Means, Motive, and opportunity

[Kentucky Kache]

In researching a cache I want to get as close as I can to proof. But what if cold hard proof isn't available? What then? Then I'll take a look at probabilities. While It's proof I'm seeking, I need to understand that I'll never find a flashing sign saying, "Treasure here." I want to find all I can, but if I get too picky, I'll probably never go searching. So what are some of the things I want to see in my quest for proving my lead?

MEANS: Have you found reason to believe the person actually had the amount of money he was supposed to have buried? You can find this out in court and census records, etc. And one thing is sure, they didn't take it with them when they left. Can you find where it went? If you found that he indeed had the means, then look to see if he left a will. Did you find it there? What about the bill of sale of his personal property after his death? Also check the census records of his family members both before, and after, his death. Do any of them reflect an increase in wealth after he died? If you know the man had $10,000.00, but only $2,000.00 is accounted for, you have to wonder what happened to the remaining $8,000.00.

MOTIVE: Did this person have good reason to bury their money? In almost all treasure stories it is said that the person didn't trust banks. Although this saying may be overused, it is a fact that many DIDN'T trust banks back in the day. Also you may find through your research that there were no banks in that particular area in the time of the supposed hiding. Did the guy have shady characters living in his home...maybe a son who was a known thief? Was there children running around, who might get into things they were not supposed to get into? Did the guy own slaves? Was it a time of war when enemy raiders were going through, plundering? There are many reasons a person could have for burying, or otherwise hiding their valuables. Can you think of any? Can you match any of the reasons with the hider in your lead?

OPPORTUNITY: I can't imagine many situations where a person would never have an opportunity to be alone, even if only for a short time. Is anyone NEVER alone? Was your supposed hider under the constant watch of a caretaker? Was he bedridden? Do you have good reason to believe he would never have had the opportunity to hide money/valuables?

Is your lead in the form of a story? If so, can you find where some of the events actually happened? Can you find where they PROBABLY happened? Can you find that they NEVER happened?
Whether you have found evidence that your story is true, or you have found that it is nothing but legend, you have successfully researched a treasure lead, and now you know whether or not you should go looking for it. But in your search for this treasure, don't ever stop researching. You still might find that cold hard proof.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A History of Mining on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska - Grab it through Amazon!

[Curtis]

Great post KK!

In my T-hunting I have found your scenarios just what I do...if I can find some historical data and the story makes sense, start a the court house. Then talk to farmers they are very good mental record keepers - if its happened in their life time they know the facts--and will usually add some no one else knows! Keep up the good work!

Curtis

 

[Tuberale]

Sounds like you have a juris-prudence background. Means, motive and opportunity facets of proving guilt or innocence in law? Just saying.

I won't dispute they are important factors. I believe that judicial records and court cases have good leads available, many with data that was never followed up on, just because metal detectors weren't available at the time. Case in point: an Oregon treasure trove case began with 2 young boys finding a large sum of gold coins hidden in a chicken coop, which they were then hired to clean out. Each boy was given a shiny nickel for returning the cache they found. Later they brought suit against the landowner and property renters. Case was settled out of court. The most interesting information, though, was one neighbor testified there could be more money hidden on the property. His testimony was ruled out of order, and his testimony nearly stricken from the legal record. I kind of suspect there might be more money hidden, just from the dates of the gold coins that were found.

Early treasure hunters were lucky if they owned a wagon rod (re-bar rod) with a wooden handle at one end to probe the ground with. One of the first "metal detectors" around. I'm not putting those methods down, but it took a lot of probing to find much. Those guys WORKED for what they found. I prefer to use my head before I put my headphones on.

 

[Kentucky Kache]

Great post KK!

In my T-hunting I have found your scenarios just what I do...if I can find some historical data and the story makes sense, start a the court house. Then talk to farmers they are very good mental record keepers - if its happened in their life time they know the facts--and will usually add some no one else knows! Keep up the good work!

Curtis

Sounds like you have a juris-prudence background. Means, motive and opportunity facets of proving guilt or innocence in law? Just saying.

I won't dispute they are important factors. I believe that judicial records and court cases have good leads available, many with data that was never followed up on, just because metal detectors weren't available at the time. Case in point: an Oregon treasure trove case began with 2 young boys finding a large sum of gold coins hidden in a chicken coop, which they were then hired to clean out. Each boy was given a shiny nickel for returning the cache they found. Later they brought suit against the landowner and property renters. Case was settled out of court. The most interesting information, though, was one neighbor testified there could be more money hidden on the property. His testimony was ruled out of order, and his testimony nearly stricken from the legal record. I kind of suspect there might be more money hidden, just from the dates of the gold coins that were found.

Early treasure hunters were lucky if they owned a wagon rod (re-bar rod) with a wooden handle at one end to probe the ground with. One of the first "metal detectors" around. I'm not putting those methods down, but it took a lot of probing to find much. Those guys WORKED for what they found. I prefer to use my head before I put my headphones on.

You have to ask why they use means, motive and opportunity to determine guilt or innocents. It's a way of determining whether or not the person actually did what they are accused of.
You can't kill someone without the means, and the same holds true for burying a treasure.
You wouldn't kill someone without a reason, or motive, just as you wouldn't hide your money without a good reason. What if your cache story said a person hid their money for one specific reason, like raiders. Then if you found out that raiders did come through that area at that specific time, you've proved motive. You have good reason to believe the story, or at least that part of it. If there were no raiders, and if it wasn't a time of war, you have a pretty good reason to doubt that motive, and the story.
And if the suspect never had opportunity, you can rule him out. In fact, you can use the process of elimination in all three of those. You can do the same thing in treasure hunting.
If your lead has all these - means, motive, and opportunity, is that proof positive the treasure was buried? No. But it's a step in the right direction toward proof.
I have no experience in law, but I have quite a bit in cache research. If I could show you some of the things I've found in research, you would understand why I believe this, especially when it comes to motive.

 

[Tuberale]

You have to ask why they use means, motive and opportunity to determine guilt or innocents. It's a way of determining whether or not the person actually did what they are accused of.
You can't kill someone without the means, and the same holds true for burying a treasure.
You wouldn't kill someone without a reason, or motive, just as you wouldn't hide your money without a good reason. What if your cache story said a person hid their money for one specific reason, like raiders. Then if you found out that raiders did come through that area at that specific time, you've proved motive. You have good reason to believe the story, or at least that part of it. If there were no raiders, and if it wasn't a time of war, you have a pretty good reason to doubt that motive, and the story.
And if the suspect never had opportunity, you can rule him out. In fact, you can use the process of elimination in all three of those. You can do the same thing in treasure hunting.
If your lead has all these - means, motive, and opportunity, is that proof positive the treasure was buried? No. But it's a step in the right direction toward proof.
I have no experience in law, but I have quite a bit in cache research. If I could show you some of the things I've found in research, you would understand why I believe this, especially when it comes to motive.

I was agreeing with you Kentucky. Means, motive and opportunity are all compelling factors, as you state above.

"If your lead has all these - means, motive, and opportunity, is that proof positive the treasure was buried? No. But it's a step in the right direction toward proof."
But my training and experience have been in writing, and the 5 W's still are the keys to research IMO: Who, What, Where, When, Why. Answer all those questions, and the cache will come to you.