Jump to content



Photo

Couple finds 400-year-old skeleton, gets $5,000 bill

ontario postholes forensic anthropologist property owners legally responsible

  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 Hum

Hum

    totally wAcKed

  • 61,785 posts
  • Joined: 05-October 03
  • Location: Odder Space
  • OS: Windows XP, 7

Posted 17 June 2013 - 22:29

A Canadian couple who recently stumbled upon a 400-year-old skeleton is now saddled with a $5,000 bill,  :huh:  the Star reports.

Two weeks ago, Ken Campbell of Sarnia, Ontario, came upon some bones while digging postholes in his backyard. His wife, Nicole Sauve, encouraged him to unearth the rest of the skeleton.

Ontario police, who cordoned off the area, called up forensic anthropologist Michael Spence to examine the site. Spence told the Star that the skeleton is likely that of a 24-year-old aboriginal woman who died in the late 1500s or early 1600s. Spence then contacted the Registrar of Cemeteries, which told Sauve that she and Campbell would have to hire an archeologist to examine the rest of the backyard—at their expense.

According to the Star, property owners are legally responsible to pay for such an assessment "if human remains are found on their land."

Stuck with a $5,000 bill, Sauve appealed to the mayor of Sarnia but has yet to get a clear answer about whether the government will pay. According to the Star, she might be able to make a request to the Registrar of Cemeteries to cover the costs.

Sauve told the Star that people have been telling her if they wind up in a similar situation, they won’t risk getting a bill by telling the authorities about their finds.

“This is awful,” said Sauve. “God forbid you have a murder victim, and you cover them up.”

source

Attached Images

  • skelly.jpg



#2 Growled

Growled

    Neowinian Senior

  • 41,508 posts
  • Joined: 17-December 08
  • Location: USA

Posted 18 June 2013 - 03:07

Moral of the story...if you find a body in your backyard just throw some dirt on it and never tell anyone. It'll be much cheaper that way.



#3 Garnet H.

Garnet H.

    astropheed

  • 1,604 posts
  • Joined: 08-December 11
  • Location: Sydney, AU

Posted 18 June 2013 - 21:52

Moral of the story...if you find a body in your backyard just throw some dirt on it and never tell anyone. It'll be much cheaper that way.

 

I think the real moral of the story is that it's ridiculous that that is exactly what you should do.



#4 Spike2013

Spike2013

    Neowinian

  • 5 posts
  • Joined: 18-June 13

Posted 18 June 2013 - 21:59

It's mad they got to pay $5000 I wouldn't pay it nothing would make me so stupid.

#5 +Chris123NT

Chris123NT

    Win8 Master

  • 2,795 posts
  • Joined: 01-November 01
  • Location: New York

Posted 18 June 2013 - 22:34

Wow this is stupid.  Like has been said though, if you find something like this on your property, hide it.  It just isn't worth the hassle, and the expense apparently.



#6 webeagle12

webeagle12

    Neowinian Senior

  • 7,214 posts
  • Joined: 26-May 04

Posted 18 June 2013 - 22:40

Moral of the story...if you find a body in your backyard just throw some dirt on it and never tell anyone. It'll be much cheaper that way.

Just like you witness a car accident and try to help, you can get sued...



#7 srbeen

srbeen

    Neowinian

  • 1,014 posts
  • Joined: 30-November 11

Posted 18 June 2013 - 22:51

So, would it be a crime to exhume the remains yourself? Like, what if they, or some crazy crackhead who'd do anything for $50, went out at 2 in the morning and quickly dug the rest of it up and made it disappear? what then?!



#8 OP Hum

Hum

    totally wAcKed

  • 61,785 posts
  • Joined: 05-October 03
  • Location: Odder Space
  • OS: Windows XP, 7

Posted 19 June 2013 - 13:50

:shifty:  At least the skeleton looks happy that he was found:

Attached Images

  • happy.png


#9 PhilTheThrill

PhilTheThrill

    Neowinian Senior

  • 3,861 posts
  • Joined: 28-November 03
  • Location: Canada
  • OS: Win 8.1
  • Phone: WP8

Posted 19 June 2013 - 13:57

Spence told the Star that the skeleton is likely that of a 24-year-old aboriginal woman who died in the late 1500s or early 1600s. 
source

Anyone else spot something odd with the above sentence.



#10 OP Hum

Hum

    totally wAcKed

  • 61,785 posts
  • Joined: 05-October 03
  • Location: Odder Space
  • OS: Windows XP, 7

Posted 19 June 2013 - 14:26

^ Why ?  aboriginal, does not always mean 'Australian'.

 

ab·o·rig·i·nal

[ab-uh-rij-uh-nl] 

 

2. original or earliest known; native; indigenous:





Click here to login or here to register to remove this ad, it's free!