Odyssey Marine Article...

[mariner]

Jeff,

My memory was that Odyssey had found the Sussex off the coast of Andalucia, and when I go back and check the announcements made at the time, they do say that was the case. So where do you get the information that the wreck is 10 miles SW of Gibraltar? Could you post something that clarifies the wreck's location?

Mariner

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[jeff k]

Mariner... I did mean SE. That's the second time I posted SW by mistake. That would put her south of the first "H" in "High Seas" on that map. Back in 2005, Odyssey use to post hydrolants showing where they would be working. These hydrolants are available on-line, but Odyssey does not post there anymore.

http://www.nga.mil/MSISiteContent/StaticFiles/MISC/warn/dm_a.html

The M/V Odyssey went out in Nov. to prepare the site, and the Odyssey Explorer started work in Dec. I believe it was early Jan. 2006 that they were forced to leave.

HYDROLANT 2086/2005(52). STRAIT OF GIBRALTAR.
1. SURVEY OPERATIONS 0700Z TO 1900Z DAILY 15 THRU 20 NOV
BY M/V ODYSSEY VICINITY 36-xx.xN 005-xx.xW.
TWO MILE BERTH REQUESTED.
2. CANCEL THIS MSG 202000Z NOV.
(I x'd-out the minutes.)

 

[mariner]

Jeff,

Thanks for the clarification.

If we assume for the moment that the wreck is in International Waters, why didn't Odyssey just go to the Federal Court in Florida at the time and apply for the arrest of the wreck, given that it had the agreement with Britain? This is a necessary step in the process, and would have deterred Spain from interfering with the recovery.

I just cannot understand why Odyssey would have ignored this huge boost to its profits and cash flow for so long, if the site does contain what it claims. Odyssey's relationship with Spain was not bad in those days immediately after the discovery, and it was only Andalucia that was kicking up a fuss.

Mariner

 

[jeff k]

Mariner... Since Odyssey had an agreement with the Brits an arrest was not necessary. Besides, the Admiralty Court cannot protect a shipwreck outside of its jurisdiction. It can only rule on and protect artifacts brought into its jurisdiction. I didn't know that until recently.

 

[mariner]

Jeff,

Two things:

Firstly, I thought that part of the Admiralty process was to confirm that a supposed owner giving a salvor rights to recover a wreck was, indeed, the sole owner and had the right to enter into such an agreement. Otherwise any salvage company with an agreement with somebody who claims to own a wreck could go ahead and proceed with the recovery without authorization from a court.

Second, I thought it was your contention that the Sussex lies in International Waters, Gibraltar having failed to assert its rights to a 12 nm territorial sea. If this is the case, then an Amerian court would have jurisdiction, particularly if the British did not insist on classifying the Sussex as a Sovereign Vessel. My impression all along was that the Sussex was a British vessel lying in Spanish waters, but your recent information suggests that this is not the case.

Mariner

 

[Cablava]

" Maybe if the wimps in England got off their butts " That should work well in the UK. Now you want to alienate anyone born on the other side of the Atlantic from the former British colony that you live in. Clearly you went to the Greg Stemm School of Diplomacy, how to make friends and influence people.

Jeff get over it.

Feeling sorry for yourself, like gloating is a total waste of time.

When you are not influenced by you commitment to OMEX you post really good information, stick to it.

OMEX played a dangerous game and lost. Now lets hope they are in an new frame of mind to get out and do some good work which I am sure they are capable of. They have the data and they have some good aging equipment, plus they have some funds, so lets see them capitalise on the good things they have. Not continue to tip money into an bottom less pit. They could have bought real State of the Art equipment had they done this properly.

Now lets see if the subject vessel "The HMS Sussex" has anything on it or even if it is the correct vessel. On that point OMEX have got some good data so if this one is not it then I am sure there is another one waiting in the wings to fit the bill.

If OMEX are to have any respect from the TH community, and even more important the investors who pay for their games. Lets see them perform, it will be about time, they are in the finding business not the law business.

On another point lets not have any more dribble about the various South American countries the silver was originally removed from. Sure I feel that they should benefit from this windfall more than anyone. But I am sure if you were to look hard enough into those countries at that time and before, there were many atrocities carried out by the various incumbents. The Romans did it, the British did it, the Spanish did it and the Americans (Iraq), Russians (Georgia) and Chinese (Tibet) are still doing it. Its just at different levels and I am sure we do not know more than 10% of what really go's on around the world every day.

 

[jeff k]

Mariner... The main reason to arrest a shipwreck is to protect it from other potential salvors. There's no law that says someone has to arrest a shipwreck. It's voluntary. The U.S. Courts can protect a shipwreck within its territorial waters, but have no means to protect a wreck in international waters. A good case in point is the Titanic. Russian salvors have already salvaged thousands of artifacts from her.

Cablava... Since you're in the salvage business you should know that a win for Odyssey is a win for YOU. I think it's time you started looking past your nose. This case is not over by a long shot. It will go all the way to the Supreme Court if need be. You should also read the Gibraltar newspapers. I do every day. The opposition party has said a lot worse than I did about the current party in power. Sometimes appeasement does not work. Neville Chamberlain found that out the hard way.

 

[mariner]

Jeff,

I think that the legal protection offered by an Admiralty award is as important as physical protection.

Mariner

 

[MORE AND BEYOND OSSY]

Mariner... Since Odyssey had an agreement with the Brits an arrest was not necessary. Besides, the Admiralty Court cannot protect a shipwreck outside of its jurisdiction. It can only rule on and protect artifacts brought into its jurisdiction. I didn't know that until recently.

Jeff why did Odyssey arrest the Victory Just in case? It's a Sovereign war ship !
Ossy

 

[4theMoney]

Why wouldnt you want to arrest any potentially valuable wreck. Until it is proven soverign immune, you have to protect your find.
Also, It still seems that there is question if the Mercedes qualifies since it had private cargo..............Also, it seems to me that there is a distiction as to if it qualifies as a wreck site or just contents of cargo that were dispersed. It seems that the answers are subjective depending upon the point of view.

Ps....I still think that if everyone wants to fight over who owns the treasure it should go back to Peru. Leave the wreckage and cannon alone to preserve Spains heritage or whatever, but its ill gotten gains should not belong to Spain. The Spanish Stole them and behaved badly. Now they still behave badly by claiming somthing that doesnt belong to them. If it was the bell off a Spanish ship or a cannon that would be different. To me it is like returning a bag of cash back to a bank robber if they dropped it.

 

[mariner]

To me it is like returning a bag of cash back to a bank robber if they dropped it.

Well the recommendation of the magistrate covers most of the points you raise, and infers that it was Odyssey who had robbed the bank. And if the recommendations are accepted, it won't be Odyssey who chooses how the loot is returned to Spain. The Court will decide that.

Mariner

 

[Saturna]

Maybe it's time for Odyssey to secretly move the coins again, maybe to the Cayman Islands this time.





Jay

 

[mariner]

Jay,

Maybe that's why they have been producing all those replica coins. About to work the old switcheroo.

Mariner

 

[4theMoney]

To me it is like returning a bag of cash back to a bank robber if they dropped it.

Well the recommendation of the magistrate covers most of the points you raise, and infers that it was Odyssey who had robbed the bank. And if the recommendations are accepted, it won't be Odyssey who chooses how the loot is returned to Spain. The Court will decide that.

Mariner

Like I said....It is subjective dependind upon your point of view..... In min it was Spain that is the bank robber.

And....SWR......The people of Peru were forcefully subjected to Spanish rule. It just lasted much longer than the Nazi occupation of europe.

 

[MORE AND BEYOND OSSY]

The Spanish Stole them and behaved badly.

The Spanish stole them?

You keep avoiding the issue that Peru was a Spanish colony for HUNDREDS of years before these coins were lost at sea. You probably are also in the dark about the Inca wars, and other atrocities happening in Peru before the Spanish conquest.

I hate to keep pointing this out to you, but you keep skirting around real history.

4themoney how can you compare what happen in 1500's to the Nazi war in Europe in the 1900's. The Romans caused more blood shed and conquered most of Europe including England and stayed longer than the Spanish in the America's, your not whining about them.
Selective memory ? What did the early colonials do to the red Indians? have you given their land
back yet and are you going to give back California to Mexico? when did the US abolish slavery? they say People in glass house's shouldn't throw stones !
Ossy

 

[4theMoney]

The Spanish Stole them and behaved badly.

The Spanish stole them?

You keep avoiding the issue that Peru was a Spanish colony for HUNDREDS of years before these coins were lost at sea. You probably are also in the dark about the Inca wars, and other atrocities happening in Peru before the Spanish conquest.

I hate to keep pointing this out to you, but you keep skirting around real history.

4themoney how can you compare what happen in 1500's to the Nazi war in Europe in the 1900's. The Romans caused more blood shed and conquered most of Europe including England and stayed longer than the Spanish in the America's, your not whining about them.
Selective memory ? What did the early colonials do to the red Indians? have you given their land
back yet and are you going to give back California to Mexico? when did the US abolish slavery? they say People in glass house's shouldn't throw stones !
Ossy

It is quite obvious as I have stated that opinions are subjective depending on your point of view And that yours will not change any more than mine will.
Spain was only in the new world to secure riches in order to be a dominate power in europe. In its quest many were killed or enslaved during Spains forceable occupation. It was no different than the nazi regime.
English colonys were not much different. They were here looking for riches and many starved during winter because they spent more time looking for gold than ensuring their survival through winter.
So do I think there was much of a difference between Spain's colonys and those of the rest of europe......No, not really. They were all wrong and they were all greedy, and that is the only cultural heritage that Spain can claim.
Like I said before, if everyone wants to make this about right and wrong, the Spain should give back ALL of the heritage that it stole and still has. Just as you have your strong beliefs, I have mine.
BTW....what difference is there in protecting the cultural heritage of spain from the 1500's and not Those of Peru? I just dont get the statement of " We conquered them so that makes it alright'.... I would only hope nobody invades Spain, takes what they like and kills most of the population with the argument "If we conquer them its alright...."

 

[jeff k]

Odyssey PR...

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Odyssey-Motion-Granted-to-bw-15493609.html?.v=1

 

[mariner]

4theMoney,

I haven't studied in any great depth the pre-conquest Incas, but I have looked at the Aztecs. When Cortes arrived in Mexico, he found Montezuma and his generals far exceeding the Nazis in the way they treated some of the other Mexican nations. Live, public human sacrifices in which the still-beating heart was removed from body after body was extremely common. Cortes estimated that on one day alone, the Aztecs sacriced 20,000 victims in this manner.

It is true that Pizarro and DeSoto committed acts in Peru that we would all find unacceptable these days, but man's inhumanity to man was not restricted to the Spanish, or to the 16th century. There is genocide and suppression going on today in parts of the world.

As my fellow Liverpudlian, John Lennon, wrote "Let's give peace a chance."

Mariner

 

[MORE AND BEYOND OSSY]

God bless John Lennon, Imagine the World living in Peace, we can only dream !
Mariner, I've been a Beatles nut since the 60's, George was my favorite.
Cheers, Ossy

 

[Philvis]

4theMoney,
The biggest difference between the English and Spanish colonies is that the English colonies proved to be the more successful of the two as far as governmental stability. The English colonies nutured the colonists more to create a stabilized government that succeeded once they gained their independence. There has not been a stable government in South America since the Incas.

If a country is going to be able claim "treasure" that is 200-500 years old, then I do think the means in which the treasure was obtained should be taken into account. If the natives of the area were enslaved to mine the gold and silver that should count for something. If cultural objects of the people were seized and melted down to obtain the gold and silver, that should be taken into account. When a country can look back far enough on a wreck to claim it, they need to realize that the history of how it was obtained is very relevant. If a country uses the argument that they ruled the area of the "treasure's" origin, they are essentially saying "finder's keepers." In that case, whoever finds the treasure should have rights to it.

Being the North American Indians civilization was at a different stage/level than their South American counterparts, the experience was different. There wasn't tons of treasure to be hauled away. Just land to be taken. If there were North American Indian treasures spirited away and lost at sea, I would definitely say the same thing. I also feel that various tribes still should pursue land that was stolen from them through treaties made by our American government that was renigged upon.

I am not trying to beat up the Spanish and call them unholy, etc. I just simply think that if they want to claim spoils of their rule, those who had the spoils stolen from them should be able to make a claim. Personally, I think it should be finder's keepers. It's not like it was a recent wreck. It would be like Russia claiming they have rights to that treasure in Afghanastan that was luckily hidden away successfully.