maybe the archies should chill out and let the justice system actually deal with real problems instead of this crap about prosecuting your average citizens who have no intent of causing harm to anyone.

Get your heads on straight, archies(I'm sure there are some on this forum, this is addressed to them). Stop and see the nonsense you're propagating.

Now. Lets get a bit hypothetical. Lets say that someone over here in NA would find a large cache of treasure and "hid it away" for fear of losing it all to the government's greed. Would you prosecute them as a criminal? Would you go as far as to imprison them with hardened criminals? Does a person who seeks to unearth history at his or her own expense, in order to pursue a dream and also make some profit out of it, deserve to be locked up with rapists, murderers, and so forth? Where is the "justice" in that? Do you see it? Cause I sure don't.

A new approach needs to be adopted, an approach of co-operation and mutual benefit. An "us-vs" them approach doesn't really have to be.

 

[texan connection]

Intresting the law was made 1996, she was 9, she found it when she was 6,.

good story

 

[Mark S.]

The problem here was her not taking the proper action when informed to do so. And then apparently ignoring warnings. Like it or not the law says that the coroner must be notified. You may not agree with the outcome but she failed to abide by the law. A law which was written to make a working relationship between the metal detector and archaeological community. One which has been working fairly well and benefitting both.

If deemd to be treasure the find could then be bought at fair market value by a museum. She was not ignorant of the law. She chose to ignore it even after warnings. That is where she encountered the problem.

Pick the situation. You are notified in person and by letter that you are in violation of a law if you do not take a specific action. You ignore the notices. What do you think would happen?

 

[mariner]

I am surprised that the statute of limitations does not apply to this case, and amazed that she should be prosecuted under a law that was enacted after she made the find.

There is a saying in Britain that "if that is the Law, then the Law is an Ass." It is for this particular prosecution.

By the way, I think this item would count as Treasure Trove, in which case she is entitled as the finder to 50% of the value, if I remember the rules correctly. It appears that the museum did not tell her that. They won't get many people bringing their finds into museums in teh future, that's for sure.

Mariner

 

[Mark S.]

Why was a word in my post censored? Apparently you can use the word ignorance but not the other form that ends in "t" instead of "ce". You can also use ignore.

I don't think the statute of limitations would apply as she was not prosecuted for making the find years ago. She was prosecuted for not reporting it after she was told to. The law says that you must report it within a period of time "after" it is realised that it may be treasure. It appears that she was given more then ample time and warnings.

I am not commenting on whether it is right or wrong. Just as to the reason behind it. It has nothing to do with the actual find or when it was found. It is the fact that she failed to report it when warned to do so.

 

[Prime]

You're right, she should have reported it. In Britain the law is more fair because you're allowed to profit greatly from the find. For example, that one guy in the UK who last summer found that treasure trove of gold artifacts from the 7th century(or sometime close to there). As I recall, he split the find 50/50 with the landowner.

My beef is with the North American laws. Reading this case with the 23 year old girl brought them back into my mind. In Canada, the government keeps all, so I've read and heard from archies.