Fight Over Rock About To Go To Grand Jury
- ballparent
- S
- Posts: 1974
- Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 1:50 pm
Fight Over Rock About To Go To Grand Jury
Fight over Ohio River rock about to go to a grand jury
Mar 06, 2008 @ 11:30 PM
The Associated Press
PORTSMOUTH, Ohio -- The border fight over a crudely carved 8-ton boulder known as Indian Head Rock is escalating.
Officials in Kentucky are hauling the mayor of Portsmouth into court in their effort to get back the rock, which an Ohio historian and a team of divers pulled from the Ohio River.
The river is mostly under Kentucky jurisdiction. The prosecutor in Greenup County, Ky., has issued a subpoena for Portsmouth Mayor Jim Kalb to testify before a grand jury on March 28 as a material witness in the removal of the boulder, which is being stored in a city-owned service garage.
"We have the Antiquities Act here in Kentucky, that involves things that are registered under that act through the University of Kentucky," said Greenup County Prosecuting Attorney Cliff Duvall. "It's a Class D felony, and in Kentucky, that carries one to five years. That charge will probably be the most applicable. There isn't any monetary value that anybody could put on it."
Kalb said he wasn't surprised when he received the subpoena.
"I got a call from my office a couple of days ago, saying that a member of the Scioto County sheriff's office was there to serve me with a subpoena," Kalb said Monday. "I kind of suspected that it would be over the rock."
Kentucky State Rep. Reginald Meeks, D-Louisville, a member of the state's Native American Heritage Commission, is sponsoring a resolution in the Kentucky General Assembly condemning the removal of the rock and demanding that it be returned to Kentucky.
"We're going to use all legal means to get them to return it to its rightful place in the commonwealth," he said in January.
Not much is known about the origin of Indian Head Rock, which has a crude carving of a face and another of a house, along with the names of several early settlers.
Some say it was a navigational marker. Its existence was known locally during the late 1800s and early 1900s, when it appeared once in a while when the river was low.
Historian Steve Shaffer of Ironton, who headed a team that retrieved the rock in September, said it had been submerged since at least 1920, before a system of dams kept the Ohio River at a relatively constant level.
He said there are five main theories about how a face was carved on the rock.
"One is that in 1851, messages were placed on the rock, likely by early pioneers to mark the low-water mark," Shaffer said.
"The second is that a quarry man carved it with a metal tool. Theory No. 3 is that a band of robbers used it as a marker when they buried their loot nearby. The fourth theory is that it was carved by Native Americans, and that theory began in an account in the 1891 edition of the Portsmouth newspaper. And the fifth theory is about 100-years-old. It says a boy named John Book, a prominent member of Scioto County society who was killed in the Civil War, carved it."
Kalb says he won't back down to Kentucky's demands.
"The rock belongs in Portsmouth. It's a logical place for it," Kalb said. "This is not a case of Kentucky wanting to display it, it's a case of them not wanting Portsmouth or Ohio to have it.
"This is an important part of Portsmouth history, and if the rock is on display, it will be for both sides of the river to enjoy. If it's Kentucky's intent to put the rock back in the river, that should be a crime in itself."
Mar 06, 2008 @ 11:30 PM
The Associated Press
PORTSMOUTH, Ohio -- The border fight over a crudely carved 8-ton boulder known as Indian Head Rock is escalating.
Officials in Kentucky are hauling the mayor of Portsmouth into court in their effort to get back the rock, which an Ohio historian and a team of divers pulled from the Ohio River.
The river is mostly under Kentucky jurisdiction. The prosecutor in Greenup County, Ky., has issued a subpoena for Portsmouth Mayor Jim Kalb to testify before a grand jury on March 28 as a material witness in the removal of the boulder, which is being stored in a city-owned service garage.
"We have the Antiquities Act here in Kentucky, that involves things that are registered under that act through the University of Kentucky," said Greenup County Prosecuting Attorney Cliff Duvall. "It's a Class D felony, and in Kentucky, that carries one to five years. That charge will probably be the most applicable. There isn't any monetary value that anybody could put on it."
Kalb said he wasn't surprised when he received the subpoena.
"I got a call from my office a couple of days ago, saying that a member of the Scioto County sheriff's office was there to serve me with a subpoena," Kalb said Monday. "I kind of suspected that it would be over the rock."
Kentucky State Rep. Reginald Meeks, D-Louisville, a member of the state's Native American Heritage Commission, is sponsoring a resolution in the Kentucky General Assembly condemning the removal of the rock and demanding that it be returned to Kentucky.
"We're going to use all legal means to get them to return it to its rightful place in the commonwealth," he said in January.
Not much is known about the origin of Indian Head Rock, which has a crude carving of a face and another of a house, along with the names of several early settlers.
Some say it was a navigational marker. Its existence was known locally during the late 1800s and early 1900s, when it appeared once in a while when the river was low.
Historian Steve Shaffer of Ironton, who headed a team that retrieved the rock in September, said it had been submerged since at least 1920, before a system of dams kept the Ohio River at a relatively constant level.
He said there are five main theories about how a face was carved on the rock.
"One is that in 1851, messages were placed on the rock, likely by early pioneers to mark the low-water mark," Shaffer said.
"The second is that a quarry man carved it with a metal tool. Theory No. 3 is that a band of robbers used it as a marker when they buried their loot nearby. The fourth theory is that it was carved by Native Americans, and that theory began in an account in the 1891 edition of the Portsmouth newspaper. And the fifth theory is about 100-years-old. It says a boy named John Book, a prominent member of Scioto County society who was killed in the Civil War, carved it."
Kalb says he won't back down to Kentucky's demands.
"The rock belongs in Portsmouth. It's a logical place for it," Kalb said. "This is not a case of Kentucky wanting to display it, it's a case of them not wanting Portsmouth or Ohio to have it.
"This is an important part of Portsmouth history, and if the rock is on display, it will be for both sides of the river to enjoy. If it's Kentucky's intent to put the rock back in the river, that should be a crime in itself."
Re: Fight Over Rock About To Go To Grand Jury
So officials in Kentucky were perfectly content as long as the rock was submerged in the Ohio River. But, since some enterprising Ohio Historians showed some initiative and retrieved the rock they want it back.
-
- Freshman Team
- Posts: 175
- Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2004 12:16 am
Re: Fight Over Rock About To Go To Grand Jury
New York Times did a nice article and slide show on this issue. Go to New York Times and search for "indian head rock".www.nytimes.com/2008/02/11/us/11land.html
-
- S
- Posts: 1632
- Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 11:37 pm
Re: Fight Over Rock About To Go To Grand Jury
I know that some people from CBS have been to Portsmouth recently and interviewed people from Kentucky and Portsmouth about the "rock" and this particular piece of news will be aired on the CBS news on March 28th at 6:30 or 7 p.m. Be sure to tune in....
Re: Fight Over Rock About To Go To Grand Jury
http://www.irontontribune.com/articles/ ... ocal01.txt
Big article in the Sunday Ironton Tribune today, complete with some old pictures. Kentucky does nothing, considers this unimportant, for years; but the minute Ohioans take the time, make the effort, and spend the money to reclaim this bit of history, Kentucky wants it "back"?
What they can have "back" is the Ironton-Russell Bridge across the River they say belongs to them and then pay to replace it. Oh right, Kentucky doesn't want to spend the money or do the work - they just want the credit and claim to ownership when someone else does it for them!
Big article in the Sunday Ironton Tribune today, complete with some old pictures. Kentucky does nothing, considers this unimportant, for years; but the minute Ohioans take the time, make the effort, and spend the money to reclaim this bit of history, Kentucky wants it "back"?
What they can have "back" is the Ironton-Russell Bridge across the River they say belongs to them and then pay to replace it. Oh right, Kentucky doesn't want to spend the money or do the work - they just want the credit and claim to ownership when someone else does it for them!
- Doc Panther
- JV Team
- Posts: 316
- Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 8:10 am
Re: Fight Over Rock About To Go To Grand Jury
FalconFan wrote:I know that some people from CBS have been to Portsmouth recently and interviewed people from Kentucky and Portsmouth about the "rock" and this particular piece of news will be aired on the CBS news on March 28th at 6:30 or 7 p.m. Be sure to tune in....
Just watched it......nice 2 or 3 minute piece.....nice pub for Portsmouth. I'd like to see it....they showed some dates (1856) and pictures on it....as a student of Hopewell culture I'd be interested if it contained any Native American pictographs.
- ballparent
- S
- Posts: 1974
- Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 1:50 pm
- ballparent
- S
- Posts: 1974
- Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 1:50 pm
Re: Fight Over Rock About To Go To Grand Jury
Since Steve Hartman did this piece for CBS you might want to tune in to CBS Sunday Morning that comes on at 9:30 a.m. (I think) on Sunday Morning (hence the name Sunday Morning ). His pieces that are on Friday's usually air again then.
- ballparent
- S
- Posts: 1974
- Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 1:50 pm
Re: Fight Over Rock About To Go To Grand Jury
The CBS show "Sunday Morning" came on at 9 a.m. and the Steve Hartman piece about "the rock" is going to be on this morning.
- ballparent
- S
- Posts: 1974
- Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 1:50 pm
-
- Varsity
- Posts: 671
- Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 9:22 am
Re: Fight Over Rock About To Go To Grand Jury
I'm still baffled by KY owning parts of the river. I know this is a little off the subject but if they own anywhere near the Ironton/ Russell Bridge why aren't they paying for half of the reconstruction of the proposed new bridge?
- eagles73Taylor
- SE
- Posts: 2479
- Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2004 2:18 pm
- Location: Piketon, Ohio
Re: Fight Over Rock About To Go To Grand Jury
Jail time for spending his time and money on a project that took a large rock off of the bottom of a river? Only Kentucky! I wonder how much taxpayer money was spent starting this fiasco?
- tony181stewart
- Riding the Bench
- Posts: 74
- Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 5:22 pm
Re: Fight Over Rock About To Go To Grand Jury
Last edited by tony181stewart on Mon Jan 12, 2009 12:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- tony181stewart
- Riding the Bench
- Posts: 74
- Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 5:22 pm
Re: Fight Over Rock About To Go To Grand Jury
I am not clear on why the Ohio River belongs to Kentucky at all. I really doesnt make sense, can someone enlighten me on this?
- Doc Panther
- JV Team
- Posts: 316
- Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 8:10 am
Re: Fight Over Rock About To Go To Grand Jury
Don't politicians have more important things to worry about....say unemployment and the cost of living?
This is friggin ridiculous.
This is friggin ridiculous.
-
- SEOPS Mr. Ohio
- Posts: 20590
- Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:49 am
- Location: Next to a lake somewhere
- Contact:
Re: Fight Over Rock About To Go To Grand Jury
I say split it inhalf so each side can have a peice of it.
Hey I have some big rocks in my back yard I can let the side that loses have!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hey I have some big rocks in my back yard I can let the side that loses have!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
- S
- Posts: 1580
- Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2004 9:17 pm
Re: Fight Over Rock About To Go To Grand Jury
Mouth's Better Half wrote:I'm still baffled by KY owning parts of the river. I know this is a little off the subject but if they own anywhere near the Ironton/ Russell Bridge why aren't they paying for half of the reconstruction of the proposed new bridge?
I lived on the river for several years and my deed said that Ky. owned to the low water mark on the Ohio side. Never did find out where that was.
-
- All State
- Posts: 1169
- Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2005 3:33 pm
Re: Fight Over Rock About To Go To Grand Jury
Kentucky became a state first. I'm guessing that's how they "own" the river.