Lancashire and Cumbria missing finds

[dondo]

The statement says that a man has been 'arrested' pending further enquiries. It doesn't say that he has been 'charged'.

There would be no benefit in people knowing his identity at this stage anyway.

I know?

[Majorp]

Don't know how you got told day after raids yours been found as up to yesterday they still not id them . I been waiting on both my hoards , I was the first person to find out about this and I was the whistle blower , nearly 6 months after he was arrested still don't know if mine been found and by looks of it he will get away with it as if he not been charged in 6 months on bail that's in a week as after 6 months will get nfa.

[Majorp]

Nearly 6 months and still not been told if mine have been found they still not id them . My email couple days ago .

[Mancave-man]

This is still on-going even after all these years and is with the CPS. See below from the Police in Preston.


The investigation in this case was concluded in ~May 2024, and since then the casefile has been with the Crown Prosecution Service to consider charges. Due to the gravity of the allegations this is a matter which the CPS must make a final determination on, rather than a police evidential review officer. The CPS will apply first an evidential test, to decide whether or not they believe the evidence gathered by Police presents a ‘reasonable prospect of conviction’ (i.e. they believe that it is more likely than not that a jury, hearing the evidence, would find an accused guilty of the crime). If they believe that there is a reasonable prospect of conviction, they will then apply the public interest test (i.e. whether it is in the public interest for a criminal court to render judgement versus an out of court disposal – or even, potentially, for no further action to be taken).



The matter has been with CPS for some time because of the complexity of the case – both in terms of the nature of the evidence that is relied upon, and the specific parts of the case that are in issue. We continue to liaise regularly with CPS to drive progression, and to liaise with LCMS to give heritage professionals access to the artifacts to try and mitigate the impact on the PAS/TAct timelines.[/highlight)

Regards to all,

M-m

[Alan Black]

... whether it is in the public interest for a criminal court to render judgement versus an out of court disposal – or even, potentially, for no further action to be taken.

Well if they do not prosecute then it is no deterrent for others to steal from museums.

[Captaindan]

I totally agree, they must be prosecuted to show the whole community that the rules are there and must be upheld.
The irritating part is the time scale for sure. We all know that the Police are greatly understaffed and yet they performed their duties and recommendations in good time, makes one very suspicious if the alleged perpertrators ( and I have no knowledge of them ) have certain connections which need to be protected, ie families with connections or gangs from a certain section of society............

I do hope not, and that this can be sorted out and publicised as any suspicion always points at us detectorists and the possibility that we could be underhand, not the so called establishment which simply must be trusted.

Dan.

[Macsen Wledig]

They have to do a "test" to evaluate whether or not it's in the public interest to prosecute thieves. No issue throwing a Grandmother in jail for a spicey tweet for a couple of years but not so sure when it comes to proesecuting actual criminality