Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Can the blaze be pre-determined...?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by Zapster View Post

    If you're drawn to that area, I think Icebox Canyon is more "Fenn-y" as a WWWH. It still feeds you to the same area. I just don't care for the Lamar Ranger Station as a home of Brown (for instance) since I'm a firm "no structures" guy.
    even as a put in point? as in put in below the HOB then no paddle up your creek for north using HOB as a starting point...? and interesting fact, between Cooke city and Soda Butte is Warm creek picnic area, It's right where Warm Creek dumps into Soda Butte Creek. If I ever head back out there maybe I'll start from Cooke City stop at Warm Creek and have a picnic eat a sandwich and have a grapete soda.. wonder if they sell them in Cooke City. Bonus Factoid... 212 from Cooke city to 89 and on up to Gardner is kept open year round so the folks in Cooke city can shop for supply's and that means that Lamar is accessible in the winter time meaning that its a place where Forrest could go any time of the year and walk right to the box, in fact Yellowstone forever has all kinds of winter classes and outings including hikes up to the wolf pens. there's also a really decent dirt road that runs up behind the ranch through a firing range (Rangers only) above the ranch and takes you a good half way up to the pens. I've been out there and people HAVE driven up that road and parked above the firing range and they were not park employees.
    Last edited by 1keyword; 07-04-2019, 03:19 AM.

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by khan View Post

      ask them, they'll tell you, they WILL take the treasure
      Well I wouldn't ask them for one, two I don't think that they would have legal grounds unless i was dumb enough to tell them i found it in the park, and... If they did and it was in my possession and they took it with out knowing whether or not it was found in the park then it would be an illegal seizure of personal property.. some cops do what they want and are crooks sure, But that's not what were talking about here they cant just assume that it was taken from park grounds just because your in the park any more than they can assume that your phone, your car or anything else on your person was stolen from the park or was found there. they need to see you do it or you need to admit to it being found there. they can say whatever they want in the news tell park visitors what ever they like but if they cant prove you took it from park property they have no case and it is not illegal to posses treasure, a famous one or not. if they confiscate it they cant hold it if they cant prove you committed a crime, infact the abandoned property laws trove laws none of that apply's unless or until they prove that it was left in the park or you admit to it. there is no law stating that it's illegal to transport gold and or treasure through Yellowstone and Forrest has not said that it's hidden there. maybe it was found in Gardner, or Cooke City or West Yellowstone. If there is no proof of any law broken it's not legal for them to take it from you and they will have no grounds to do so that will hold up in a court of law period. gold isn't a controlled substance like coke it's not illegal to posses, Its not like cash where you can assign an immediate cash value to it..??? so why would they take it, because the park superintendent stated that if the treasure were found in Yellowstone that it would belong to the park? the words "hey ranger guys check out this treasure that i found in Yellowstone" would never come out of my mouth if i found it... catch me pulling it out of the dirt before i put it in my back pack and witness it then they totally have a case.. Because of a thing called Law.

      There was a hit man for the cartels who was arrested in 2013, he committed several murders here in California 36 in total across the United States. the cops new it was him but had they arrested him with no certain evidence to convict him they would just have to let him go, they have 48 hrs to charge you with a crime or they HAVE to let you go so they had nothing conclusive and did nothing, he continued to go go free until he was busted in Alabama for murder and then confessed to the other crime's (Jose Manuel Martinez ).. were not talking murder were talking treasure and they still have to follow law and have a case.. no proof of any law broken then no case regardless of what the truth is. Like Fenn said what if there isn't an issue... If i find it I'm not telling a Ranger I found it in the park, and just like with any other cop from any agency I'll sit there with them for 48 hrs keep my mouth shut until they have to release me and my property and or find one of any number of attorneys that would be chomping at the bit to take on what would most likely become a high profile case, Pro Bono with damages, the feds know that and there not going to waste there or your time if they have no case.. possession of treasure is not a crime.
      Last edited by 1keyword; 07-04-2019, 03:14 AM.

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by ksfromKS View Post
        If the poem contains all the information needed to locate the treasure chest, and the blaze is a clue, then I would suspect it can be (predetermined).
        I agree, but want to add. The poem should contain all information needed to know where to go, within several steps, before leaving home. This applies whether one believes the treasure is indicated at the end of verse 4, compared to the end of verse 6. I am convinced that one uses the complete poem (therefore, the chest referenced at the end of verse 4 is not as commomly interpretted).

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by 1keyword View Post

          Well I wouldn't ask them for one, two I don't think that they would have legal grounds unless i was dumb enough to tell them i found it in the park, and... If they did and it was in my possession and they took it with out knowing whether or not it was found in the park then it would be an illegal seizure of personal property.. some cops do what they want and are crooks sure, But that's not what were talking about here they cant just assume that it was taken from park grounds just because your in the park any more than they can assume that your phone, your car or anything else on your person was stolen from the park or was found there. they need to see you do it or you need to admit to it being found there. they can say whatever they want in the news tell park visitors what ever they like but if they cant prove you took it from park property they have no case and it is not illegal to posses treasure, a famous one or not. if they confiscate it they cant hold it if they cant prove you committed a crime, infact the abandoned property laws trove laws none of that apply's unless or until they prove that it was left in the park or you admit to it. there is no law stating that it's illegal to transport gold and or treasure through Yellowstone and Forrest has not said that it's hidden there. maybe it was found in Gardner, or Cooke City or West Yellowstone. If there is no proof of any law broken it's not legal for them to take it from you and they will have no grounds to do so that will hold up in a court of law period. gold isn't a controlled substance like coke it's not illegal to posses, Its not like cash where you can assign an immediate cash value to it..??? so why would they take it, because the park superintendent stated that if the treasure were found in Yellowstone that it would belong to the park? the words "hey ranger guys check out this treasure that i found in Yellowstone" would never come out of my mouth if i found it... catch me pulling it out of the dirt before i put it in my back pack and witness it then they totally have a case.. Because of a thing called Law.

          There was a hit man for the cartels who was arrested in 2013, he committed several murders here in California 36 in total across the United States. the cops new it was him but had they arrested him with no certain evidence to convict him they would just have to let him go, they have 48 hrs to charge you with a crime or they HAVE to let you go so they had nothing conclusive and did nothing, he continued to go go free until he was busted in Alabama for murder and then confessed to the other crime's (Jose Manuel Martinez ).. were not talking murder were talking treasure and they still have to follow law and have a case.. no proof of any law broken then no case regardless of what the truth is. Like Fenn said what if there isn't an issue... If i find it I'm not telling a Ranger I found it in the park, and just like with any other cop from any agency I'll sit there with them for 48 hrs keep my mouth shut until they have to release me and my property and or find one of any number of attorneys that would be chomping at the bit to take on what would most likely become a high profile case, Pro Bono with damages, the feds know that and there not going to waste there or your time if they have no case.. possession of treasure is not a crime.
          You might want to look at " 1st amendment audit " on youtube. Rights are violated on a daily basis by police including 4th amendment. I'm not saying you are wrong other than they would take the chest if you were in National Park and lied to them. Once in court you would either have to continue lying (not recommended) or tell the truth and the park police (rangers) would still hold the treasure till situation was totally litigated. As some parks have stated they believe if treasure was hidden on park property it is considered owned by park. (Pandoras Box)



          This is your best recourse if you don't lie and they still will not give back your property.

          https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclope...he-police.html

          Comment


          • #80
            I think the key here would be to not say anything regarding the location, not telling is not lying its just not saying, So I would just not say, if i don't say then I don't incriminate myself. If no one see me grab it then no crime is committed and If no one witnesses my taking possession then no one can get me in trouble but me and my own big mouth. no law broken no proof of a law broken then no cause for seizure... I can legally own a 10X10X6 box of gold and carry it on my person any where I chose I would think... crooked cops and or a corrupt system don't represent true law because if they did they couldn't truly be corrupt you cant have both the letter of the law and corruption. I don't think that any of the arguments regarding lost vs abandoned vs trove etc apply to anything in this chase until your A: caught in the act of physically removing it from the ground and or picking it up from the ground or B: incriminating yourself verbally by stating you found it in the park and are in fact going to leave the park with it without informing the park superintendent and surrendering it too him after making said statement. other wise there is no way to prove that it isn't your personal property.. If you don't say anything is it a prosecutable and enforceable offence. The DA's office drops charges all the time because they don't have the supporting evidence to make a case that can be tried.

            that's the nut of my argument.. does enforcement have merit without evidence and if a tree falling in the woods make a sound if no one is there to hear it? so we could argue the fact that yes it does if it creates sound waves but sound is not sound waves, sound is the creation of the interpretation of sound waves relayed to the brain when said sound waves hit the ear.. no witness no admission of guilt no law stating that I cant be in possession of a 10x10x6 inch box of really neat looking stuff that doesn't in fact have anymore value than the clothes on my back until a value is assigned by an appraiser (other than a few hundred dollar in coins taken at there face value) my point is that a law enforcement officer doesn't have the training to look at the contents and assign a value to it.... I'll be back I cant even talk about this anymore until I have some sleep..

            don't lie just don't tell them and if asked just don't tell them some more.. and keep not telling them..

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by 1keyword View Post
              I think the key here would be to not say anything regarding the location, not telling is not lying its just not saying, So I would just not say, if i don't say then I don't incriminate myself. If no one see me grab it then no crime is committed and If no one witnesses my taking possession then no one can get me in trouble but me and my own big mouth. no law broken no proof of a law broken then no cause for seizure... I can legally own a 10X10X6 box of gold and carry it on my person any where I chose I would think... crooked cops and or a corrupt system don't represent true law because if they did they couldn't truly be corrupt you cant have both the letter of the law and corruption. I don't think that any of the arguments regarding lost vs abandoned vs trove etc apply to anything in this chase until your A: caught in the act of physically removing it from the ground and or picking it up from the ground or B: incriminating yourself verbally by stating you found it in the park and are in fact going to leave the park with it without informing the park superintendent and surrendering it too him after making said statement. other wise there is no way to prove that it isn't your personal property.. If you don't say anything is it a prosecutable and enforceable offence. The DA's office drops charges all the time because they don't have the supporting evidence to make a case that can be tried.

              that's the nut of my argument.. does enforcement have merit without evidence and if a tree falling in the woods make a sound if no one is there to hear it? so we could argue the fact that yes it does if it creates sound waves but sound is not sound waves, sound is the creation of the interpretation of sound waves relayed to the brain when said sound waves hit the ear.. no witness no admission of guilt no law stating that I cant be in possession of a 10x10x6 inch box of really neat looking stuff that doesn't in fact have anymore value than the clothes on my back until a value is assigned by an appraiser (other than a few hundred dollar in coins taken at there face value) my point is that a law enforcement officer doesn't have the training to look at the contents and assign a value to it.... I'll be back I cant even talk about this anymore until I have some sleep..

              don't lie just don't tell them and if asked just don't tell them some more.. and keep not telling them..
              I'm not saying you are wrong in most of what you are stating. You do have certain rights that are 4th amendment rights and 5th amendment rights. Which are very difficult to exercise in certain situations. The situation (scenario) is being in a National Park with a treasure that some National Parks have stated they believe the treasure is owned by them if found on their property. I'm not saying they are correct. I'm just trying to show you the types of things police have done and will do to get what they want regardless of a citizens rights. Forrest did state what he was told was the rules if treasure was found in National Park and that was the treasure should be brought to superintendent. So why not do that ?

              https://www.nps.gov/aboutus/lawsandpolicies.htm
              Last edited by TreasureCodex; 07-04-2019, 12:02 PM.

              Comment


              • #82
                I think he had to say that because it wouldn't be write to tell people to break the law and not take it to the superintendent.. TTOTC where he has a run in with his teacher and has to face double jeopardy with his dad says more than anything to me.. I have a thread going on reddit that has some good point's in it from some people, I think seattle_battles may be an attorney and has made some good points that thread is here

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by 1keyword View Post
                  I think he had to say that because it wouldn't be write to tell people to break the law and not take it to the superintendent.. TTOTC where he has a run in with his teacher and has to face double jeopardy with his dad says more than anything to me.. I have a thread going on reddit that has some good point's in it from some people, I think seattle_battles may be an attorney and has made some good points that thread is here
                  Yes, Double jeopardy is quite a Pandora's Box.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    right, tell the truth mostly?

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by 1keyword View Post
                      right, tell the truth mostly?
                      I'm not really even disagreeing with you. Who the heck would want their prize confiscated by known agencies that are as corrupt as the day is long ? That would be what I would testify about under that scenario. So let's say finder does as you are stating and finds treasure but does not get it confiscated and does not turn it into superintendent . Then does an interview on national television and explains that they did not feel comfortable handing treasure over to park because there was an open threat by them to steal the treasure from finder "under the color of law". Because that is how I view the statement from official that said if treasure was on federal land that it is owned by the federal government. And that is not true whatsoever.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        the park superintendent clearly stated that if found in Yellowstone that it would be confiscated and would become government property period.. don't say a thing and later on when asked by the community same thing don't tell.. my thinking is it's a place private to Forrest where he wants to be interred.

                        look at what this guy found.. Click image for larger version  Name:	O9TZS9O.jpg Views:	1 Size:	207.8 KB ID:	107265
                        and this guy..
                        Click image for larger version  Name:	v87guvxfya831.png Views:	1 Size:	521.3 KB ID:	107266

                        hmm... Ya new plan. I would not divulge the location if and when I found it.
                        Last edited by 1keyword; 07-04-2019, 02:43 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by 1keyword View Post
                          the park superintendent clearly stated that if found in Yellowstone that it would be confiscated and would become government property period.. don't say a thing and later on when asked by the community same thing don't tell.. my thinking is it's a place private to Forrest where he wants to be interred.
                          It would take more than the Superintendent's wants or opinion for such a theft to become fulfilled. There would have to be Judges just as willing to do a 1983 against finder. Big Pandora's Box opened wide. The ill's of our society on display.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            I agree, I think with Fenn's backing and the history of the chase that It would become a high profile case..

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by 1keyword View Post
                              I agree, I think with Fenn's backing and the history of the chase that It would become a high profile case..
                              Here are the laws that shows the Superintendent is wrong when he states the treasure automatically becomes government property.

                              https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-id...2_122&rgn=div8

                              (3) Found or impounded property shall be inventoried to determine ownership and safeguard personal property.

                              (4) The owner of record is responsible and liable for charges to the person who has removed, stored, or otherwise disposed of property impounded pursuant to this section; or the superintendent may assess the owner reasonable fees for the impoundment and storage of property impounded pursuant to this section.

                              (c) Disposition of property. (1) Unattended property impounded pursuant to this section shall be deemed to be abandoned unless claimed by the owner or an authorized representative thereof within 60 days. The 60-day period shall begin when the rightful owner of the property has been notified, if the owner can be identified, or from the time the property was placed in the superintendent's custody, if the owner cannot be identified.

                              (2) Unclaimed, found property shall be stored for a minimum period of 60 days and, unless claimed by the owner or an authorized representative thereof, may be claimed by the finder, provided that the finder is not an employee of the National Park Service. Found property not claimed by the owner or an authorized representative or the finder shall be deemed abandoned.

                              (3) Abandoned property shall be disposed of in accordance with title 41 Code of Federal Regulations.

                              (4) Property, including real property, located within a park area and owned by a deceased person, shall be disposed of in accordance with the laws of the State within whose exterior boundaries the property is located.


                              Comment


                              • #90
                                so here's a valid question.. remember his Meets and Bounds Comment's regarding chain lengths and distances, there are some Interesting bounds relating to roads, that old system is still used to some degree and one thing it still used for (measured in feet now im sure) Is railroad right of ways and Highways.. highway 212 is an interstate highway, I'm pretty sure the highway department and and national parks are two separate entity's. all highways have easement's on either side of the road, so if this is indeed governed by a separate government agency possibly with different laws similar to BLM VS national parks and Highway 212 is a federal highway as its an Interstate then couldn't the laws be different regarding retrieval on highway right of way vs park land the same as the laws governing BLM land are different than the laws governing the National Park system? 212 isn't the only highway in the park.. but i think it maybe the only one that ends in the park. now how about national historical trails that exceed the bounds of the park such as some of the old stage coach trails, the bannock Indian / Nez Perce I wonder if there governed by there own set of rules or park rules.. or if it's a separate agency.
                                Last edited by 1keyword; 07-04-2019, 03:26 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X