“In his 34-page ruling Tuesday, U.S. District Judge John F. Walter found no evidence the museum knew it was looted art...
“Under Spanish law, Walter ruled, the painting is legally the museum’s.”
Sounds like Spain has some version of the “Holder in due Course” doctrine.
Which means unless it can proven that the Museum knew the goods where stolen then they are a “Buyer in Good Faith” and cannot be forced to surrender the property.
Not saying it is good law but the laws of Spain apply or so the judge as said. We wouldn’t want a Spanish judge overruling US laws so I doin not see a problem here as far as the legalities go.
The morality is a different matter. The right thing to do is to return the property ti it rightful owner and get the money paid back form the other party. Isn’t that what the average Freepr would do if they unknowingly and in good faith purchased, say, $9,000 worth the stolen jewelry? They would just give it back to the rightful owner, right?
golly- sounds like spain museums are the place to sell stolen art- apparently they buy no questions asked- thereby exonerating them of any accusations of knowledge? What a criminal racket that is