Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Implied Permission to Trespass

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Implied Permission to Trespass

    Here me all and listen good, if Forrest were to have hidden the chest on private property that he owns through a trust, grant, deed where he remains as an anonymous grantor, it is entirely possible for a person to legally trespass on the property and get to the chest location. Here are some examples of legal trespass arguments.

    https://www.wikihow.com/Prove-Implie...spasser-Claims

    Assuming this logic is sound and rational, one would then have to locate such a property where it was "Abandoned" and possibly having posted signage. However, as I discussed in the past about "Ownership of Abandoned Navigable Riverbeds", such land could be considered public land but actually exist in the legal and technical definition of being part of the adjacent private land. Now, if you reference exhibit 4 of the attached document, there is a single phrase that makes it entirely possible to have unrestricted access to the private land.

    "The landowner sees you trespassing and never complains." . Lets take this example and pretend the land owner has signage saying the property is under 24 hour video surveillance and you knowingly trespass on the land. The property owner is not there and does not enforce their property rights but you are on a video record of trespassing. Days and weeks go by and you never get any court summons, no phone call, or no letter. You return a year later and trespass, not once, but twice in the summer and make several trips down to the hidey spot. Still, under video surveillance, no property owner shows up to enforce their property rights. As time goes by, your research reveals that many people (hundreds or even thousands over 10 years) have visited this property and still, no one enforces the property rights.

    With the right legal attorney representing you, if there was ever a claim of illegal trespassing, you now have an legal argument to claim the land owner knew of your trespass but did nothing to prevent you, in essence, give you unfettered access to the land to come and go as you please.

    Now, where does such land exist?

  • #2
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zone_of_Death_(legal)

    Comment


    • #3
      Ok, I'll play along but trespassing is trespassing. Somewhere in the mountains NORTH of Sante FE.

      Comment


      • #4
        This is too funny ! The guy that broke down forrests door with an axe thought he had such implied consent.
        Did he get that idea from Walking Among Lions ?
        Where does the madness end ?

        Comment


        • #5
          I was momentarily distracted by the Wikipedia page, which referenced author “CJ Box.” Hmmmm.

          I’m afflicted, like Roddy Piper in They Live!

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by ultrasharp sunshine View Post
            Ok, I'll play along but trespassing is trespassing. Somewhere in the mountains NORTH of Sante FE.
            Y'all are stuck in the box. There are legal and legitimate claims to justifiable trespassing. I guy taking an axe to a residence would be considered criminal trespassing because of forcible entry. Crossing someone's land in the wilderness is a much different scenario and in several situations would be perfectly legal and justified, regardless of what the landowner thinks. However, there are also instances where the land owner who does not enforce his rights, loses his ability to enforce trespassing against other individuals. Sorry Y'all can't think creatively in regards to something Forrest himself has done legally and illegally for most of his wilderness life. Woe to Ye who have little faith and little minds.
            Last edited by Walking Among Lions; 04-01-2020, 07:50 AM.

            Comment


            • #7
              If he anonymously owns the property, how are you going to know it's his property to be able to safely trespass?

              Also, wikihow is not a legal site nor should anyone take legal advice from it.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Quest View Post
                This is too funny ! The guy that broke down forrests door with an axe thought he had such implied consent.
                Did he get that idea from Walking Among Lions ?
                Where does the madness end ?
                A will..ing to die with a dead man's chest IF you break into Forrest's or SHILOHS . I know he's a good Hunter!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Outkast Searcher View Post
                  If he anonymously owns the property, how are you going to know it's his property to be able to safely trespass?

                  Also, wikihow is not a legal site nor should anyone take legal advice from it.
                  Now that is a good Question and I suppose this is where all that Gut stuff comes into play.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Legally private, or just private land?

                    One’s home might be a castle, but would the county tax roll show it as a castle?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Forrest did say on know video that as far as he knows there is no LS, if you know where it’s at just go get the dang thing. Too bad he won’t put that in writing for no one.
                      Last edited by ultrasharp sunshine; 04-01-2020, 01:43 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I think putting it on private land would just complicate things. My guess is you won't have to trespass or have to try to figure out who owns certain land. All IMO.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Walking Among Lions View Post

                          Y'all are stuck in the box. There are legal and legitimate claims to justifiable trespassing. I guy taking an axe to a residence would be considered criminal trespassing because of forcible entry. Crossing someone's land in the wilderness is a much different scenario and in several situations would be perfectly legal and justified, regardless of what the landowner thinks. However, there are also instances where the land owner who does not enforce his rights, loses his ability to enforce trespassing against other individuals. Sorry Y'all can't think creatively in regards to something Forrest himself has done legally and illegally for most of his wilderness life. Woe to Ye who have little faith and little minds.
                          Your funny ! You got adverse possession laws mixed up with trespassing laws. But humour us and show us the imaginary laws of which you claim.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Quest View Post

                            Your funny ! You got adverse possession laws mixed up with trespassing laws. But humour us and show us the imaginary laws of which you claim.
                            Here are a few common defenses to trespassing:
                            • Consent. If the alleged trespasser obtained consent to enter the property or use the chattel, then the trespass was legal. Consent can be given through words, actions, or written permission (for example, a license). The property owner's silence or inaction may also count, if a reasonable person would have spoken up. But the consent isn't valid if you obtained it through fraud (namely, by tricking or coercing the owner). You also can't get valid consent from children, people who aren't legally competent, and folks who are intoxicated.
                            • Reclaiming your own property. Under certain circumstances, you're allowed to trespass if you're in the process of recovering property or chattel that rightfully belongs to you. The initial deprivation of your property must either have been the property/chattel owner's fault or an "act of God" such as a storm or wind.
                            • Public necessity. A complete defense exists when you have to commit a trespass in order to protect the public during an emergency. There must be an immediate necessity for the trespass and you must have trespassed in genuine good faith that it was to protect public safety. You lose the protection of this complete defense when your trespass becomes unreasonable under the circumstances.
                            • Private necessity. Although not a complete defense, private necessity lets you trespass if it's to protect someone (including yourself) from death or serious bodily injury or to protect any land or chattel from serious destruction or injury (if they're animals). Though not guilty of trespass in a private necessity situation, you could still be held civilly liable for any damages that you cause during your trespass -- for example, damage to a property owner's fence if you swerved onto his property to avoid a crash.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              MEH

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X