tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3425507272157287074.post24105610757124399..comments2024-03-09T14:18:50.979+01:00Comments on ARCAblog: The Legal Case of the Mummy Mask of Lady Ka-nefer-nefer at the St. Louis Art Museum Ignites Discussion on Museum Security Network after Courthouse News Reports US Court Rules US Government Could Not Prove TheftEdgar Tijhuishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06122194472344222217noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3425507272157287074.post-2346648927907058632014-06-18T21:17:26.326+02:002014-06-18T21:17:26.326+02:00The CN article is inaccurate. The appeals court di...The CN article is inaccurate. The appeals court did not rule that the U.S. government failed to prove that the mask was stolen from Egypt. Instead, the appeals court ruled that the lower district court did not abuse its discretion by denying the government’s post-dismissal motion asking for leave to file an amended civil forfeiture complaint. That amended complaint, if accepted by the lower court, contained the allegations that the mummy mask was stolen property. Therefore, the substantive case involving whether the mask was stolen was never litigated. That is what prompted appeals court judge Diana Murphy to write a concurring opinion that agreed with the dismissal of the Ka Nefer Nefer case on procedural grounds, but addressing a caution because of the substantive matters raised but never addressed by the case: "Museums and other participants in the international market for art and antiquities need to exercise caution and care in their dealings in order to protect this heritage and to understand that the United States might ultimately be able to recover such purchases." See http://culturalheritagelawyer.blogspot.com/2014/06/eighth-circuit-rules-in-case-of-ka.htmlRick St. Hilairehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12454468681431304027noreply@blogger.com