Prison time, felony charges rare for relic looters
Lawyer Blogs
Sentences of probation — not prison time — for a southern Utah mother and daughter who pleaded guilty to illegal trafficking of Indian artifacts last month weren't out of the ordinary.
A 10-year analysis of prosecutions under a law meant to punish artifact looters shows most people convicted never go to prison.
Archaeologist and former academic Robert Palmer has found in his review of cases from 1996 to 2005 that of the 83 people found guilty, 20 went to prison and 13 of those received sentences of a year or less. Another study found only 14 percent of artifact looting cases are ever solved.
Jeanne and Jericca Redd were given probation after pleading guilty to several felonies related to a sweeping federal investigation into grave robbing and artifact trapping in the Southwest.
Related listings
-
Congress to look into Vikings case
Lawyer Blogs 10/12/2009The House Energy and Commerce Committee plans to conduct a hearing next month on the case of two professional football players whose suspensions were blocked by a federal appeals court.Committee Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif., is concerned that the ...
-
Sharp debate at high court over cross on US land
Lawyer Blogs 10/12/2009As the Supreme Court weighed a dispute over a religious symbol on public land Wednesday, Justice Antonin Scalia was having difficulty understanding how some people might feel excluded by a cross that was put up as a memorial to soldiers killed in Wor...
-
Man pleads not guilty to north Dublin murder
Lawyer Blogs 10/12/2009A Dublin man has pleaded not guilty to murdering an Estonian man who died following an attack in a lay-by near Dublin Airport.Twenty-eight-year-old Ian Daly, of Moatview Drive, Priorswood, Dublin 17, today entered his not guilty pleas to murdering Va...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.