Ring stolen three decades ago from Colts player is returned
In 1977, during a trip to Japan, Baltimore Colts legend Art Donovan had his 1958 NFL championship ring stolen.
Howard County police have found it.
Police said that they received a tip that the ring was being sold on Craigslist for $20,000 by a seller in Elkridge. Detectives contacted Donovan, who told them about the theft. Detectives posed as buyers and met the seller. They said the ring was engraved with Donovan's name and No. 70 jersey number.
Police said they determined the seller did not know the ring had been stolen, and that he had purchased it from a sports shop many years ago. The seller gave the ring to police and is not facing charges.
Comments
I thought the law is that if he bought it in good faith that the property still belongs to him. He probably needs to get a lawyer and try to get the ring back. If he put it up for sale, he probably needs that $20K.
Posted by: Slater | August 23, 2011 11:24 AM
Wow! After 34 years! Art probably gave up years ago! It's great to know it's back where it belongs!
Posted by: RavenDan in FL | August 23, 2011 11:57 AM
I believe if I found a championship ring engraved with a name (my favorite Colt ever!), that I would contact him and let him know what I had.
Posted by: baltimoregirl | August 23, 2011 12:36 PM
It seems to me that the shop owner would
have a few questions to answer if they
are still available to question after all this time.
Posted by: Donald E. Hall Sr. | August 23, 2011 1:36 PM
To Slater: No my friend, I don't know where you ever heard that little 'ole wive's tale but it tain't so! In reality, he was in possession of stolen property, whether he was aware of the fact or not.
Posted by: XCareBearK9 | August 23, 2011 1:47 PM
To answer Slater's question:
An innocent purchaser can never acquire clear ownership to stolen goods, despite their lack of knowledge that the goods were stolen. However, under the law where I live in Florida, an innocent purchaser for value who carried insurance coverage could make a claim to their insurance company if they had to return the ring to its rightful owner under the same facts in the
Donovan case.
When I lived in Balto as a child, my family had 2 huge German Shepherds, "Arthur" and "Donovan".
Posted by: David Bronstein | August 23, 2011 2:12 PM
@Slater yeah, umm no, not on any planet that I'm aware of... If you bought in good faith you don't go to jail for buying stolen goods, but that's about it. Stolen items ALWAYS belong to the person they were stolen from.
Posted by: bob | August 23, 2011 3:24 PM
@Slater: You really think the guy should sue Artie to get a ring back that belongs to and is engraved to Donovan? Not only is this not the law, it makes no sense.
If your house is burgled, and all your stuff is sold on Craigslist, you are out of luck, because the buyers thought it was legit? It's called caveat emptor (let the buyer beware).
Posted by: mencken | August 23, 2011 3:25 PM
Wow. This had to have been taken by someone traveling with Mr. Donovan. I'm sorry for him. Not about his ring so much as that someone he trusted shouldn't have been.
Posted by: Eve | August 23, 2011 3:42 PM
Slater -- I'm not an lawyer, or an expert, but I do not believe a person can rightfully own property (even if they bought the stolen property in good faith) because the stolen property is considered to have a bad title. A bad title cannot be converted to a good title by buying in good faith. In this case, if the ring was stolen, the ring still belongs to Art Donovan no matter how many people may have purchased the ring in the meantime. Now the seller can sue the person they bought the ring from to recover their losses, this is the only remedy I know of.
Posted by: Peter | August 23, 2011 3:59 PM
Solen property is stolen property and is returned to the original owner unless insurance money was paid out for it and then it is the property of the insurance company. The police should go back to the shop that it was sold from to find out if they could track it down.
Posted by: carolyn | August 23, 2011 4:05 PM
"Nemo dat quod non habet" Slater
Posted by: Dave | August 23, 2011 4:18 PM
@slater
Thats NOT the law! If you purchase something that is determined to be stolen later AND you had no knowledge, your ONLY recourse is to go after the person who Sold it to you. However, something so unique such as a 1959 COLTS championship ring with THE PLAYERS NAME ON IT, for a guy from Maryland who buys sports memorabilia an argument could be made that he had an obligation to look into the circumstances and return the ring. It's possible the buyer could be charged with possession of stolen goods!
Posted by: tomTucker | August 23, 2011 4:23 PM
Slater, are you serious? He should be able to keep something that was stolen from someone else? So Art should take the loss instead of this other dude? You're joking right?
Posted by: logic over emotion | August 23, 2011 4:27 PM
Who has a famous ring that they try to sell for $20k and hasn't done even the smallest google search about it??? Sounds very fishy to me.
Posted by: BP | August 23, 2011 4:27 PM
THIS IS GREAT NEWS FOR ART AND UPLIFTING TO US EARTHQUAKE VICTOMS HERE IN WEST BALTIMORE. IT WAS VERY FUNNY TO SEE THE LOCAL MEDIA RUNNING AROUND LOOKING FOR THE SCOOP OF THE DECADE! WHERE WAS MARTY? WHERE WERE ALL THE STREET REPORTERS YOU SEE ASKING THE OBVIOUS STUPID QUESTIONS?
Posted by: MICHAEL HENLEY | August 23, 2011 4:32 PM
good story
Posted by: jim | August 23, 2011 4:59 PM
I did not even know he was still alive.
Posted by: Sowhat | August 23, 2011 6:03 PM
As a collector of sports stuff when you usually buy rings, autographs the seller provides a certificate stating the item is real and their are not legal issues. Ray Guy just sold his 3 Super Bowl rings to pay some debts.
Posted by: John | August 23, 2011 7:59 PM
God Bless Artie and I'm glad he got the ring back. Stolen in Japan in 1977 and now being sold in Howard County? Hum? Okay, we'll leave it at that.
Posted by: Mikey | August 24, 2011 7:52 AM