Heir to Indian headdresses suing Science Center

[kevin airis]

Hi it's been awhile .
I wanted to let everyone know what is going on. Yes it is still going on in the courts. The local newspaper did a excellent story this week, It is called The Case Of The Missing Eagle Feathers it is the whole front cover of the paper it is a nice picture. If you would could you please go to their web site and take a look. I gave Aimee every court doc. And every picture, and loan doc. I had it took her awhile to go through them but at least she knew I was telling the truth. She called everyone herself to make sure and wow her story is excellent. I am happy that a paper is willing to tell the truth. Please go to St. Louis News, Events, Restaurants, Music if you would would you share this on your facebook at the time I am writting this we are up to 90 shares thank you for reading my story.

[kevin airis]

Here is the link to the story http://www.riverfronttimes.com/2010-...-airis-family/
thank you

[kevin airis]

I wanted to let everyone know we are at 144 Facebook shares at the river front times and moving up on most view.
I have now spent 46 hours going through the 1979 appraisal, the 1989 appraisal and the grave act. Now I have run a tool and die shop for 13 years, I know how to sort through paperwork and do inventories. I found 16 pages of mistakes, ranging from missing items to items with the same numbers to the grave act with the wrong number wrong description and items not in it. Even the items they gave me back. I was told by the person who did the grave act that the records was a mess. I wonder how the judge is going to explain this. I am email this finding to Russal kinsaul tonight . Why would a museum risk me showing what I found in 46 hours

[kevin airis]

This is what I found
in the 1979 appraisal their was 825 cat. Numbers without a discription. 28 items with the same number. None of the items they gave me back showed up
All of the items in the Indian case ( 24 ) no discription for any of them and cat. Numbers that were letters. The 1989 appraisal had 600 numbers that didn't show up in the 1979 appraisal, the numbers I am talking about were old numbers ( like 24.850 when their was a 24.851 and 24.849). Their was several items for each of the items I am missing with no donor for the items.
The headdresses they gave me back had no donor information I showed them pictures of the headdress and they had to give them to me. I have not been allowed to look at their collections at all. I was told no by Melinda Frillman
The NAGRPA their is the same. Itemns that match what I am missing also the cat. Numbers have been changed ( they didn't give us any records of the changes) also the discripition in the NAGPRA were different from the 1989 appraisal. In the 1989 appraisal called if "Cuffs leather with beads) the grave act called it gauntlets. That is just one example. Their are lots like that.
In the Nagpra and half of the items in the Nagpra have no donor are any other information except questions marks. Also they list a belt that does show my father as the owner. Now the judge said that nothing shows up in what he changed the name from 1989 appraisal to this is how he wrote it (1989 Inventory) the appraisal on the second page says for insurance only and can not be used for anything else. Now if they didn't destroy their files why are these the only things they have? We filed are answer today and I e- mnailed the river front times the finding today. Oh I forgot to say we didn't get the belt back. even though it shows up in the nagpra judge said it didn't.if anyone wants a copy of my findings I will e-mail them to you.
I have one question don't the Nagpra have to be accurate?

[kevin airis]

We Filed our (APPELLANT'S BRIEF ON THE MERITS) on Aug. 30 2010

I will send anyone a copy. In it we found out that the laywers and the president told the judge nothing showed up in their (INVENTOR) really they are appraisals any way they didnt furnish the judge with a inventory from 2004 that showed one of the belts we are missing,they also submitted the presidents affidavit stating that he personally looked through the inventories.
His deposition that was submitted by us was never given to the judge and in that deposition the president said he did not look at the inventories. also 5 pages of the collections manger deposition was not given to the judge. Also the judge said no other museum has been suied in Missouri ,but the Transporation museum was. same thing lost items. The museum property act does not contain language that it is exclusive remedy. There is no language in the museum property act to suggest that it preempts common law or other statutory causes of action other than the lost and unclaimed property act.
There is precedent that causes of action in replevin may accrue against a museum for the return of items on loan and that 184.116 is not controlling. In lackwanna Chapter of the railway.&locomotive historical Society,Inc. V. St.Louis County MO,. doing business as Museum of Transportation 606F.3d 886(8th Cir.2010) the plaintiff brought a suit in replevin seeking the return of a locomotive that it's predecessor had lent its precedesser of the national Museum of Transportation in St.Louis in 1953. The court stated that "in Missouri,an action for replevin must be brought within five years of its accrual" Id. at 888. Moreover, it dismissed the agurment that the museum property act provided the exclusive remedy, and held that an action in replevin could be maintained.Id. 888
They have 30 days to respond why they failed to submitt all doc to the court and the affidavit of Doug King does not conform to the standards of rule 74.04 and was submitted in bad faith
we have 15 days after that to submitt our response to their response and then it goes to the judge to send it back to the courts. I had several books made of this to give to the river front times and the local news.

[kevin airis]

We recieved our copy of their response to our breif Friday. They need to read what they submitted to the court. I will show anyone that wants to read it. Just send me a line.This is a good reason to involve the people that makes donations to your museum so that you know the real history behind your collections. This lawyer seams not to really care about the museum, just he keeps getting paid. You have to read his breif. I can say and be right ,when I say he does not know what the truth is in this report. You have to read this thing. Everyone that has seen it stands with their mouth open in disbelief. At how he got it so wrong. The best part he submitted it to the court and can't change it now. The local news people just stared at me when I showed it to them and Amiee at the River Front Times just laugh and laugh at it. In 30 days I will print what he said. It will give everyone except the science center a good laugh. I think a class action lawsuite against the science center for hiring these guys would be in order. And I not kidding. I am going to call the you know who to tell her this one too. After all they involved her staff member in one of their lies and she knows it. I am sure she will be speachless when she hears this.

[kevin airis]

We turned in all the briefs now and received a date for the oral hearing. It is Jan 5 2011 at 9:00 am. I can now tell you some of what the Science Centers lawyers said in there last brief. After my mother took the items to the museum in 1974. She received a letter which was a list of the items she took earlier. This letter became exhibit 2 in the court doc. This lawyer said 7 times in his 40 page breif that the letter did not contain any of the items listed in exhibit 2. I know this sounds crazy but that is what he is trying to tell the judge this. Also he lied when he said that I didn't know if the belt that shows up in there records from 2001 was ours, when I was asked in my deposition I flat out said it was. He also tried to tell the judge that we were offered to view there collections and we turned them Down, when Melinda Frillman told us 3 times that we were not aloud to and she told my son this to. I will be happy to show anyone these so you can see what not to do. Also we found out that Doug King is leaving the Science Center as of this month, but they are saying it is not because of this. I guess you be the judge on this. I believe it is. I keep telling that this lawsuit covers so many of the guidelines put down by the AAM that this is a very good study for anyone running a museum or your collections manger. We are going to write a book when this is over and I have an offer to do a small film telling the fight we have been through

[kevin airis]

Science Center Director Doug King Headed for Seattle - St. Louis News - Daily RFT

[kevin airis]

Here is a story from the Seattle Weekly
It seams that a person named Debbie at the Science Center wants to call us and my mother a liar. I have offered many times for her to look at the court papers but she has refused. Instead she thinks calling us a liar is the right way to comment on this matter. This is the thinking that we have been up against for over four years now. If they would follow the guidlines set down by the AAM we would not be in court. Please read this story and the comments. I will sit down with anyone and show you everything. Even the letters saying they did not run a investigation that Doug said in court papers that he did

Doug King, New Head of Seattle's Museum of Flight, Accused of Mishandling Native American Artifacts at His Previous Job - Seattle News - The Daily Weekly

[kevin airis]

I have another example of poor record keeping at the science center.
I went to the Art museum to look around ,and as I was leaving we notice a item that was on loan from the science center. I took a picture of it because the cat. Number didn't seam right to me. Remember I have gone through the appraisals that they submitted to court. When I looked up the cat. Number it was a totally different item then what they listed. To make sure I asked for a copy of the loan papers from the science center to the art museum. Sure enough Doug and Melinda sign this paper with the wrong cat number on it. Now this is a totally different from my lawsuit so I called Melinda to request a copy of all the paperwork. They have left on that item. You see it does not appear in the grave act done in 2001 are even in the 1979 appraisal. Now they received this supposedly in 1944. Remember from the articles they said if it doesn't show up in those then they don't have it. Well this item only shows up in the 1989 one. Anyway Melinda SCREAMED at me "what do you want me to louse my job too?" I don't know what she ment by the word too,I can only guess what that ment. Anyway she hung up on me only for their lawyers to call asking what papers we want for this. This shows exactly the unprofessionalism
I am dealing with. They can't even loan something out without getting it wrong. I am taking this to the news wed. And they are going to do another
story on this. This is serious but you know the science center doesn't care they feel the guidelines don't apply to them. Why they felt they needed to scream at the top of her voice was uncalled for. I will post the story when it comes out. Also Jan. 5 is the oral hearing