TedM

from wiki. Comments? Why is this considered so tarnished as to accept the conclusion of the judge and many experts? What evidence was left out of the trial that provides reason to distrust the judge's verdict?

Trial of Oded Golan

Oded Golan claimed publicly to believe his finds were genuine. Hershel Shanks declared that he did not believe the evidence of forgery and launched a personal complaint against IAA director Shuka Dorfman. Lemaire supported his original assessment when Frank Cross regretted Shanks' attitude. The Royal Ontario Museum, in its statement about Oded Golan's arrest and the validity of the so-called James Ossuary stated, "There is always a question of authenticity when objects do not come from a controlled archaeological excavation, as is the case with the James Ossuary."[17]

On 29 December 2004, the Israeli Justice Ministry charged Golan, three other Israelis, and one Palestinian, with running a forgery ring that had been operating for more than twenty years. Golan was indicted in an Israeli court along with his three co-conspirators: Robert Deutsch, an epigraphy expert who has given lectures at the University of Haifa; collector Shlomo Cohen; and antiquities dealer Faiz al-Amaleh. They were accused of manufacturing numerous artifacts, including an Ivory pomegranate which had previously been generally accepted as the only proven relic from the Temple of King Solomon. Golan denied the charges.

In February, 2007, at Golan's trial, the defense produced photographs taken in Golan's home that were dated to 1976. In these photographs, the ossuary is shown on a shelf. In an enlargement, the whole inscription can be seen. The photographs were printed on 1970s photographic paper and stamped March 1976. The photo was examined by Gerald Richard, a former FBI agent and an expert for the defense. Richard testified that nothing about the photographs suggested that they were produced other than in 1976 as the stamps and paper indicated.[citation needed] These photographs undermined the prosecution's theory that the ossuary was a recent forgery by Golan intended to be sold for profit. Golan's attorney, Lior Beringer argued, "The prosecution claims that Golan forged the inscription after the beginning of 2000. But here is a detailed report from an FBI photo lab that states that the inscription existed at least since the 70s. It is unreasonable that someone would forge an inscription like this in the 70s and suddenly decide to come out with it in 2002." [19] However, it would also be necessary for some time to pass for a forgery to acquire the characteristics of an authentic patina. Later under oath, the government’s chief scientific witness, Professor Yuval Goren of Tel Aviv University admitted on cross-examination that there was original ancient patina in the word “Jesus.”[20]

The two world-acclaimed paleographers, pronounced it as authentic in the trial, Andre Lemaire of the Sorbonne and Ada Yardeni of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. More importantly no paleographer of repute has challenged their analysis.[20]

By 2009, many of the world's top archaeological experts had testified for both the prosecution and defense. Judge Aharon Farkash, who has a degree in archaeology, indicated difficulty in making a judgment regarding the objects' authenticity if the professors could not agree amongst themselves.[21] In the second week of October 2010, the judge in the case against Golan and others retired to consider his verdict.

The criminal, scholarly and scientific implications of this verdict are considerable. If genuine, the artifacts are of historic importance and worth millions. An acquittal would be a severe setback for the Israel Antiquities Authority and its special investigators, who accused Golan and his co-defendants of making millions of dollars as part of an international chain of forgers planting sophisticated fakes in the world's museums. It would also be an acute embarrassment for the isotope experts at the Israel Geological Survey and professor Yuval Goren of Tel Aviv University, who spent many days on the stand defending scientific tests they said showed the items must be fakes.

A guilty verdict, on the other hand, would destroy the reputation of one of the world's leading collectors of biblical antiquities and drive the entire Israeli market underground. The Israel Antiquities Authority has made no secret of its desire to shut down the trade in Bible-era artifacts, which they believe encourages grave robbers, who smuggle the choicest finds out of the country.[15][22]

On March 14, 2012, Jerusalem Judge Aharon Farkash stated "that there is no evidence that any of the major artifacts were forged, and that the prosecution failed to prove their accusations beyond a reasonable doubt."[9] He was particularly scathing about tests carried out by the Israel police forensics laboratory that he said had probably contaminated the ossuary, making it impossible to carry out further scientific tests on the inscription.[23] On May 30, 2012, Oded Golan was fined 30,000 shekels and sentenced to one month in jail for minor non-forgery charges related to the trial. As he spent time incarcerated at the start of the case, he will not have to serve any time in prison.[24]

Toto

The judge's verdict was only that the prosecution failed to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt.

When the police raided Golan's house, they found a fully equipped forgery lab. The had evidence from an Egyptian who worked for him on his forgeries, but this person left Israel and was not available at the trial.

You can read a highly partisan account here and more articles here.

stephan huller

its a fake

sotto voce

Has to be. Mary had only one child.

TedM

That's not what the judge said. Read it again. Edit: ok, I see that wiki is apparantly misleading the reader..You are right, it appears.

This, if true, bodes very badly for Golan..I agree with that much..

Although I'll still read it, your first 'highly partisan' account was written by Joe Zias, former curator of archaeology at the Israeli Antiquities Authority, Toto. This agency has much to lose if their original assessment is shown to be wrong. I see now that he was behind the arrest. This is not partisan. From wiki:

and what about this?

Toto

Ted - do you remember the OJ trial? The defense produced lots of highly paid expert witnesses who impeached the scientific case. OJ was acquitted, but later lost a civil suit with a different burden of proof.

Read the essay here, which looks like a fair summary of what happened and what it means: The Ossuary of James the Brother of Jesus: From Trial to Truth? By Paul V.M. Flesher

Duke Leto

Has anyone ever formulated a coherent account of how the nominal leader of a highly unpopular cult who was murdered in the lead up to a fundamentalist rebellion managed to get himself buried in an extremely expensive bone box normally reserved for aristocrats? More to the point, his bodily decay would have proceeded to the point that the bones ought to have been boxed AFTER the Fall of Jerusalem, assuming a death date of 69 CE. Are Ossuaries made at the time of burial or when the bones are ready for transfer? If the latter, where was it made of the Jerusalem craftsmen were no longer there?

I absolutely do NOT wish to get into a debate on either the historicity of James or the reliability of the secular historians.

I'm simply curious if the authenticity camp has an answer for that line of thought.

sotto voce

James was not the leader, nominal or otherwise. Neither was anyone else.

Toto

The usual date for James' death is 62, based on a Josephus passage about someone of the same name. The bones were typically placed in an ossuary after one year, which would give this enough time.

The main group behind identifying this bone box as significant are James Tabor and the TV production company headed by James Cameron. Tabor has his own theory of the historical Jesus which is regarded in academia as perhaps even less credible than Jesus mythicism - he thinks that Jesus was part of a dynasty. There is a long review here from Christianity Today.

There is a review from Robert M. Price here

Duke Leto

Thank You.