Stories Detectorists Tell

The Portable Antiquities Scheme Database is reliant on finders (metal detectorists included) telling the truth about the circumstances surrounding the discovery and subsequent handling of artefacts. Readers may remember this story posted in November on a publicly available metal detecting forum, accusing the PAS of allowing finds in their care to "go missing". A forum member by the pseudonym of "Prasutagus" wrote (Mon Oct 31, 2022 11:41 pm):

I had a Saxon silver cross disappear after handing over to my FLO. Not only that, but they had the audacity to then tell me, after further review, from studying the remaining pictures of the cross, they believed it was actually less than 300 years old and closed the treasure case. It was 100% Saxon. I was speechless. This happens way more than people think.

At face value, this is a pretty disturbing account. Using the name "Prasutagus" (a king of the Iceni) suggested to me that he was a Norfolk or Suffolk detectorist. While the FLOs of Norfolk and Suffolk did not respond to my request for information and a copy of the photo of this object, Professor Michael Lewis kindly replied with the following information (pers comm. email dated ):

This find was made in Essex, not Norfolk or Suffolk. The finder posted it to Philip Wise (copied in), but it did not arrive, hence an identification/report was made from the images. I am not really sure how we (on the archaeological side) can be responsible for its loss given the finder posted it... The Crown has disclaimed its interest.

So that explains that, if this is true, the detectorist is caught out telling a distorted version of the truth, the fault here would be the British Post Office (pretty crap these days by all accounts). But also his own, Philip Wise is neither the Coroner, FLO or Treasure Registrar. So why is this hapless numpty posting what he says is a valuable Anglo-Saxon pendant and therefore potential Treasure to him in the first place? Secondly did he really just pop it into an envelope and post it instead of in a proper package hand delivered by a courier? Or not take it himself? There are not many parts of Essex that are outside an hour's drive from the Museum. 

Also note that there is not a mention here of the fact that (unless he has a copy of a protocol assigning sole ownership to him) until an inquest decides otherwise, the joint owner of this item is the landowner. 

From the evidence of Professor Lewis's statement, this (anonymous) detectorist makes up a story, missing out the important facts, and publishes it in order unjustifiably to besmirch the name of the (Essex) FLO. With what looks like being a lie. Who'd trust a grabby British metal detectorist about anything?

Note, though, no photo of this "Anglo-Saxon Cross" has been seen by me. How did the Museum get the photo without getting the object, was it sent on in advance, or was it sent after the loss in the post?