UK's first Treasure Trove prosecution (for not declaring)

[Bacchus]

Here is an interesting article - it seems a bit excessive to me though.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1253991/Woman-coin-worth-2-000-garden-prosecuted-reporting-treasure.html

Malcolm

[romeo]

worrying at first glance, especially for us metal detectors, but on reflection I dont think I will be loosing much sleep, and neither should any of the hundreds of other 'finders' that sell on ebay. She got the 'legal' version of a slap on the hand, which maybe she deserved for being silly enough to show it to a museum 
I know this is a controversial area but i am all for 'liberators of history'. They give every man a chance to own history and collect. Why should anyone else but the finder get a cut?

Ofcourse for legal reasons i would like to add that i declare all my finds. 

[cliff_marsland]

It's a travesty, but what can one expect from such ghouls?  However, all the European dominoes fall in a few months, they'll have far worse things to worry about rather about than persecuting poor women.  In honor of that I'm listening to the Pistols' "Anarchy in the U.K". Great song and ahead of it's time!   Have fun with that, Dr. Michael Lewis!   One could have read his quote in a Dalek voice.

She made one big mistake though; showed it to a museum.

I was listening to the BBC's 100 items, the gold cape episode.  It was a wasteful shame that the finders cut up the cape, but at least they were able to do what they wanted with their own find back then.

The poor woman should have destroyed the coin before the jackals got their hands on it.

P.S. Right on, Romeo!

[Robert_Brenchley]

Why are they jackals? Most finds are returned; if they aren't, the finder and the landowner share the money. It enables museums and detectorists to work together. If we didn't have something like this, stuff like last year's Staffordshire Hoard, plus the innumerable smaller finds which are reported, would end up on the black market, and much of their historical value would be lost.

[silvernut]

Why are they jackals? Most finds are returned; if they aren't, the finder and the landowner share the money. It enables museums and detectorists to work together. If we didn't have something like this, stuff like last year's Staffordshire Hoard, plus the innumerable smaller finds which are reported, would end up on the black market, and much of their historical value would be lost.

... which is exactly what happens in Spain due to our disgraceful laws.

[romeo]

ask anyone thats found something and been given a fraction of its worth if they think its fair or if they would call them jackels (or worse). Maybe by 'black market' you mean eventually getting into the hands of collectors like people on this forum? if it were a case of getting values worth i dont think there would be a problem, but really- you dont think they give the finder anywhere near the value do you??

[mauseus]

Hi

worrying at first glance, especially for us metal detectors, but on reflection I dont think I will be loosing much sleep, and neither should any of the hundreds of other 'finders' that sell on ebay. She got the 'legal' version of a slap on the hand, which maybe she deserved for being silly enough to show it to a museum 
I know this is a controversial area but i am all for 'liberators of history'. They give every man a chance to own history and collect. Why should anyone else but the finder get a cut?

....and if Mr Barford reads this it will just reinforce his views. While he may not be everyone's "cup of tea" he does raise some important issues that need to be remembered.

Regards,

Mauseus

[Robert_Brenchley]

ask anyone thats found something and been given a fraction of its worth if they think its fair or if they would call them jackels (or worse). Maybe by 'black market' you mean eventually getting into the hands of collectors like people on this forum? if it were a case of getting values worth i dont think there would be a problem, but really- you dont think they give the finder anywhere near the value do you??

I think we have to be honest about the source of a lot of coins. I don't think it's in anyone's long-term interest. The thing is that under UK law, most material does end up on the market. Nobody is interested in depriving collectors or detectorists, merely in ensuring that museums have a look at anything which might be significant. If a museum wants a find, then it has to pay the market value. I don't 'think' they get the market value, I know they do, and museums sometimes have a great deal of difficulty in raising it. Right now, there's a big appeal locally to raise the money to pay for the Staffordshire Hoard. The money is shared between the finder and the landowner. I find it extremely hard to see any problem with that, as it seems to be a solution which is fair to all sides.

[LordBest]

I don't see much of a problem here. I understand her reluctance to report something she found while gardening with her mother (sentimental value) and a court appearance and twenty five pound fine is hardly draconian. It is a shame she took it to the museum really, it is hardly an item of national significance and it is a shame to see Britains' outstanding Treasure laws given such negative publicity.
Do the Treasure Trove laws have a provision for private individuals to keep items for personal collections? If not, this case might cause enough of a stir to prompt an amendment. Let her keep it with a proviso if she or her heirs ever want to sell it, they have to offer it to the museums first.
                                                                          LordBest.

[Dino]

I don't think this is such a travesty.  As far as laws go regarding ancient artifacts I think Britain is very progressive.  In Greece, anything found is property of the State.  You're required to report it and once you do, depending on the find, you may not be able to use that part of your land until someone is sent to investigate and excavate.

My grandfather told me of a neighbor of his who hit a marble head while plowing, dug it up and buried it in a fallow field.  When he plowed the fallow field, he dug it up again and moved it somewhere else.  There are some who find silver and gold and hammer it and or cut it up so that it's unrecognizable and sell it for its bullion value to jewelers who melt it and use it.

As far as this case in particular, look at some of these excerpts:

"Ludlow magistrates heard how Miss Harding had ignored calls and letters from Ludlow Museum advising her to report the piedfort to the district coroner once it had been identified last February."

"Miss Harding initially claimed she had lost the piedfort, the court heard."
 
"Defending Miss Harding, Brendan Reedy said she had failed to notify the coroner because of ' disorganisation' on her part and that the artefact had a sentimental value to her."
 
"Miss Harding ... walked free from court on Wednesday with a conditional discharge and was ordered to pay £25 of the £300 costs."

Based on her conduct, I think she got off pretty light.  I presume that she also had to give up the item, but the article doesn't say.

[Robert_Brenchley]

If the court didn't order it to have ben confiscated, then it was probably returned. If museums don't want the find, which is the case in the great majority of cases, its routine to return it.

[silvernut]

This is what happens in Spain to metal detectorists (sorry, only in Spanish!). Of course, it is illegal to detect around possible 'sites of archaeological interest', but I do think the law should change along the lines of the British laws.

http://www.elmundo.es/elmundo/2010/03/10/espana/1268212857.html

Regards,
Ignasi