Vox veritas
Bronze Member
- Aug 2, 2008
- 1,078
- 271
- Primary Interest:
- All Treasure Hunting
trinidad said:
Trini, a public company has to be more transparent than the water.
To clarify the doubts is a duty.
Odyssey Marine Article...
- Thread starter jeff k
- Start date
Trini, a public company has to be more transparent than the water.
To clarify the doubts is a duty.
Mariner,
I will do my best.
My understanding is based on arguements put forth in Odyssey's most recent filing and is expressed as I stated -- my understanding:
Historical documents show the Mercedes was serving as a commercial trasport vessel for the maritime mail service.
173 receipts for cargo shipments were signed by a civilian 'silver master' showing roughly 75% were private commercial property.
25 claims filed by private individuals.
Paying passengers.
Section 1609 of FSIA -- None of the res is protected because int'l agreements do not extend to vessels engaged in comercial activity.
Only sovereignty would apply to vessels' that are on 'non-commercial' service when they sunk.
In the 1902 Treaty -- Sovereignty applies to Sunken warships, naval auxilary or other vessels owned by governments on military, non-commercial service.
Personally, I havn't seen the historical documents, the 173 receipts, the 25 claims, read the FSIA, etc -- but rather based my assumptions on the belief that these are represented as 'facts' by Odyssey.
I am also not aware of any retribution paid by Spain to private parties for the commercial cargo lost (or an insurance policy) that may effectively trasfer ownership. Even if there was retribution, I'm not sure how their claim to commercial cargo would play out with regard to salvage law since it was originally private commercial cargo.
I beleive Odyssey has a valid claim that deserves to be heard in a trial case with a jury.
You may disagree -- It is what I beleive.
See the link below for the info I wrote above:
http://www.shipwreck.net/pdf/dkt230OdysseyObjectionstoRandR_000.pdf
I will do my best.
My understanding is based on arguements put forth in Odyssey's most recent filing and is expressed as I stated -- my understanding:
Historical documents show the Mercedes was serving as a commercial trasport vessel for the maritime mail service.
173 receipts for cargo shipments were signed by a civilian 'silver master' showing roughly 75% were private commercial property.
25 claims filed by private individuals.
Paying passengers.
Section 1609 of FSIA -- None of the res is protected because int'l agreements do not extend to vessels engaged in comercial activity.
Only sovereignty would apply to vessels' that are on 'non-commercial' service when they sunk.
In the 1902 Treaty -- Sovereignty applies to Sunken warships, naval auxilary or other vessels owned by governments on military, non-commercial service.
Personally, I havn't seen the historical documents, the 173 receipts, the 25 claims, read the FSIA, etc -- but rather based my assumptions on the belief that these are represented as 'facts' by Odyssey.
I am also not aware of any retribution paid by Spain to private parties for the commercial cargo lost (or an insurance policy) that may effectively trasfer ownership. Even if there was retribution, I'm not sure how their claim to commercial cargo would play out with regard to salvage law since it was originally private commercial cargo.
I beleive Odyssey has a valid claim that deserves to be heard in a trial case with a jury.
You may disagree -- It is what I beleive.
See the link below for the info I wrote above:
http://www.shipwreck.net/pdf/dkt230OdysseyObjectionstoRandR_000.pdf
- Thread starter
- #864
Article X of the Friendship Treaty does include "individuals."
ARTICLE X
In cases of shipwreck, damages at sea, or forced putting in, each party shall afford to the vessels of the other, whether belonging to the State or to individuals, the same assistance and protection and the same immunities which would have been granted to its own vessels in similar cases.
P.S. Spain never paid any retribution.
ARTICLE X
In cases of shipwreck, damages at sea, or forced putting in, each party shall afford to the vessels of the other, whether belonging to the State or to individuals, the same assistance and protection and the same immunities which would have been granted to its own vessels in similar cases.
P.S. Spain never paid any retribution.
capt dom
Hero Member
I started this post below under shipwrecks. Please take a look.
Maybe it belongs here:
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,269712.0.html
I am appalled at the rationale some within our court system are leaning
However, I personally have been a surviving victim of a negative magistrate
report and recommendation in an Admiralty Action. The actual Judge reversed
the negative Magistrate's ruling in my case but much time passed and damage
was done :
If those of you who are following this case believe it belongs here let me know
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,269712.0.html
Maybe it belongs here:
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,269712.0.html
I am appalled at the rationale some within our court system are leaning
However, I personally have been a surviving victim of a negative magistrate
report and recommendation in an Admiralty Action. The actual Judge reversed
the negative Magistrate's ruling in my case but much time passed and damage
was done :
If those of you who are following this case believe it belongs here let me know
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,269712.0.html
PDJ,
I happen to agree that the Mercedes should not be regarded as a Sovereign vessel, because of the commercial nature of some of its payload, and I do not agree with either the magistrates recommendations nor the recent US Government intervention. I am very critical of the way Odyssey lifted all the coins, rather than a sample, but that they brought on their own problems as a result. However, my question was whether the laws written to protect warships were also designed to protect private wealth, as you had asserted.
As Jeff has pointed out, the 1902 Treaty covers both State-owned and privately-owned wrecks, but I don't think it was designed primarily to protect warships. In fact, I am not aware of any laws designed to protect warships that also provide for the protection of private wealth on those ships. Instead, they actually sacrifice both the warship and the private wealth by making both open to salvage claims, or they had until now.
Mariner
I happen to agree that the Mercedes should not be regarded as a Sovereign vessel, because of the commercial nature of some of its payload, and I do not agree with either the magistrates recommendations nor the recent US Government intervention. I am very critical of the way Odyssey lifted all the coins, rather than a sample, but that they brought on their own problems as a result. However, my question was whether the laws written to protect warships were also designed to protect private wealth, as you had asserted.
As Jeff has pointed out, the 1902 Treaty covers both State-owned and privately-owned wrecks, but I don't think it was designed primarily to protect warships. In fact, I am not aware of any laws designed to protect warships that also provide for the protection of private wealth on those ships. Instead, they actually sacrifice both the warship and the private wealth by making both open to salvage claims, or they had until now.
Mariner
- Thread starter
- #867
Capt. Dom... That's very interesting. Can you post the case number, or PM it to me? I'll check with Odyssey to see if they're aware of your case. If not, they may be able to use it.
Update: I found the case on Pacer, and sent it to Odyssey.
Update: I found the case on Pacer, and sent it to Odyssey.
capt dom
Hero Member
Whoops! 
I posted this in the wrong place...
This question is a lot bigger than whether or not Odyssey is getting screwed or not....
After being in the biz.... for some time they know exactly what is going on and are not stupid.
If you follow the stock swings and blocks of stock sold - and options flipped, you will see the
principals are not exactly suffering too much over the extended protraction - while these issues
are being pondered....
The genuine issue we should all be concerned with is are their attorneys making the best case
they can make or are they too just along for the ride.... I agree with the above posting and
have some faith that in the end - the smoke may br finally blown away... by our Judicial System.
From a cultural resource issue - or even a "war grave" issue the bottom line here is that there
really isn't anything left of most of these shipwrecks to actually study - from an archeological stand point.
It is all "smoke and mirrors". The ship blew up.... Its gone.... The crabs carried off most
of the bones that may have made it to the bottom. Various other marine creatures and birds, that
have long since gone ate everyone else - if they didn't just dissolve from floating about as
bloated corpses.
Both sides are guilty of playing an archeological card that is empty handed. These projects are
anthropological events. The public interest they generate are their real treasure. more money
is going to be made in the peaks and valleys of OMEX stock than ever will be made in the marketing
of 500,000 coins that pretty much all look alike.
It is just a down right shame projects like this end up serving other agendas - especially of the
true 21st century pirates - Goules that are called attorneys - and even worse - public employees who
don't really give a crap about serving the public trust....
I posted this in the wrong place...
This question is a lot bigger than whether or not Odyssey is getting screwed or not....
After being in the biz.... for some time they know exactly what is going on and are not stupid.
If you follow the stock swings and blocks of stock sold - and options flipped, you will see the
principals are not exactly suffering too much over the extended protraction - while these issues
are being pondered....
The genuine issue we should all be concerned with is are their attorneys making the best case
they can make or are they too just along for the ride.... I agree with the above posting and
have some faith that in the end - the smoke may br finally blown away... by our Judicial System.
From a cultural resource issue - or even a "war grave" issue the bottom line here is that there
really isn't anything left of most of these shipwrecks to actually study - from an archeological stand point.
It is all "smoke and mirrors". The ship blew up.... Its gone.... The crabs carried off most
of the bones that may have made it to the bottom. Various other marine creatures and birds, that
have long since gone ate everyone else - if they didn't just dissolve from floating about as
bloated corpses.
Both sides are guilty of playing an archeological card that is empty handed. These projects are
anthropological events. The public interest they generate are their real treasure. more money
is going to be made in the peaks and valleys of OMEX stock than ever will be made in the marketing
of 500,000 coins that pretty much all look alike.
It is just a down right shame projects like this end up serving other agendas - especially of the
true 21st century pirates - Goules that are called attorneys - and even worse - public employees who
don't really give a crap about serving the public trust....
- Thread starter
- #869
signumops
Hero Member
- Feb 28, 2007
- 756
- 226
- Detector(s) used
- Garrett, Minelab, Aqua-Pulse
- Primary Interest:
- All Treasure Hunting
Actually, I am proud that SOMEBODY in Washington is concerned, but shocked that they would put it on paper. Like I said B4, Goold will disappear when Hillary disappears. OMX only needs to keep things in court for 3 years more (maybe less, depending upon other more serious circumstances).
FISHEYE
Bronze Member
- Feb 27, 2004
- 2,333
- 401
- Detector(s) used
- Chasing Dory ROV,Swellpro Splash 2 pro waterproof drone,Swellpro Spry+ wa,Wesmar SHD700SS Side Scan Sonar,U/W Mac 1 Turbo Aquasound by American Electronics,Fisher 1280x,Aquasound UW md,Aqua pulse AQ1B
- Primary Interest:
- All Treasure Hunting
If i mount a cannon on the deck of my private 40 foot striker sportfish.Is it now a warship?
Any comment about the two last responses of Odyssey at the Tampa court?
http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/florida/flmdce/8:2007cv00614/197978/240/
http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/florida/flmdce/8:2007cv00614/197978/241/
http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/florida/flmdce/8:2007cv00614/197978/240/
http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/florida/flmdce/8:2007cv00614/197978/241/
- Thread starter
- #873
FISHEYE said:
Fisheye... Actually, no guns are necessary to be classified as a warship. Any govt. owned ship that's at risk of being a "target" from an unfriendly force is classified as a warship. A US Navy hydrographic or salvage vessel would fall under this category. I just found that out a few days ago myself.
Salvor6
Silver Member
- Feb 5, 2005
- 3,755
- 2,171
- Detector(s) used
- Aquapulse, J.W. Fisher Proton 3, Pulse Star II, Detector Pro Headhunter, AK-47
- Primary Interest:
- Shipwrecks
What about the cargo ships that are targeted by Somali pirates?
- Thread starter
- #877
Tampa Tribune Article...
http://www2.tbo.com/content/2009/sep/11/how-does-odyssey-find-all-sunken-treasure/
http://www2.tbo.com/content/2009/sep/11/how-does-odyssey-find-all-sunken-treasure/
- Thread starter
- #878
- Thread starter
- #879
Firm asks court to reject U.S. brief in Spain treasure fight...
http://www.tradingmarkets.com/.site/news/Stock News/2524546/
http://www.tradingmarkets.com/.site/news/Stock News/2524546/
H
HAVE DETECTOR WILL TRAVEL
Guest
Coins in iron chests or even close to iron in saltwater will fuse together. What a joke, the Spanish claiming it is theres when they stole it from the natives of South America. Once again the RATS come out of the woodwork when there is found money. Heck if they want to find there lost ill gotten treasure you think they would have searched for it. To bad our government doesn't have the balls to unblock the Odysee by blowing the Spanish vessels out of the water.
Top Member Reactions
-
1962 -
1162 -
1091 -
984 -
941 -
904 -
848 -
797 -
750 -
723 -
424 -
405 -
396 -
E
362
-
329 -
325 -
322 -
303 -
301 -
282
Users who are viewing this thread
Latest Discussions
-
-
I found something I never wanted to find and what we all fear of finding.- Latest: Bucket Lister
-
-
-