Offshoreonly.com - Looking for pic of 41 yellow apache, with "41 APACHE" airbrushed on black dash panel

Offshoreonly.com (https://www.offshoreonly.com/forums/)

- Apache (https://www.offshoreonly.com/forums/apache-55/)

- - Looking for pic of 41 yellow apache, with "41 APACHE" airbrushed on black dash panel (https://www.offshoreonly.com/forums/apache/230263-looking-pic-41-yellow-apache-41-apache-airbrushed-black-dash-panel.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Panther (Post 3388256)

The hull and engine hatch were clearly in the background of pictures posted in the advertisement. I would start there.

Agreed!

+2, everything is right there in the ad pictures!!!

Also, and this is not to cause wakes, but if the engines and drives are 100% known to be from this boat (and they are) do these recently sold parts (or proceeds) not legally belong to the insurance company at this point since they've paid a substantial claim on them??? Seems to me it wouldn't make a damn bit of difference if someone knew they were buying/selling stolen goods or not, they legal belong to the insurance company. These key parts are just as valuable as the hull itself, if not more so and the insurance company paid out a claim for them... :confused:

You know the old saying... If it looks like sh1t and smells like sh1t, then it probably is..... Or the other saying about the duck.... lol

Quote:

Originally Posted by Panther (Post 3388909)

You know the old saying... If it looks like sh1t and smells like sh1t, then it probably is..... Or the other saying about the duck.... lol

The one about if it quacks and sh1ts like a duck, it probably pee's and fu@ks like a duck too? :drink:

Still waiting for some insight regarding some of the above questions and observations.

Where did the pics come from that were used to advertise the engines and drives? The boat was clearly in the background! This doesn't seem like a tough case to crack!

And since the insurance company already paid a claim on this boat, why do they not care about the potentially most valuable part of this thing... the engines, drives, etc? Sure seems to me that legally they should have ownership of the parts or the proceeds from those sales, yet they don't seem to care about them... all they care about is the dead carcass???

This entire thing is really, really odd!

Quote:

Originally Posted by matthew schmahl (Post 3388110)

Please permit this message to clarify the circumstances, while simultaneously apologizing to all for my delinquency in attending to OffshoreOnly.com. Due to other commitments it is a challenge to visit and read all the posts. I am one of the persons involved in unraveling the misfortunes of the Apache named Running Bear. As you know the vessel was reported stolen in March 2010 while temporarily located at a closed concrete contractor's former office location in Royal Palm Beach FL. The claim against the vessel was paid by the insurer to the owner(s). More recently in mid March 2011 and within hours after some advertisements surfaced in OffshoreOnly. com involving the engines and related equipment, some dedicated and knowledgeable members of OffshoreOnly.com notified me. (Thanks again, the assistance was very helpful). The circumstances with regard to the engines, sterndrives and related equipment are clear. The person who placed the advertisement on OffshoreOnly.com, James Harpold, had purchased the engines, sterndrives and equipment in good faith and without a hint of notion that they originated from a boat that was reported stolen. He and his associates were immediately helpful to our investigation and have provided very helpful information that sheds light on the circumstances in their totality. In that James Harpold had acquired the engines, sterndrives and equipment in good faith, paid good money, and had no idea the equipment originated from a stolen boat, it was not within the realm of equity to challenge an ownership issue regarding the engines and sterndrives. James Harpold has since maintained regular contact with me and is oontinuing to assist in the investigation. In discussions I know that recently James Harpold sold the engines, sterndrives and equipment to another person located in South Carolina. Obviously the person in South Carolina is familiarized with the events and just like James Harpold, he has no involvement in the circumstances of the theft of the boat and he also acquired the engines and sterndrives in an entirely legitimate transaction. I will pay more attention to keeping all of you informed, and yes the roll out will take months. Meanwhile, we all know where the engines and sterndrives are, can anyone tell me where the hull and the trailer are? Again, all of you have been exceedingly helpful. Thanks and regards. Matthew Schmahl.

1) How does Mr. Harpold get away with selling stolen goods, regardless whether he didn't know they were stolen and

2) How does the person he sold the stolen goods to get to keep them?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Catmando (Post 3389713)

1) How does Mr. Harpold get away with selling stolen goods, regardless whether he didn't know they were stolen and

2) How does the person he sold the stolen goods to get to keep them?

Good questions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Catmando (Post 3389713)

1) How does Mr. Harpold get away with selling stolen goods, regardless whether he didn't know they were stolen and

2) How does the person he sold the stolen goods to get to keep them?

To me i think it would depend on the Time frame. if the engines and drives were sold the day before the repo/theft then yes they are stolen goods. if they were sold a few months before with the intent of a repower and then things went south, then there was no intent to defraud. Dollars to doughnuts it is time frame which would show "intent"...

I liken this to a situation where a dying parent puts the house in the childrens name at the 11th hour to defer tax/penalty. there are laws stated for time frame for such transactions...but that is just my common sense take on it :D

Timeframe is an intersting way of looking at it.
but from the sounds of it boat was in storage, was stolen, and stripped of engines and drives etc --- which were then sold (with pics of said stolen boat in back ground)
Stolen property is just that stolen.
There must be more to it than is being said?
Or are all those stripped out hulls going through the Repo yards in the right? and taking their engines out because it is just the hull that has the numbers?

Quote:

Originally Posted by offshoredrillin (Post 3390042)

if they were sold a few months before with the intent of a repower and then things went south, then there was no intent to defraud. Dollars to doughnuts it is time frame which would show "intent"...

Good point. But it begs the question, was the photo taken when the parts were legitimately removed from the boat during a repower which occured before the hull theft and then the photos subsequently re-used when buyer decided to sell the parts.

If that is the case, then the seller deciding to reuse the original photos was not the best decision.

u guys would all be on the other side of the fence if you were the guy that, unknowingly bought stolen parts and paid for them in good faith. now u have to GIVE them back to the insurance company??????? you would all be very willing to return them for no money right guys????????

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaughingCat (Post 3390067)

Agreed, but the ultimate decision maker was the insurance company and they made a decision based on facts that they are content with. I like the fact that they didn't roll someone else into it like the whole national marine fiasco that left good people paying for boats they really didn't own.