Quote:
Originally Posted by tis
Thank you PennyPenny for enlightening us a bit. I felt there had to be some previous bad blood. If he is such a great guy as everyone is saying, he had to have a reason to be so upset. I just can't imagine a normal person greeting someone who is "lost" with a gun.
|
I don't believe there was bad blood between the parties involved, certainly if there was, one of the attorneys would have brought this out to benefit their side. It was simply that the person was warned NOT to trespass and they did anyway. The property for sale was owned by Wards sister in law and Ward had a FROR on it (ALL publicly available information). I went to visit that land many times, both with and without a REA in tow, with the intent of purchasing it.
None of the times was I chased by someone, BUT I didn't cross over the boundary well marked with no trespassing signs. There was also adequate room to turn around, if you missed the small driveway crossing the stream to the for sale property.
What is the ambiguity in a no trespassing sign? What is in the mind of someone who crosses this sign then won't leave, or, if reminded by the property owner they are trespassing, doesn't issue an immediate apology turn on their heals and run...its not to the benefit of the land owner, for sure. The message is being sent you can do what ever you want on someone else's posted private property until (or if) the police finally arrive and they decide what that person can do.
Another factoid is that there is almost 2000 feet of driveway between that job trailer and Wards house, how could a reasonable person not know they were deep into someone else's posted private property? Thank you Slickcraft for noting the law will change on 1/1/11, obviously the general court saw a problem with the laws as they are now interpreted and currently enforced. Maybe, Lynch, based on the law changing, will take an interest and reverse more of this liberal insanity. Time for a petition to the Guvnah ?