Man arrested for trespassing... on his own land

[cornbread]

Man arrested for trespassing... on his own land

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2400258/posts

Man versus the system. Man loses.

Jeremy Engelking will appear in Douglas County court this afternoon to face a trespassing charge. But here's the kicker: The Superior man allegedly trespassed on his own property.

Engelking, 27, aimed to hunt deer Wednesday morning when he noticed a pipeline crew on his land. He hopped on his ATV and told workers they had no right to be on his property because he had received no compensation from Enbridge Energy Partners L.P. for an easement.

Engelking said workers told him he was in an unsafe place and asked him to come to an equipment staging area, where he continued to argue his case.

But just as he was turning to leave, Engelking said an officer from the Douglas County Sheriff's Department arrived on the scene and approached with a Taser drawn.

"He ordered me to 'get down on the ground now!' And he said that I was being arrested for trespassing," Engelking said.

When Engelking protested, pointing out that he was on his own property, he said Sgt. Robert Smith told him: "It doesn't matter. You're going to jail. You can tell it to a judge tomorrow."

Man Arrested for Trespassing on his Own Land
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAk7So6aRUE

Charges dropped in pipeline-property dispute
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-ap-mn-pipelinetrespassi,0,5214456.story


Inch by inch, little by little, step by step we Americans are loosing ALL our rights.

[Kansas]

When I was in high school, we spent most Sundays hunting quail, pheasant, etc on a friend of mine's family farm. I happened to not be there the weekend a game warden stopped a group of hunters, including my friend. He got a ticket for not having a hunting license, nor a hunters safety course certificate. He was standing on the family ground when this happened. It got thrown out of court as soon as the judge reviewed the case.

[red oaks lumber]

this one is not about rights. if the land owner got hurt being in the rightof way who would be liable? enbridge .
landowners are compensated for the "right of way". when the company that has that r.o.w.they can control who or what can be there..

[Gary_C]

this one is not about rights.
when the company that has that r.o.w.they can control who or what can be there..

Sorry, but I don't believe that. It is all about rights for one thing.

And another thing having a r.o.w. is not the same as having ownership and the owner has the right to be on his property. As far as being injured, it would depend on where he was and what he was doing when injured. Just like a road r.o.w. if he was standing in traffic it would be one thing, but if he was merely standing with other contractor's men, that would be another matter. Depends on the circumstances.

So you could not just exclude the owner just because you did not want to hear what he was saying and especially not if you did not actually have a r.o.w.

[Warbird]

this one is not about rights. if the land owner got hurt being in the rightof way who would be liable? enbridge .
landowners are compensated for the "right of way". when the company that has that r.o.w.they can control who or what can be there..

"...and told workers they had no right to be on his property because he had received no compensation from Enbridge Energy Partners L.P. for an easement."

It is all about rights and the lack thereof. 

[beenthere]

When I was in high school, we spent most Sundays hunting quail, pheasant, etc on a friend of mine's family farm. I happened to not be there the weekend a game warden stopped a group of hunters, including my friend. He got a ticket for not having a hunting license, nor a hunters safety course certificate. He was standing on the family ground when this happened. It got thrown out of court as soon as the judge reviewed the case.

If this happened in WI, the landowner (or his family) would be required to have a license and hunt game according to the game laws and seasons. And the DNR seldom loses in court.  :


Reading several of the articles about this land owner, he had been offered money but refused that money. So there is more to the story here, I'm thinking. 

[ely]

it is tough to be an armchair quarterback when we dont have the playbook.

[red oaks lumber]

gary c,
if a landowner came to your logging site and basically is in your way,(saftey) are you going to keep working or try to get him to move for his own saftey?and if the landowner got loud and stupid with you what would you do then ? call law enforcement?

[Tom]

........he had been offered money but refused that money. So there is more to the story here, I'm thinking.

If I were a landowner, I would think that refusing money that would give someone rights to my land would be a viable alternative to being run over by anyone who felt that what was mine was "ours".

I think the proper mode that these people should have been in was to quit work and leave, when the man declared himself the "owner" and didn't want them on the property.  Doesn't sound like much of an argument to me.

[JohnG28]

Id have to agree.  If someone owns property and has a problem with people on his property, they should definately stop and iron out the problem or miscommunication immediately. 

[zopi]

I smell lawsuit(s)

and BS...on both sides...there are three stories...what he said, what they said, and what happened...

c'n tell ya though...if they don't have a legal ROW and his land was legally posted...he's got a case...

[Gary_C]

red oaks, those are hypothetical situations I have trouble imagining happening. The closest thing would be if I was working on state owned land, normal for me, and a member of the public got in my way for whatever reason. In that case I would avoid him and not argue with him. If he persisted in being confrontational, I would call the DNR Forester in charge and let him deal with the problem. There is always the potential for those type of problems with some rowdy deer hunters during gun season and typically they are avoided by staying out of the woods during those times.

In any case, I cannot imagine calling law enforcement to have the owner of the property arrested unless he became very threatening and even then I'd try to talk thru whatever dispute he had. After all I would be there at his pleasure and if that ended, I would be gone. And then it could become a civil action, not a criminal one.

[SwampDonkey]

A landowner, in my mind, has the right to refuse any payment or sign over any rights of way to anyone he sees fit. However, there was a time when many families along the river were about to loose their livelihoods farming and fishing (guiding) and everyone was offered a sum what the government figured the land was worth, take it or leave it. They were taking land that was going to be in flood by a new dam. My grandfather's uncle had his home site on the dam site, where his father was the first land grantee to settle the area. He had a house, 2 barns, spring house and sheds and 12 kids. They were all grown up by then, but he was forced to move onto another property he owned that had a camp to stay in. Died that winter over the whole episode. My grandfather had two guide camps he had to move up away from the river, and those camps are still standing. A fellow in PA bought them about 30 years ago and comes up every summer to spend time. I think he comes mostly to eat my uncle's cooking. Oh, and he likes Red River cereal, will eat a whole 2 quart potful if you let him. Don't you folks eat well down there? He reminds me of Homer Simpson, shaped like a pear. :D

[Kansas]

Beenthere

I am suprised that you would have to have a license to hunt on your own land. Here in Kansas, the basics-quail, pheasant, squirrel and rabbits are all okay on your own land without a license. I believe you can get a deer permit for little or nothing for hunting on your own ground. Not sure about turkey, and you always have to have a duck stamp for duck and geese.  You do still have to hunt in season.

[stonebroke]

Had the pipeline company gone though eminent domain?

Stonebroke

[Gary_C]

That is one of the unknowns here. If the guy had been offered compensation and refused to accept the check, he may not be in very good standing. Far as I know, if the state took eminent domain, the only thing he could dispute is price. He could not throw the pipeline company off his property.

So I could see where he could be charged with disorderly conduct if he got difficult, but not tresspassing. But apparently the judge threw both charges out.

[easymoney]

if he gets a lawyer and challenges the pipeline company the real winner will be the lawyers. i detest lawyers. i know they are nessicary but i still do not like having to deal with them.

[metalspinner]

The article mentions the owner was out hunting.  Could the presents of a weapon and the hieghtened emotions of the land owner have changed the perceptions of the contruction crew and the sherriff's deputy?