Skip to comments.
Couple claim hope for 'peace' in Boulder land grab case
Daily Camera ^
| December 24, 2007
| Heath Urie
Posted on 12/24/2007 9:57:15 AM PST by george76
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-122 next last
To: wmfights
What about common decency? What about common neglect! These people knew each other, they all were mistaken about where the property line was. If you buy a piece of property establish your property line. Simple common sense. These people had owned the lot for 23 years, it was 200 yards from where they lived. They bought thought the line was in a different spot.
I don't know why it is important enough to post here at all.
41
posted on
12/24/2007 12:32:10 PM PST
by
org.whodat
(What's the difference between a Democrat and a republican????)
To: tarheelswamprat; org.whodat; george76; Jack Wilson
They claimed that the footpath met the requirements, but aerial photos showed that the footpath was recent and had not been there anywhere near 18 years. If this can be proved in court, shouldn't they lose their law licenses and judgeships?
42
posted on
12/24/2007 12:33:51 PM PST
by
wmfights
(LUKE 9:49-50 , MARK 9:38-41)
To: tarheelswamprat
Arrogance and ignorance are poor substitutes for facts and logic, especially when coupled with a complete disdain for any semblance of justice.The only arrogance and ignorance is on your part, the court has ruled, if you don't like it file an appeal. However given the points of the case I think the judge was correct.
43
posted on
12/24/2007 12:36:42 PM PST
by
org.whodat
(What's the difference between a Democrat and a republican????)
To: org.whodat
So you’re in favor of stealing other people’s property? How much property have you stolen? That sort of “legal” theft has been tried around here, and did not end well for the would-be thieves.
To: org.whodat
What about common neglect! I haven't read anything in the article about the property being condemned by the city because of the state it was in. I do remember reading that the owners did weed the property and maintained the fence.
These people knew each other, they all were mistaken about where the property line was.
If you have any familiarity with real estate, outside a court room, you would know that it is not uncommon to have some confusion about property lines. The ones who conveniently stole their neighbors property sure seemed to know what the lines were. They just didn't have the decency to talk to their neighbors about usage, or purchase.
45
posted on
12/24/2007 12:42:05 PM PST
by
wmfights
(LUKE 9:49-50 , MARK 9:38-41)
To: george76
"We still hope that we can reconcile our differences with the Kirlins and restore peace in our neighborhood and community," McLean and Stevens wrote. Easy enough: pay for the property (at whatever your neighbors' value it), AND pay for all expenses your neighbors incurred defending it.
And no, I won't hold my breath waiting for it to happen...
46
posted on
12/24/2007 12:42:36 PM PST
by
Who is John Galt?
( "He therefore who may resist, must be allowed to strike." - John Locke, 1690)
To: org.whodat; Jack Wilson
Wait a minute...how can there be a claim of adverse possession when McLean/Stevens are now
admitting in writing that they didn't trespass after all? They said under oath that they did and it was
on that basis the land was granted.
47
posted on
12/24/2007 12:47:04 PM PST
by
pray4liberty
(Watch and pray.)
To: Jack Wilson
If the plaintiffs met the requirements, it's tough toenails. If they didn't and we have a dishonest judge, that's a different story. That is the story.
48
posted on
12/24/2007 12:49:03 PM PST
by
pray4liberty
(Watch and pray.)
To: org.whodat; tarheelswamprat; joanie-f; george76
Where did you get your degree in real estate??? Where did you get your degree in law???
One thing left out of McClean & Stevens' story is that they've honed their skills at land manipulation through the RTD and FasTracks Light Rail Eminent Domain procedures, which have been under study for over ten years.
Here's my take after digging through all of the stories and several other segues to others similar:
Fact: McLean and Stevens both testified and proved that they willfully, intentionally, and with forethought trespassed onto the Kirlin property.
Fact: Statutory Law holds that you cannot profit from any result of your own intentional criminal act, of which Trespass is one.
Fact: McLean, Stevens, and Judge Klein are subject to and bound by the Cannons of Ethics of the Bar, in that they cannot commit or countenance a criminal act.
My IANAL conclusion: The Kirlins retain their property at the original boundaries. McLean and Stevens are assessed Kirlins legal fees and court costs. A formal request is placed to the State Bar and/or Licensing Commission to investigate McLean, Stevens, and Klein, with a view toward Disbarment, if warranted.
That should be what the Appeal Court determines. We shall see if Colorado still honors the Rule of Law.
Merry Christmas, and Best Wishes for a Happy New Year to the Kirlins and their supporters.
49
posted on
12/24/2007 12:49:08 PM PST
by
brityank
(The more I learn about the Constitution, the more I realise this Government is UNconstitutional !!)
To: org.whodat; tarheelswamprat
The only arrogance and ignorance is on your part, the court has ruled, if you don't like it file an appeal. I think you can't see the forest because of all the trees around you.
This case illustrates how our legal system employs "justice" for the select few at the expense of the many. I'm not a lawyer, but if I remember correctly adverse possession can occur when the use by those seeking to take the property has been open and notorious for a specified number of years. If the people who stole the property were open about it, why didn't their neighbors who owned the property know about it?
50
posted on
12/24/2007 12:49:23 PM PST
by
wmfights
(LUKE 9:49-50 , MARK 9:38-41)
To: pray4liberty
Take it to court! A real simple process!
51
posted on
12/24/2007 12:51:22 PM PST
by
org.whodat
(What's the difference between a Democrat and a republican????)
To: ozzymandus
If you don’t understand adverse possession it not my fault, and it goes all the way back to old English law.
52
posted on
12/24/2007 12:54:50 PM PST
by
org.whodat
(What's the difference between a Democrat and a republican????)
To: brityank
Fact: McLean and Stevens both testified and proved that they willfully, intentionally, and with forethought trespassed onto the Kirlin property. Fact: Statutory Law holds that you cannot profit from any result of your own intentional criminal act, of which Trespass is one.
Aha, maybe that's why they're saying now, they didn't trespass. So which is it? They railroaded the Kirlins into a corner and won their case, but now it seems the tables are turning on them.
They are truly reaping what they have sown.
53
posted on
12/24/2007 12:57:38 PM PST
by
pray4liberty
(Watch and pray.)
To: org.whodat
Take it to court! A real simple process! Should I trust a crooked Judge?
54
posted on
12/24/2007 1:00:00 PM PST
by
pray4liberty
(Watch and pray.)
To: pray4liberty; brityank
They railroaded the Kirlins into a corner and won their case, but now it seems the tables are turning on them. We can only hope.
I hope they lose their ability to practice law.
55
posted on
12/24/2007 1:03:06 PM PST
by
wmfights
(LUKE 9:49-50 , MARK 9:38-41)
To: wmfights
Both of them are retired, they are in their 70s I believe, but I would like to see some of their friends lose their ability to practice law (namely, Judges Sandstead and Klein).
56
posted on
12/24/2007 1:04:36 PM PST
by
pray4liberty
(Watch and pray.)
To: pray4liberty; org.whodat
Take it to court! A real simple process!What if you don't have the 6 figures to fight and the other party is a friend of those in the courthouse?
57
posted on
12/24/2007 1:06:27 PM PST
by
wmfights
(LUKE 9:49-50 , MARK 9:38-41)
To: Jack Wilson
“Getting land by adverse possession has been around forever.”
I don’t care how long its been around. Its wrong, and these people are still lowlifes for stealing their neighbors land.
58
posted on
12/24/2007 1:07:21 PM PST
by
DesScorp
To: pray4liberty
Both of them are retired, they are in their 70s I believe, but I would like to see some of their friends lose their ability to practice law (namely, Judges Sandstead and Klein). In their 70's and haven't developed any integrity, just the smarts to know how to steal. Sad.
I agree people should be held accountable.
59
posted on
12/24/2007 1:09:07 PM PST
by
wmfights
(LUKE 9:49-50 , MARK 9:38-41)
To: wmfights
I would venture to guess that they’ve been railroading people their entire careers, only this time, they got caught.
Read the letter...they blame everybody else but themselves.
60
posted on
12/24/2007 1:12:22 PM PST
by
pray4liberty
(Watch and pray.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-122 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson