RED ALERT Lost 3 ft TOS Enterprise found????
- Thread starter CessnaDriver
- Start date
Considering the questionable aspects of previous Heritage auctions (*cough*fakephaserfakephaserfakephaser*cough*), nothing would surprise me.
joberg
Legendary Member
In the end, it's going to be lawyers laughing all the way to the bank...
Last edited:
Yeah. I guess the storage unit guys have a better claim on it. Idk. I have a feeling that Roddenberry won't get it back.
Lightning
Master Member
haven't watch the video yet. My understanding is that Storage Unit buyers are "good faith purchasers". They have no liability for anything they buy. Rules about what happens if you buy stolen property unknowingly are strangely foggy, other than that you have committed no crime.
The other issue is if the Enterprise might not actually be stolen. If it's simply classified as lost, that's a whole different thing.
Trek World
New Member
Correct.
The Storage Unit law protection is specific to CA and was passed all the way back in 1982 in anticipation of otherwise tying up the courts with estates, families, etc.
And the fact that Gene wrote the letter in 1979 saying he "loaned it out" automatically means it does not meet the legal definition of "stolen".
Added to that, he was an ex-cop in LA, and yet he never filed a police report. Which would have been required if he had tried to create an insurance claim.
For whatever reasons, Gene never characterized the loss as stolen. It wasn't until after he passed that Majel started openly referring to the model as "stolen".
Trek World
New Member
One more thing to note is that this latest video is an update on the lawsuit only and doesn't contain the whole story concerning how it disappeared and reappeared.
The lawsuit isn't actually about the sale of the model, or the ownership. It is about actions taken by Heritage that were unethical and a violation of Deceptive Practices law with Heritage.
So no one is pointing their finger at Rod. But the model hasn't moved from Heritage since they got it because the refuse to turn it back over to the owners, and they can't legally give it to Rod.
mach7
Well-Known Member
Thanks Jim,
That helps, It does seem, from the paperwork filed, that Heritage at least has the appearance of acting in its own interest, not the clients.
Why am I not surprised.
But they will have their day in court, or settle out of court.
As for the buyers being exempt from liability when buying stolen artifacts in a storage unit, I can understand them not being subject to prosecution for buying stolen property, but I can't believe it transfers ownership from the original, owner, who had it stolen from them, to the buyer of the storage unit. Otherwise it creates a loop hole for "sanitizing" stolen property.
I steal a priceless artifact then hide it in a box in a storage unit. Pay the rent for a period of time, then stop paying. When items in the unit go up for sale I buy them and now I legally own the item I stole.
But as I have said, I'm no legal expert.
That helps, It does seem, from the paperwork filed, that Heritage at least has the appearance of acting in its own interest, not the clients.
Why am I not surprised.
But they will have their day in court, or settle out of court.
As for the buyers being exempt from liability when buying stolen artifacts in a storage unit, I can understand them not being subject to prosecution for buying stolen property, but I can't believe it transfers ownership from the original, owner, who had it stolen from them, to the buyer of the storage unit. Otherwise it creates a loop hole for "sanitizing" stolen property.
I steal a priceless artifact then hide it in a box in a storage unit. Pay the rent for a period of time, then stop paying. When items in the unit go up for sale I buy them and now I legally own the item I stole.
But as I have said, I'm no legal expert.
Well…to be candid, one wonders if the miniature ended up in Roddenberry’s hands the same way that the Star Trek film trims found their way to Lincoln Enterprises, in the first place…
Meaning, without the express permission or knowledge of Paramount.
Meaning, without the express permission or knowledge of Paramount.
Trek World
New Member
Howdy,
It’s crazy, isn’t it?
Definitely not a lawyer on my end (thank the Lord!)… But I have since discovered the “real” reasons behind special laws in certain states.
I think that as a result of Hollywood; there are hundreds of these storage auctions every year. And without this law, the liability for the Storage Unit companies is simply way too high. And that’s why they passed this law all the way back in 1982. It’s been challenged a lot over the years, and it’s been upheld each time. I think that if they could find a way to legally handle the liability while still providing protections in the case of stolen property; they would then refine that law. But who knows?
And I agree with you on the whole “storage unit” loop hole. One of the very earliest videos I ever did about the subject a few years back talked about how I thought the model would eventually be found in a storage unit. Not because I knew it would provide any legal protection - but because it provided ethical protection. Just say you found it in a storage unit and come forward. No one will think you were a bad person. And there is always the potential for a reward. So even if you were the one who put it there in the first place; you wouldn’t have to admit knowing where it came from and who had it.
And in the case of Texas - well…… In Texas, the law allows the customer to be able to bid on their own sale unit. It is considered a public sale and no member of the public is excluded. So that law also hints at why Heritage is a Texas company instead of a California company. People have said for years that they were concerened that some bids on items were made in order to simply drive up the final auction price.
Of course; that’s hypothetical.
alensatemybuick
Well-Known Member
So despite public perception that the model was “returned” to Rod, that is not actually the case? Sorry, the latest video was just too long and too “content-light” to sit through.
I can’t see how it’s an auction house’s job to enforce claims of legal ownership. So, if they failed to deliver on their contractual obligations to those who found it, I don’t understand how they can legally refuse to return the model to them if requested to do so (if indeed they still possess it / the finders have actually requested it back?), and just let the matter of ownership play out *without* the auction house’s involvement. Maybe at this point they’re angling to be compensated for assembling the authentication team / securely storing it, even if they do lose in court.
Sounds like a PR disaster in any case. The public has a short memory though, so there’s no need to weep for the auction house (not that I’d be inclined to).
I can’t see how it’s an auction house’s job to enforce claims of legal ownership. So, if they failed to deliver on their contractual obligations to those who found it, I don’t understand how they can legally refuse to return the model to them if requested to do so (if indeed they still possess it / the finders have actually requested it back?), and just let the matter of ownership play out *without* the auction house’s involvement. Maybe at this point they’re angling to be compensated for assembling the authentication team / securely storing it, even if they do lose in court.
Sounds like a PR disaster in any case. The public has a short memory though, so there’s no need to weep for the auction house (not that I’d be inclined to).
Would should have had a 24/7 RPF eBay watch for this to come up over the years and bought it before anyone knew it was ever there and things would have been very different. We blew it guys. Hold heads in shame. Not too late for the K-7 though. Volunteers?
Trek World
New Member
Agreed!So despite public perception that the model was “returned” to Rod, that is not actually the case? Sorry, the latest video was just too long and too “content-light” to sit through.
I can’t see how it’s an auction house’s job to enforce claims of legal ownership. So, if they failed to deliver on their contractual obligations to those who found it, I don’t understand how they can legally refuse to return the model to them if requested to do so (if indeed they still possess it / the finders have actually requested it back?), and just let the matter of ownership play out *without* the auction house’s involvement. Maybe at this point they’re angling to be compensated for assembling the authentication team / securely storing it, even if they do lose in court.
Sounds like a PR disaster in any case. The public has a short memory though, so there’s no need to weep for the auction house (not that I’d be inclined to).
And yes, Heritage still has the model. Their first answer to the the court once the lawsuit was filed said that they are in an “impossible” situation. Namely, they say they can’t give the model to REI because they have no written agreement that allows them to do that. And then they say they can’t give it back to the sellers because they don’t believe it is legally theirs.
Sigh……. The really sad thing about this entire situation is that the original agreement with the sellers was signed and agreed to by everybody. It fell apart when they said they had to amend the agreement with then new stipulations on signing over ownership to them and let them rescue it for REI, when the money would change hands, changing the finders fee to a “Gratuity” (which means they didn’t legally have to honor giving the sellers any money at all) as well as how much money they wanted to keep.
The original lawsuit literally says : give us the $500K and we will give Rod the model. So ironically, if they had simply done what they had all agreed to do, then the lawsuit would never have happened. A lot of people still think that the issue is about money, it’s not. It’s about punitive damages cause by violating the Fair Trade laws and insisting that the model be turned over to them “for free” so that Heritage would appear to be hero’s that saved the day.
I’m surprised they still have the press release up on their website from April; because it was the first piece of legal documentation that they had a changed the deal between the time they signed it in March and then their press release in mid-April.
This needs to be settled asap; Heritage will lose a significant amount of good will when the contracts, depositions, and evidence get splashed across the internet headlines.
They’ve strongly contested contents added as exhibits in the recently amended lawsuit. They don’t want the public to know that the agreements with each seller included gag orders that the sellers could never talk about the outcome of an deal; that the sellers were routinely told they were not allowed to talk to “anybody” about the process of the auction, release, and settlement of any deal.
Heritage told the court that the documents were exposing sensitive business practices that they considered confidential. The court refused the objection and the documents are now in all the public records. This is going to start another “me too” movement in the auction house community.
Since the lawsuit; I’ve been regularly contacted by several big private collectors that have their own horror stories to tell. And not just with Heritage, both other auctions as well. But in each case; they decided to simply take their business elsewhere. And these folks are all in the wealthiest areas areas of Beverly Hills; and they collect - they do not buy and sell. This is where almost all of the high end merch ends up going because their value proposition is well beyond that of us. Ask yourself, “who could afford about $2M for a Phaser and Communicator?”
Isn’t it funny, that the auction of the largest selling items in recent memory was given to Juliens when Heritage had done such a good job with the Greg Jein auction the year before?
These collectors have patently refused to even talk with the press, and especially any interaction with the Star Trek Community. So they specifically do not trust the people that you and I would. I love the folks that Heritage used for Authentication. And the folks (many the same people) used by the Smithsonian for the last restoration. I have contact info from most of our “production heroes”. I trust them - and I believe them. And I don’t waste their time.
The private collectors Do Not believe them or respect them. Every one of those who reached out to me in the past year did so as a result of my being considered an “outsider”. I simply tell them they’re right. I’m just a nobody who got the opportunity during the pandemic to start asking questions about things that didn’t make sense to me. Prior to these past few years, I have had no experience, tribal knowledge, or even the slightest conversations with anyone involved in Trek. And my last fan encounters were the 80s conventions. After that; nothing. Watched each new show each week and went on with my life.
This year, I had the pleasure of talking to various people who officially had some ties to the 3FT model. People who I could prove they had physical possession of the model - or that they were eyewitnesses to an event in its past. After putting out my journey laying this all out; I contacted them all once more just to check. And sure enough, every single one of them said that no one had talked to them about the model or their experiences when they were within arms reach of the model. No one talked with the auction unit sellers, Susan, the Hollingsworth family, or the BHI historian who maintains the history website for BHI.
Sacket and Roddenberry both have 100% reiterated many times over the years that the model was delivered to Robert Abel’s team at one of their physical locations. Yet instead of anyone actually double checking with her about what she knew, they talked to a person who worked with Robert Abel and were told the exact same thing that has always been said - namely, one one saw the model ever at Robert Abel’s.
They are correct; none of them had actually seen the model. But the reason was that it was delivered to Abel’s team so that BHI could pick the model up. Thus, it “was never here”. Also, people say that Howard Anderson handled the related work on preparing the final footage. But there is no real documentation supporting that. In fact, the only documentation that we have seen concerning Anderson was that Desilu shifted the majority of the optical work to Film Effects of Hollywood after Anderson repeatedly missed deadlines on footage. And there’s no record of them ever dealing with Trek ever again after the series ended.
Did they have an involvement? Perhaps; but there’s not a single document anywhere that can substantiate that. The only houses who had physical possession of the model and film *that we can prove* was Multiplex, BHI, and CFI. No other documentation has been provided.
And recent comments about the work that was done in preparing the Beta communicator for auction have been ridiculed along with an offer (for money of course) “to do the job right.” The offer was a good one and can stand on its own. But the collectors cited that to me as yet another reason they just don’t trust us. The criticism and ridicule that preceded the offer showed them yet another case of the Trek community attacking another member of the community and disparaging them.
We REALLY have to get better at maintaining an even relationship with others. Lots of things are being sold from the Pop Sci museum; which just shows that these items are going to be swept away from public view. And all because they don’t trust us at all.
alensatemybuick
Well-Known Member
As one nobody to another, I have to wonder just who is it you’re referring to that you think I trust as much as you do?
Most of us have to resist the urge to show off our modest collections. But I totally get those with particularly valuable items who don’t dare. Lots of kooks out there in fandom, not all of whom are harmless (and who wants to find out the hard way which are which?).
Trek World
New Member
You are so right! I think it prudent for these folks to not want their names, addresses, or items in their collection to be publicly known. And I think that the greatest safety risk for them isn't fandom - it's justnut jobs in general.As one nobody to another, I have to wonder just who is it you’re referring to that you think I trust as much as you do?
Most of us have to resist the urge to show off our modest collections. But I totally get those with particularly valuable items who don’t dare. Lots of kooks out there in fandom, not all of whom are harmless (and who wants to find out the hard way which are which?).
In my case, I generally trust anything that I hear from any of the folks that were present at the April 1st authentication meeting. There's been plenty of group photos showing who they all were. I think my respect has grown out of appreciation for the work they continue to do after all these years. I won't name them all since I said I had a blanket trust for them. But they include people like Doug, Mike & Denise, Darren, Gary, etc.
Very sad how this is all turning out. Would have loved to see the model restored like it's big brother and displayed somewhere near it In the Smithsonian. But sadly it's looking less likely or at least very very far in the future that it will ever happen.
alensatemybuick
Well-Known Member
BTW, how does one square that with this press release:
Last edited:
Similar threads
