I don't see why the "Trial of a Curator" is not a legitimate post. It is
about museums and about a serious issue. The "shot" in regards to a
typographical error made by a non-native English speaker is rather unkind.
Wish that more American museum professionals spoke and wrote as many
languages as our European colleagues do. More interesting is the use of the
word "verdict." Unless I am mistaken the writer of the original post
probably meant the term "sentencing," which has a different understanding in
American English from the word "verdict."

In any case, the question arises whether Dutch law follows the Napoleonic
code where the presumption of guilt is made, not innocence. The difficulty
that many provincial Americans run into, is that of assuming that our
traditions are universal when in actual fact they often are not. A number of
European (and I assume other) countries share the fundamental proposition
that an accused is guilty unless he/she can prove their innocence. I don't
know if this is true of Holland, but if it is, then even if the term
"verdict" has been used in its normal American meaning there is no need to
for the term "accused."

What I find remarkable is that the prosecutor was recommending such a "mild"
sentence (if compared to normal American sentences where 200 and 400 year
sentences are not unusual) given the gravity of the offense. The fact that
among the recommendations was for a six-year suspension from the right to
curate is particularly interesting-the implication being that after that
term the curator could resume his profession. The Dutch seem to have
incorporated into their legal system an assumption that punishment for a
crime has to end after a period and that a miscreant can be rehabilitated
and lead a productive life in the future. A refreshing point-of-view for our
society, that craves revenge and brutalization of our fellow citizen who
overstepped the bounds of law and morality.
nburlakoff
-----Original Message-----
From: Museum discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf
Of Lynne Ranieri
Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 1:42 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Trail against curator Armory Museum, Delft, The Netherlands

I am not sure if the "Trail (sic) against curator ..." is a legitimate post,
but the observation that:

" The defendant has been stealing books, prints, and paintings from the
museum's collection for at least the past four years."

and the rest of the assertions, should probably be properly qualified by
noting that "The defendant has been *accused of* stealing ..." since the
verdict is not due until December 16, shouldn't it?
   What a great tragedy if the accusations are found to be true.
Lynne

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at
http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed
information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message
to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help"
(without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to
[log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff
Museum-L" (without the quotes).

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).