bowhunterjae
Member
Survey sent!
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I don't understand why this is even a debate, if there is an easement in place isn't it a case closed situation?
Often there is a "prescriptive easement" by virtue of historic trail use, but not a recorded or court ordered easement. That is why the documentation of historical use is critical to the claim of access easement that should eventually be decided by the court..... if there is an easement in place isn't it a case closed situation?
Having monitored the Tim Newman murder case for months and discussed the case with attorney Peter Dayton, the prescriptive easement expert witness, I can tell you that it was an area development / property rights / Montana values debacle that went on for years and resulted in the murder of someone attempting to maintain longstanding access to public land. The deceased Tim Newman was obsessively adamant about using the trails he had used for many years to the point that he and the new landowner threatened each other and were always armed when out and about. It was a tragedy that illustrates the strong feelings that folks have concerning access and private property rights. It did not turn out well for either Newman or Joe Campbell, convicted of negligent homicide (but who actually murdered Tim Newman IMO) and who the judge essentially evicted from the area. It's a terrible story for both.What the eff is this?
Often there is a "prescriptive easement" by virtue of historic trail use, but not a recorded or court ordered easement. That is why the documentation of historical use is critical to the claim of access easement that should eventually be decided by the court.
Having monitored the Tim Newman murder case for months and discussed the case with attorney Peter Dayton, the prescriptive easement expert witness, I can tell you that it was an area development / property rights / Montana values debacle that went on for years and resulted in the murder of someone attempting to maintain longstanding access to public land. The deceased Tim Newman was obsessively adamant about using the trails he had used for many years to the point that he and the new landowner threatened each other and were always armed when out and about. It was a tragedy that illustrates the strong feelings that folks have concerning access and private property rights. It did not turn out well for either Newman or Joe Campbell, convicted of negligent homicide (but who actually murdered Tim Newman IMO) and who the judge essentially evicted from the area. It's a terrible story for both.
It involved much more than "walking across dirt", to include cutting locks and confrontations, but still should not have resulted in someone being murdered. Campbell made a deal with the prosecuting attorneys for the state and with the court to plead guilty to the lesser charge of "negligent homicide" as opposed to second degree or first degree murder. I agree that he got off much too leniently. I felt strongly enough about it that after the hung jury, I wrote to the prosecutors and asked them to retry Campbell for murder, expressing my "armchair / peanut gallery" legal advice. Obviously they decided otherwise.Taking someone's life over something as petty as walking across dirt combined with the fact that he got off so lightly is simply beyond comprehension.