LA Judge Rules Against San Diego Jewish Family Over $30M Painting Looted By Nazis

cbs2la ^

[Bob434]

justice in a court of law is not vengeance- as stated already- God instituted the courts and judges for all people- even Christians-

[[These people are not going to get their painting,]]

Thanks to crooked courts that protect criminals- they probably won’t- the point about painting and child is that something that didn’t belong to the nazis was taken by force- as explained in previous post- doesn’t matter if it’s a painting or child- it was a crime for the nazis to take something that didn’t belong to them by force-

[Savage Beast]

No, he should observe Spanish law. You’re right, and I appreciate your clarification. But couldn’t the matter be litigated in some other venue?

[FreedomNotSafety]

Long delay on answer. Sorry.

I am guessing most other venues will be no better. The concept of “holder in die course” is a common law right and should not be diminished even for Nazi looted Jew owned art. That sounds terrible. But the alternative is worse. Did our ancestors steal the land we now occupy? What about the diamond you wear? How many transfers should stolen goods be traced and retrieved from? How about corrupt judges and lawmakers who decide something was stolen way after any witnesses have died?

Remember if there was knowledge of the theft or reason to be suspicious then “holder in due course” does not apply.

[Savage Beast]

What you say makes sense. Thanks!

I had a gorgeous piece of property on the Atlantic Coast, and the state government proclaimed that I didn't own it, that I would have to prove ownership by virtue of a grant from the king of England. I found the grant, and all was well. But I wondered why the grant alone was inviolate. For example, the king's authority to make such a grant could be challenged, though I didn't mention this for obvious reasons.