Not logged in. Login - Register

All new registrations need to be approved manually. After registration, mail me at tyblossom at aol dot com.
ChaseChat is available for Smartphones via Tapatalk, Download the app at After installing CLICK HERE to add the forum to Tapatalk.

Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Woo Hoo Barbara Anderson
Yesterday, 10:41 PM,
RE: Woo Hoo Barbara Anderson
(Yesterday, 07:04 PM)Brakinbad Wrote: And let me be clear. Forrest would have taken a loss on tangible property via abandonment back in 2010. The loss would have reflected the value of the chest. Now that he has it back in his possession, he would need to inventory the assets and file appropriate tax forms.

That sounds like one of the more reasonable and realistic ideas.

I agree that it 'could' call into question the existence of a finder. It really does seem like something is being covered up aside from just the finder, but I'm not jumping to any conclusions.

I can think of at least two more ideas for why Fenn might have needed to inventory the chest even if there is a finder:

(1) To relieve the finder of taxes by accepting the return of his abandoned property and in turn gifting it to the finder. Such a step would require an appraisal and documentation of the contents in addition to filing tax forms. All of that could be kept private.

(2) According to some published national park rules, if the chest was found and retrieved from public property, and proper procedures were followed, the finder would be obligated to return the chest to park officials at which point they would have sought out the original owner (Fenn obviously) and returned it to him to in turn release it the the finder. In that case the office in the photo might be that of the park/forest supervisor.

Number (2) was my first prediction. However, it seems clear that the office in the photo was in New Mexico where Fenn could visit safely and comfortably, not in Wyoming, though perhaps it could be done remotely due to the pandemic. Also, the proper procedures would require disclosure of the finder and the location. Those could be kept private by the park authorities, but perhaps subject to a FOIA request. No evidence has surfaced yet to support this idea, and someone's FOIA to Yellowstone came back negative. I haven't heard of any FOIA request to other national parks or forests.

If someone is sure of their solution, rather than just talk about it, why not make a simple FOIA request and see if the chest was turned in at the national park or national forest where they think the chest was found? It's free, does not require a lawyer, it can be done online in most cases, and it's perfectly within any citizen's rights, no questions asked. See

Interestingly, Fenn made statements, once on a taped interview and recently to someone directly, that the information would eventually come out. That would probably not be consistent with there being no finder because why would he admit that a deception would eventually come out? But it would be consistent with scenario (2), presuming that the anonymity of the finder and the location of the find could only be held in secret by authorities until they were required by law to disclose them, i.e. when someone sends a FOIA request to the proper park.
7 hours ago,
RE: Woo Hoo Barbara Anderson
I believe he had it in his backyard as I've said...I wonder if anyone has checked for it. I would imagine that if it was found that they wouldn't say.
© Stephanie

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Barbara the lawyer from Chicago admin 30 2,745 06-25-2020, 02:19 AM
Last Post: Beavertooth

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)
Contact Us | ChaseChat™ - Treasure Chat | Return to Top | | Lite (Archive) Mode | RSS Syndication