Live data from Hacker News

Ancient Iraqi Artifacts Imported By Hobby Lobby to be Forfeited

justice.gov

101–110 of 168 posts

Re: Ancient Iraqi Artifacts Imported By Hobby Lobby to be Forfeited

#101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, antiquities from this part of the world that are sold on the black market have higher stakes. The DOJ makes it clear Hobby Lobby acted very suspiciously/maliciously. If you're at a yard sale where you're asked to meet the seller at the back to see the "real goods" and pay in unusual ways, you're exposing yourself. Let's not forget, the president of Hobby Lobby isn't naive when it comes to the law... he navigated…

The DOJ makes it clear that they broke laws. I'm not disputing that. Clearly they did something wrong, and are paying a pretty penny for it (pocket change for the CEO, but almost twice what they paid overall). And as I said, I'd like to think I'd have acted better. People are making good points in this thread. I'm not blindly trying to defend a company I know very little about; just trying to poke some holes in the g…

>"is it possible that, since this was a process that probably spanned multiple transactions and weeks, he had some help that was less than competent? Doesn't absolve him of anything, and it didn't! His company was fined. But it pokes a hole in the "mustache-twirling" narrative.

From a 2015 article in the Guardian:

"Patty Gerstenblith, a professor of law at DePaul University who is an expert in cultural heritage, confirmed to the Guardian that she was asked by the Green family to explain to them how import controls for ancient antiquities worked in 2010 – a year before the tablets arrived in Memphis. Gerstenblith said that she went to some lengths to set out for them the potential pitfalls.

“I read them the riot act,” she told the Guardian. “I explained to them how the system worked in the interest of trying to discourage them from doing anything illegal. I knew they were building a collection, so I was concerned they might be doing something they shouldn’t, even out of ignorance of the law.”[1]

The "moustache twirling narrative" goes something like this:

"The reason that he thinks the Green family might have broken international law or avoided ethical standards in the antiquities trade is to promote their overtly Christian beliefs — beliefs they fought for and won at the Supreme Court last year in their landmark case on the religious freedom of employers with regards to government mandates on healthcare.

“In their hearts, [I think] they think they’re doing the right thing,” Al-Azm said. “They look at this cultural heritage and they have a close affinity to it. They feel that this is something that touches their deep core beliefs, and they see it in an area or a place that is dangerous or unstable. So they can justify this sort of activity by saying I’m doing something good for posterity.”[2]

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/oct/28/hobby-lobby-...

[2] https://thinkprogress.org/experts-believe-hobby-lobby-stole-...

Re: Ancient Iraqi Artifacts Imported By Hobby Lobby to be Forfeited

#102
post #50
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's how the "justice" system works in America. Giant crime by a party with a lot of money? DOJ will just slap you with a relatively small fine. Bag of weed? You're going to jail, buddy!

The difference is that in drug cases, there is almost always overwhelming proof that someone committed a crime. Nobody has a kilo of cocaine shoved down their waistband and doesn't know about it. In a case like this, maybe it's a "giant crime," or maybe it's just a customs violation. Unless you have proof of the entity's state of mind, it's impossible to tell the difference.

The overwhelming majority of cases never go to trial. Too often the accused can't afford to make bail, can't afford to be stuck in jail for potentially years while they wait for trial, can't afford competent legal counsel, and end up pleading guilty to whatever crime they're accused of whether they're guilty or not. The types of appeals that you mention in your other comment are not representative of the bread and butter of the US criminal legal system, which is plea bargains.

Re: Ancient Iraqi Artifacts Imported By Hobby Lobby to be Forfeited

#104
I had a summer job at Hobby Lobby roughly a decade ago. The founder has an autobiography for sale by all the registers that we used to hate-read in the breakroom over our depressing, windowless lunch breaks. Our favorite bit was the part where he justified not having bar code scanners on the registers by saying that employees take more pride in their work (like sticking price stickers on 1000's of items) when they do it by hand.

Re: Ancient Iraqi Artifacts Imported By Hobby Lobby to be Forfeited

#105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The DOJ makes it clear that they broke laws. I'm not disputing that. Clearly they did something wrong, and are paying a pretty penny for it (pocket change for the CEO, but almost twice what they paid overall). And as I said, I'd like to think I'd have acted better. People are making good points in this thread. I'm not blindly trying to defend a company I know very little about; just trying to poke some holes in the g…

>"is it possible that, since this was a process that probably spanned multiple transactions and weeks, he had some help that was less than competent? Doesn't absolve him of anything, and it didn't! His company was fined. But it pokes a hole in the "mustache-twirling" narrative. From a 2015 article in the Guardian: "Patty Gerstenblith, a professor of law at DePaul University who is an expert in cultural heritage, conf…

That Think Progress piece was an interesting read, thanks for sharing and giving some more context to this story.

Re: Ancient Iraqi Artifacts Imported By Hobby Lobby to be Forfeited

#106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have a source for this one? I'd haven't heard this before.

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/jul/01/...

Your "article" says they were offering it unknowingly. This does not support OP's implication that they dropped it to protest Obamacare.

Re: Ancient Iraqi Artifacts Imported By Hobby Lobby to be Forfeited

#108
post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So how did this go down, in your mind? The President of Hobby Lobby got his eyes on some shiny objects, then was told to make the check out to Al-Qaeda, and decided that it was worth funding terrorism to get the items he'd been lusting after? Also, would you arrest someone who purchased an item at a yard sale that had been stolen at one point? Come to think of it, should I be grilling every yard sale proprietor to ma…

Your yard sale analogy is a little off, unless the yard sale is in the middle of an active war zone. How do you think this went down? "Hey, let's buy this stuff from Iraq. Iraq, Iraq... where have I heard of that before? Hmm, isn't that where those ISIS fellows are? Well, never mind, they probably have nothing to do with it." There's also the issue of inconsistent punishment. If you or I had done this we'd probably b…

> "Hey, let's buy this stuff from Iraq. Iraq, Iraq... where have I heard of that before? Hmm, isn't that where those ISIS fellows are? Well, never mind, they probably have nothing to do with it."

To be fair, it looks like all this happened in 2010—ISIS wasn't in the nation's consciousness back then: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=isis

I'm not saying it was a good idea.

Re: Ancient Iraqi Artifacts Imported By Hobby Lobby to be Forfeited

#109
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference is that in drug cases, there is almost always overwhelming proof that someone committed a crime. Nobody has a kilo of cocaine shoved down their waistband and doesn't know about it. In a case like this, maybe it's a "giant crime," or maybe it's just a customs violation. Unless you have proof of the entity's state of mind, it's impossible to tell the difference.

"Intent to distribute" charges get slapped on people an awful lot without much hard proof.

because the law has defined "intent to distribute" purely by the amount of drugs you have. They don't have to actually prove intention to distribution.

Really it should just be called "possession of a lot of drugs."

The reason the laws were changed was that it was tough to convict someone if you had to actually show they intended to sell.

Re: Ancient Iraqi Artifacts Imported By Hobby Lobby to be Forfeited

#110
post #42

Per Hobby Lobby statement: https://newsroom.hobbylobby.com/articles/artifact-import-set... "At no time did Hobby Lobby ever purchase items from dealers in Iraq or from anyone who indicated that they acquired items from that country." lol. Don't ask don't tell, amirite? It's funny to see HL running through the motions defending themselves on this one. Surely nobody there is stupid enough to think that we actually buy…

It's not about people buying their excuses. They don't expect you to. They don't care.

It's about giving talking points to "defenders".

Post reply on HN