Another UK Museum Artefacts Case Cover-up: Bloomsbury Apparently Screws Over Metal Detectorists Again

Here is a question unanswered by the UK's totally useless Portable Antiquities Scheme that I published on 04/10/2023 08:30:

"PAS, What's Happening in the Preston Museum Artefacts Case?"

    Nothing to see here, move along   

According to a letter received by the NCMD, the Finds Liaison Officers, Pauline Clarke and Alex Whitlock are again "now accepting finds" on behalf of the PAS Lancashire and Cumbria. Readers are also informed that:

The present police investigation is ongoing and a great many of the finders [and landowners? PMB] have recently been informed of the successful recovery of items linked to this investigation.

What does this mean? An arrest was reportedly made in December 2022 ('More on Empty Storeroom Shelves' PACHI;  thePipeLine ', Arrest in Preston Museum Missing Treasure Investigation' December 22, 2022.  

The news broke in November 2022 and concerned items missing/lost by Lancashire FLO and/or LANCUM, several hoards stored during the Treasure process "and many, many, valuable single items". Allegations were made that in one case the finder [and landowner] on being informed of the loss were asked to  "keep it quiet", and that "the thefts are thought to have been occurring for a period of over a decade and it's all been hushed up!".

I have been given the (to be accurate, alleged) name of a person arrested when some "objects were found". There has been precious little further information since December. Neither is it clear if the "found" items mentioned in the letter to the NCMD are those relocated in December, or fresh ones. In the light of the recent discussions about items missing from the Bloomsbury headquarters of the British Museum, we may note the fresh significance of this text cited in my earlier post (Post by geoman » Sat Nov 26, 2022 3:44 pm):

It would appear that the system of keeping quiet has been to protect reputations and perhaps the guilty. Often the explanation has been that items have gone astray and are missing without any hint of them actually stolen by a third party There have always been hints of malpractice in the academic world with experts allowed to peruse museum store rooms and collection in the pursuit of their research and so on. Naturally some will have had sticky fingers and to preserve reputations cover ups seem to have been the norm. Proving what has gone on is very difficult as the museum establishment will simply close ranks.

It is time for the PAS to come clean and explain their version of what actually is going on.  When do they anticipate we will hear of any charges pressed, or whether the case is dropped? 

That was two years ago. Since then, silence from the PAS and its so-called "liaison officers" (who do nothing of the kind). Meanwhile, a group of guys has their prison sentences extended for not handing over found some Leominster Treasure, yet in the case discussed above (and goodness' knows how many others that have been hushed up), guys who did hand over their (and the landowners') finds have had the objects nicked while in the custody of UK museum authorities. In metal detecting circles, the name of the suspected sticky-fingered individual is known. It is known to the PAS too, no doubt. I have one of the aggrieved artefact hunters writing to me this morning, disgusted: "Looks like he got away, CPS [Criminal Prosecution Service] not charging with it". Like the guy reportedly trading papyri stolen from the storerooms of Oxford University, the bloke flogging off stolen ancient gems from the storerooms of the Bloomsbury edifice itself, this person probably comes from a different social group compared to the ones who have swapped their muddy boots for prison bars. What is the key, PAS?

Let's see something on your website explaining this to the law-abiding metal detectorists of the Kingdom. Why not explain how that "law" of yours actually works in practice? 

.