Wow. I didn't know they were related.
RED ALERT Lost 3 ft TOS Enterprise found????
- Thread starter CessnaDriver
- Start date
It's a sound argument that the current Jennings family members could be making claims based on family lore and not solid evidence.
But that also could be applied the other way. *IF* Gene had sold it and didn't want it known, then Susan and Majel would only know what he wanted them to know.
But that also could be applied the other way. *IF* Gene had sold it and didn't want it known, then Susan and Majel would only know what he wanted them to know.
But, again, WHY would he sell it? Especially knowing its value to him, both personally and culturally. It was an artifact from TOS which sat on his desk for years. He was clearly fond of it, enough to put out a search for it.
Allow me to play the part of “YouTube Columbo”…
No way The Great Bird sold that model for $5k and then sent out memos requesting it be located and returned.
Question though…was an insurance claim ever filed for the item as “missing / stolen”? If there was such a claim…and if it was claimed as “stolen”, then a police report would have been required. You’ll note Gene never used that term…he described it as “missing”. This being the case, it explains why a police report was never filed.
No way The Great Bird sold that model for $5k and then sent out memos requesting it be located and returned.
Question though…was an insurance claim ever filed for the item as “missing / stolen”? If there was such a claim…and if it was claimed as “stolen”, then a police report would have been required. You’ll note Gene never used that term…he described it as “missing”. This being the case, it explains why a police report was never filed.
Last edited:
asalaw
Master Member
It actually is evidence, but the question is one of the weight of such evidence. Given that they were both very close to GR, I'd give it a lot of weight.
Nor are this Rosa Jennings' alleged statements.
Not to cast aspersions on anyone, but I think it's entirely possible that the model WAS lost/forgotten, and that this $5,000 sale claim was fabricated to lend credence to a legal claim on it.
alensatemybuick
Well-Known Member
What’s the expression, “three people can keep a secret if two or dead”? Well, at least two are dead.
I’m skeptical that Gene sold it for peanuts and wrote that memo as some kind of plausible deniability that he did, effectively forcing the buyer never to reveal it. If the part about Jennings possessing it for decades is true, then it’s pretty clear he didn’t want anyone knowing about it, however he came to possess it. Maybe it was broken apart and he felt GR was better off not seeing it in that state (or crudely reconstructed). Or maybe it was more nefarious than that. We may never know for sure, but if the storage unit can be traced back to him, that may have to suffice as enough of the mystery solved.
I’m skeptical that Gene sold it for peanuts and wrote that memo as some kind of plausible deniability that he did, effectively forcing the buyer never to reveal it. If the part about Jennings possessing it for decades is true, then it’s pretty clear he didn’t want anyone knowing about it, however he came to possess it. Maybe it was broken apart and he felt GR was better off not seeing it in that state (or crudely reconstructed). Or maybe it was more nefarious than that. We may never know for sure, but if the storage unit can be traced back to him, that may have to suffice as enough of the mystery solved.
The first thing I said.
I know, but it needs to be reiterated.
It sounds like heresay evidence. Probably not admissible, in a court of law, in the US. But again IANAL.
Hearsay Evidence - Definition, Examples, Cases, Processes
Hearsay defined and explained with examples. Testimony based on what a witness has heard from another person, of which he has no personal knowledge.
legaldictionary.net
asalaw
Master Member
No, hearsay is a different concept altogether. Hearsay is a statement made outside of court offered in court for the purpose of proving what's said in the statement. It's not, as is often believed, "just someone's word for something."
Then what is it? You have one live person that says the Gene said he didn't sell the model. That is all they could testify to. Sounds like the definition in the link I provided.
asalaw
Master Member
That happens to be an exception to the hearsay rule. If the maker of the out of court statement is dead (or otherwise unavailable), the statement is admissible. But SS's knowledge isn't necessarily confined to something GR said. She could testify from personal, direct knowledge that he never sold it.
Similar threads
