Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 28 29 [30] 31 32 ... 51   Go Down

Author Topic: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund  (Read 617430 times)

don hirth

  • T1
  • *
  • Posts: 38
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #435 on: September 30, 2013, 02:56:22 PM »

Hello, Jeff and other members.
I like the sound of your speculation regarding one (or more) working partners uniting with
TIGHAR to prove the Niku hypothesis on the NEXT VENTURE! I believe it was already 'tough going'
financially prior to the nonsense suit by Mr. Mellon. Surely, one or more entities can be joined
with TIGHAR to make this happen. (I'm getting pretty old.)
dlh
 
Logged

Ted G Campbell

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 344
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #436 on: September 30, 2013, 08:05:36 PM »

Yep, Jeff you are a wordsmith!
Ted Campbell
Logged

Joe Cerniglia

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 284
  • Niku in a rainstorm
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #437 on: October 01, 2013, 04:51:59 AM »


Then, we'd "know".  It's either there - or it isn't.  If not, new hypothesis, move on.


Not finding the airplane or definitive pieces of it would not, in the opinion of some, including Dr. King, invalidate the Nikumaroro Hypothesis.  See Tom King's article for reasons why.

Joe Cerniglia ~ TIGHAR #3078ECR   
Logged

Nancy Marilyn Gould

  • T1
  • *
  • Posts: 47
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #438 on: October 01, 2013, 07:56:31 AM »

While there are many differences in this lawsuit vs. the lawsuit against TIGHAR, I thought this might cheer up TIGHAR members if only because the billionaire filing the lawsuit saw the case dismissed and was ordered to pay the organization's legal expenses:
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/09/sheldon-adelson-defamation-lawsuit-97564.html

Quote of note:
“We’re obviously very, very, very pleased. This is an instance where David stood up to Goliath...

Stanley said the ruling was a win not just for the NJDC, but for other organizations that backed down to Adelson over fear of expensive lawsuits.

“This is a great instance where money doesn’t win,” Stanley said.

Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5897
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #439 on: October 01, 2013, 09:20:23 AM »

Tom King's view may well be the thinking man's way to freedom in all this; for me (not always a thinking man...) it is compelling, but I have a sense of remaining doubt.  ...
So with all due respect to the hard work and rational intelligent view of the aggregate story ferreted out by Tom King, Ric and others with him - for me it remains that for a 'victory', someone still needs to produce 'airplane stuff' that is definitively of Earhart's or Noonan's belongings or ship.

Tom King and I have fought about this (and other aspects of the Earhart Project) for years. Sometimes our disagreements get pretty heated but, so far, neither of us has sued to try to force the other to accept an opinion.  I think Jeff's description is a fair assessment of the realities involved in widespread public acceptance of the Nikumaroro Hypothesis as the definitive solution to the Earhart Riddle.  Tom correctly argues that historical mysteries are seldom solved with "smoking guns" and any "proof" that relied exclusively on a single but apparently compelling piece of evidence would be far weaker than one that was supported by preponderance of circumstantial evidence from disparate avenues of investigation.  But Jeff is also correct in pointing out that what convinces scholars is not necessarily what convinces the general public.  For proof of that one need only take note of the thoroughly debunked baloney that much of the public still believes and the abundance of solid scientific fact that many reject.  Anyone seeking widespread acceptance of a solution to the Earhart mystery must accept that it is going to take something simple - something I dubbed years ago as "the Any Idiot Artifact."

I guess most of us have our pet beliefs, biases and articles.  What stands out the most strongly for me (YMMV, of course) are two artifiacts that could be of Electra origins and that are in-hand:

1) Dural 'skin' bearing pre-war stamped markings and evidence of early-style brazier-head rivets - this is something I have chased a bit myself as intriguing.  I have wondered whether it might have been a cover over the aft-RH larger window in the Electra's lavatory, which was covered over in Miami before departure for the second attempt.  It is light material (.032") and bears indications of light-weight stiffeners being attached with #3 rivets in an 'expedited' manner (hand patterned / hand drilled, etc.) and thereby appears to have been no more than a light cover riveted over a fairly large aperture.  The mystery of how that window was covered is intriguing - especially given that such a piece of metal as this artifact would turn up where Earhart was being searched for.

2) A shard of plexiglass of the right contour and thickness to match the cabin windows of the Electra.  Plexiglass does not appreciably change dimensions and shape with time after the initial heat-forming, and this piece does bear some specific qualities that are consistent with Electra windows part number 40552 - interesting.

There are others - the 'dado' panel among them.  It is consistent with such panels long installed in the cabins of airliners and exectutive transports.  Earhart's airplane was austere, but these are still useful sound-damping and FOD prevention closure items at the floor level.

These are interesting artifacts and they deserve further discussion, but not here.  When I get a minute I'll start a new topic called "Smoking guns in our pocket?"
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5897
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #440 on: October 01, 2013, 07:34:00 PM »

I still favor the lavatory over-sized window cover as a possibility for reasons I have stated.

But - I'm wandering off string - just wanted to alert you and others to that string.

Yes, you're wandering off string and that's not where it fits.
Logged

Ted G Campbell

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 344
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #441 on: October 01, 2013, 08:42:44 PM »

If I understand the status of the current Tim Mellon vs. TIGHAR/Ric Gillespie law suite there are two remaining issues that need to be litigated:
   Fraud
   and
   Negligence Misrepresentation

I am not an attorney but there seems to be something missing in the defense's i.e. TIGHAR/Ric's argument in getting this case completely dismissed.

If the charges of " Fraud and Negligence ..." are applicable then one would have to assume that Niku VII did not happen as a stand alone venture but did take into account consideration of earlier endeavors in the search for AE plane.

Let's take the "Fraud" charge first:

The very fact that earlier expeditions (going back to the original visit to Niku - 1980?) and the finding of circumstantial evidence of AE's presents on the island kept adding to the data that resulted in the "Niku hypostasis".  This continued artifact recovery would suggest that "something" happened on Niku that involved AE.

The sharing of the above data in an open forum discussion of the circumstantial discoveries leading to numerous - including Niku VII - expeditions to the island seems to allay any reasonable suspicion of a "fraud" on the part of TIGHAR/Ric.  That is, if it wasn't for the knowledge gained and publicly shared from the previous expeditions, future expeditions would not have been planned, financed and executed.  Where is the "fraud" in suggesting that since we found a shoe sole we go back and see if we can find a heal?

One expedition's findings/speculation builds to justify the next expedition.  Was Niku VI any different leading to Niku VII no!  The later was predicated on the earlier - something such as Nessi II-  suggested we might be in the right area.  Where does "fraud" come into play in this discussion to explore further?

Let's next take on  "Negligence Misrepresentation"

It seems that if  "Negligence ..." was at play here one would have to assume that TIGHAR/Ric had abandon its historic demonstrated exploration methodology - expand its explorations based upon what was found earlier and gone off into an unprecedented direction of exploration -e.g. shoot the dice, I don't think so.

In the most recent exploration of the Niky VII project the side scan "anomaly" only goes to prove the exploratory criteria implemented by TIGHA/Ric is a reasonable research methodology.  Where is the "negligence" in this approach?

In closing I find the charges of "Fraud and Negligence Misrepresentation" totally at odds with TIGHAR/Ric's methodology concerning the search of AE and FN's final hours on this earth.

Ted Campbell
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5897
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #442 on: October 01, 2013, 08:58:49 PM »

All of the legal documents associated with this case are now on the TIGHAR website at Mellon Lawsuit Documents.  They are self-explanatory.  I would suggest that you pay special attention to Judge Skavdahl's ruling on the Motion to Dismiss.  He goes to some trouble to explain exactly why he ruled the way he did on each of the counts.  His writing style is excellent and not overly legalistic.
Logged

Randy Conrad

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 387
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #443 on: October 02, 2013, 12:58:55 AM »

Ric....

  First of all I wanted to congratulate you on part of the dismissal of this case. Upon reviewing the documentation handed down by the court, I found it rather disturbing that Mr. Mellon merely was attacking you per say in this matter, and not TIGHAR. Afterall, there are many members including myself, who were not on this trip, but are a part of this organization and this team. We are all in this together! However, if the court and Mellon wants to drag TIGHAR through the coals, then legally they should have asked us all to appear in court. Secondly, I found it rather wierd that Amelia's full legal name was never used when Mellon submitted to the court in this action. What happened there. And finally two things...If you're gonna play the gambling table and put your money down...two things are bound to happen...You're either gonna win or you're gonna lose. Its no different in any aspect of life. I admired Mellon for wanting to give this money over for research, but he took a big big chance. But, again he handed over the money willingly. I don't believe Ric has forced any of us to shove our life savings over. Finally, I'm really baffled that this case went as far as it did. Afterall, this expedition that Mellon supposedly was a part of was in international waters. Not in Casper, Wyoming. Food for thought!!!!
Logged

manjeet aujla

  • T1
  • *
  • Posts: 41
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #444 on: October 02, 2013, 09:11:45 AM »


It's prolly true that even  though the Niku hypothesis is the strongest one out there, it will still require an 'idiot artifact' to clinch it. But this 'idiot artifact requirement' actually helps Tighar in the lawsuit. Any reasonable judge would have a very, very difficult time saying, yeah that is an Electra wing, AE was here, unless he is shown an 'idiot artifact' in the form of a very compelling coral shape. Even then there would always be the risk to his reputation that next year somebody mounts an expedition, retrieves the artifact, and it is .... a piece of coral.

Logged

Monty Fowler

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1078
  • "The real answer is always the right answer."
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #445 on: October 02, 2013, 10:14:32 AM »

John Masterson is da man. In addition to being an exceptionally good host.

And that's all I've got to say about that.

LTM, who tries to pick the winners,
Monty Fowler, TIGHAR No. 2189 CER
Ex-TIGHAR member No. 2189 E C R SP, 1998-2016
 
Logged

Irvine John Donald

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #446 on: October 02, 2013, 10:15:26 AM »

I have said it before and will say it again.  Just differently. The judge's decision in this case, either guilty or not guilty, is a win win for TIGHAR.

If he says "not guilty" then TIGHAR wins.  If he says "guilty" then TIGHAR also wins. 

How?  Any judge that can look at any collected evidence and say "Guilty because you did find Amelia" will create so much news media attention and public interest that the subsequent fund raising would pay off the fine.

But lets face it.  Normally the two parties in a case would call expert witnesses in the subject field to testify for their clients.  Wouldn't you say that TIGHAR is the expert in this field?  If TIGHAR cannot claim that Amelia has been found then how can a judge take that position.  Sure Mr. Mellon will say he has experts in video analysis but the stuff in the video is coral.  If there is anything there its encrusted with coral so as to be NOT 100% identifiable. 

No judge is going to say Amelia was found.  Even if a judge did it then still has to be proven that TIGHAR knew this at the time Mr. Mellon was making his decision. 

I believe that the worst that can happen here is that court costs don't get covered for TIGHAR.

All in my humble opinion.
Respectfully Submitted;

Irv
 
Logged

Jeff Buttke

  • T1
  • *
  • Posts: 10
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #447 on: October 02, 2013, 10:34:30 AM »


One question I have about this all is whether or not Mellon's court filings themselves can be used as evidence?

The mutually exclusive nature of his claims would appear to show that he neither believes nor can prove either theory.

For example If he believes or can prove TIGHAR withheld the finding of the aircraft he cannot be in good faith when he further claims TIGHAR was unable to locate the aircraft due to negligence. --

Simple fact is if he believes or can prove one of the theories the other theory is ruled out.  By alleging both he has to be making at least one  claim he knows not to be true. (I think we all agree it is probably both claims)

Whether due to lack of logic or an attempt at a "second bite of the apple" , I know it would have an affect on me if I were judge or jury.

So does anyone know if the court fillings can be used as evidence ?
Logged

Harry Howe, Jr.

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 576
  • Nuclear Physicist(Ret) Pilot(Ret) Scuba(Ret)
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #448 on: October 02, 2013, 10:56:05 PM »

I believe it was a character in one of the Bards plays who said it best  "First, Kill all the lawyers."
No Worries Mates
LTM   Harry (TIGHAR #3244R)
 
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 5897
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: TIGHAR Legal Defense Fund
« Reply #449 on: October 03, 2013, 08:35:39 PM »


The mutually exclusive nature of his claims would appear to show that he neither believes nor can prove either theory.

For example If he believes or can prove TIGHAR withheld the finding of the aircraft he cannot be in good faith when he further claims TIGHAR was unable to locate the aircraft due to negligence. --

Simple fact is if he believes or can prove one of the theories the other theory is ruled out.  By alleging both he has to be making at least one  claim he knows not to be true. (I think we all agree it is probably both claims)

If you will read Judge Skavdahl's ruling I think you'll find that he has addressed the very issue you raise.  The charge of negligence has been dismissed with prejudice.  Mellon must prove "fraud" and "negligent misinformation".  The legal meanings of those terms are explained in the ruling.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 28 29 [30] 31 32 ... 51   Go Up
 

Copyright 2021 by TIGHAR, a non-profit foundation. No portion of the TIGHAR Website may be reproduced by xerographic, photographic, digital or any other means for any purpose. No portion of the TIGHAR Website may be stored in a retrieval system, copied, transmitted or transferred in any form or by any means, whether electronic, mechanical, digital, photographic, magnetic or otherwise, for any purpose without the express, written permission of TIGHAR. All rights reserved.

Contact us at: info@tighar.org • Phone: 610-467-1937 • Membership formwebmaster@tighar.org

Powered by MySQL SMF 2.0.18 | SMF © 2021, Simple Machines Powered by PHP