Posted on 11/25/2007 6:31:07 PM PST by joanie-f
How many times have we heard about government abuses of the right to own property going on in neighborhoods across America, in the form of the invoking of the right of ‘eminent domain’, and the corruption of other legal concepts? Kelo vs. New London is probably the most publicized of such unconstitutional atrocities, but similar atrocities occur daily across this country.
How many of us have attempted to help the victims of such abuses of power? I myself have done so no more than once or twice.
I ask any FReeper who happens upon this thread to take ten minutes of his or her day to read about one such abuse of power. In terms of land area, it is a small abuse, and it affects only two ordinary American citizens who wield no more power than you or I. But its ramifications are enormous. If we’re not going to decide to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with the two relatively anonymous Americans I’d like to introduce to you, exactly when will we decide that it’s time to unite in revolt against the growing ‘privileged elite’ in this country, and the menace they represent to us all? The so-called legal/justice system is using all manner of wicked precedent to commit major, obscene private land grabs ... all such crimes tracing back to a desire for more wealth and power on the part of those who already wield more than you or I.
Before inserting the precious words ‘life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness’ into the Declaration, our Founders seriously considered using the wording ‘life, liberty and property’ (as originated by John Locke). I believe the latter to be a more powerful representation of our inalienable rights, but apparently the modern American government/judicial system vehemently disagrees with either expression.
Don and Susie Kirlin own a vacant lot, worth roughly a million dollars in today’s market, on the outskirts of Boulder, Colorado. They purchased it about twenty years ago with the idea of eventually building a home there. It is located just down the road from their current home, they walk by the land regularly, and they have been paying taxes on it faithfully for the past two decades.
Unfortunately for the Kirlins the couple that owns a home adjacent to their lot consists of a county judge, Richard McLean, and his wife, Edith Stevens, who is also an attorney. McLean and Stevens have been active, and powerful, in Boulder County politics for decades. It seems that this ambitious couple has been using a portion of the Kirlins’ land to occasionally hold their own private parties, and, in doing so, they have also created worn pathways through portions of that land.
It also would appear that these two believe that, if the Kirlins build a home on the land they purchased for just that reason, the view of the surrounding landscape from their own home would be diminished.
When the Kirlins attempted to build a fence on a portion of their vacant land before beginning construction on it, McLean and Stevens had a restraining order issued against them, stating that, since they had been using the land themselves for some time, they had become ‘attached’ to it and they are claiming it as their own. The restraining order was issued within a few hours of their request for it. Apparently the wheels of justice move at lighting speed, if the person requesting the moving has the right connections.
As a result, McLean and Stevens have invoked the doctrine of ‘adverse possession’, which allows a citizen to claim another’s property simply by virtue of using it for a specified period of time, in order to declare one third of the Kirlins’ land as their own. A Boulder judge has ordered the Kirlins to hand over to McLean and Stevens one-third of their land, which will result in their no longer owning sufficient land on which to construct not only their dream home but any home at all.
As if the preceding weren’t evidence in itself of unmitigated chutzpah, McLean and Stevens are not only claiming to ‘own’ a large portion of the land in question (without ever having paid a penny for it, or any of the taxes incumbent in its ownership), but they are also asking the court to rule that the Kirlins must pay any legal fees that they incur in order to achieve this particular theft.
Thus, as is becoming increasingly common in Amerika 2007, two people in power have decided to use a corrupt system to steal from someone else of lesser political stature -- in this case, out in the open, and without conscience or remorse.
Needless to say, the Kirlins are appealing the ruling (and amassing large, and no doubt growing, legal fees in the process). But I wouldn’t be taking any bets on their success. ‘Fighting city hall’ is fast becoming an empty phrase anymore, because the concepts of government of, by and for the people -- originally made possible by public servants who value individual rights more than government power -- is fast heading for extinction, as corruption, greed, and lust for power achieve a momentum that has become virtually relentless and unstoppable. Not to mention the fact that both the eighth (re: coveting) and tenth (re: stealing) of the Ten Commandments have essentially been declared null and void.
This case vividly portrays the battle between the average American citizen and our modern American 'ruling elite'. Yet too many Americans are more interested in the comfort of our couches, and the proximity of our remote controls, than we are in the plight of the likes of the Kirlins -- victims of a system gone awry.
Unless we Americans start giving a damn about the abuses that our neighbors suffer under tyrannical government dictates, those abuses will someday affect us, and there will be nobody left who can turn the tragedy around.
The only difference between appeasement and surrender is the passage of time.
Contact Information for Boulder, Colorado officials (and thanks, in advance, to all who avail themselves of this source of redress):
Cindy Domenico, Boulder County Commissioner
Ben Pearlman, Boulder County Commissioner
Will Toor, Boulder County Commissioner
Joan Fitzgerald, Colorado State Senator, District 16
Brandon Shaffer, Colorado State Senator, District 17
Ron Tupa, Colorado State Senator, District 18
Alice Madden, Colorado State Representative, District 10
Jack Pommer, Colorado State Representative, District 11
Paul Weissmann, Colorado State Representative, District 12
Claire Levy, Colorado State Representative, District 13
Dianne Primavera, Colorado State Representative, District 33
Resources:
Legal Landgrab Should Be Overturned on Appeal
Boulder Couple Accuses Former Judge, Mayor of Land Grab
Hard Feelings on Hardscrabble Drive
~ joanie
Allegiance and Duty Betrayed
Reading some of the other comments on other threads and topics, I can only say I've never seen people so made before. I truly hope the gummint comes to its senses.
That is only a codification of standards of evidence, which in this case were ignored completely. Perjury is the sole basis of claim here, and personal favor and bias the basis of judicial action.
~ joanie
I keep waiting for ‘objectivity’ before I write it...hasn’t happened yet! lol
And I don't suppose it will. :)
Most of us never reach the point of 'objectivity' concerning such emotionally-charged injustice.
If you ever do write your story, though, please be sure to ping me to it.
~ joanie
Google has Items (1) and (2) below in the above link:
(1)
These terms only appear in links pointing to this page:
http boulderdude files wordpress com 2007 11 order1 pdf
________________________________________________________
(2)
Page 1
EFILED Document
CO Boulder County District Court 20th JD
Filing Date: Oct 17 2007 6:04PM MDT
Filing ID: 16718877
Review Clerk: N/A
________________________________________________________
Colorado Judicial Branch - 20th Judicial District
Home page for the "Colorado Judicial Branch - 20th Judicial District".
________________________________________________________
Perhaps this will help someone find the Court document.
The path is good enough, but this judge had landscaped the neighbor's property also, and the surrounding neighbors had noted he did so for over 20 years. The neighbors testified that they thought it was the judges land, because he was frequently seen there doing work. There was also mention of the judge maintaining some wall there.
A building would have made this case easy. As far as fences go, if everyone thinks it's on a property line, and it's not, it will likely generate a loss for someone. Anyone can place a fence anywhere on their property. For instance an animal fence might be placed within someone's property. If the neighbor assumes use of the other side of the fence and the property owner doesn't say anything about it for ~20yrs, the user can claim the land. Use means he could have planted trees, or flowers. The neighbor could also put a fence, or decoration, such as near a driveway, then claim the land to the decoration after the statutory time.
It's always good to know exactly where the boundaries are, and check any surveys with simple tools. Then don't allow folks to use the land, unless they're good buddies, or a contract for rent exists. $1 is good enough to protect the owner's interest against this sort of loss, but that opens one up to other risks. Local layers should always be consulted. ie. If you grant permission to someone to grab some sagebrush of your land and they trip and split heir head open, the grieving wife can sue for damages. If the sagebrush picking goes on long enough, they can get an easement, and if they do grooming/landscaping they can claim the land.(if no rents)
Yeah, it does-in all states. I posted the relevant link on CO's statute in #98. It's CO:38-41-101->102, assuming the owner has clear title.
"No, it's a case of perjury, and a dishonest jurist, pure and simple."
Only according to the Kirlins, who testified in court they were absentee owners and knew nothing about what went on on their own land. I read the court doc. The allegations being made on this thread are bogus. This was a simple adverse possession case and the Kirlins did absolutely nothing to prevent it for more than 20 years.
My understanding of where the law comes from is when one property owner(A) gives an adjoining property owner(B) permission to cross his land. Property owner(B) uses this right of access to establish regular entry. The Court can decide that after a sufficient time period property owner(B) cannot be forbidden this access.
To make this more logical. Rancher(A) gives Rancher(B) permission to drive his haybaler across Rancher(A)’s pasture because the normal access to Rancher(B)’s pasture is not suitable for heavy equipment.
Rancher(B) uses this access for years without any problems. Then Rancher(A) sells the land to a building contractor. The building contractor doesn’t know about the previous agreement between the ranchers. He puts up a construction fence blocking Rancher(B)’s access to his pasture to bale the hay. Rancher(B) goes to Court to ask the judge to grant him access because that entryway is the only way he can gather his hay.
Solution: If you grant someone access across your land, lease the access with an annual contract. If you catch someone on your property, file a police report expressing your denial of free access to all violaters. The cops may tell you to post signs.....DO IT!
#84 doesn't apply. See #98. #84 only applies to a case where there is no clear title to begin with, such that 2 parties have registered deeds in the Co. recorder's office.
"I don't believe that McLean or Stevens have 'maintained' the land, nor have they paid a cent in taxes,"
They landscaped it for over 20 years, and used it as if it was their own. They weren't required to pay any taxes whatsoever on the property. All that was required was that they used it. See#98.
"the fact that they may lose the natural view from the side window of their home does not take precedence over their neighbors' property rights."
The law expects landowners to take care of their property. That includes taking the time and effort to make sure no one uses it openly and notoriously as if it were their own. The court docs show that the Kirlins didn't take that care and were absent for over 20 years.
What you described happened to a neighbor here in Eureka Ca 35 years ago. The county realigned a stretch of road and cut off about an acre. The property owner across the road started to pay taxes on that piece and it was soon his...
BS. I gave the statute and the link to it. The standard of evidence in this and all civil cases is a preponderance of evidence. The judge had more than enough. The neighbors thought the land was his, and testified they saw him out there working frequently over those 20 years.
"Perjury is the sole basis of claim here, and personal favor and bias the basis of judicial action."
BS. You don't know a damn thing about the case.
The court's order is laughable in its open prejudice; like many corrupt small-minded chiselers, this court plays "where's the pea" with justice, merely by 'finding' the witnesses for the favored side credible (even when contrary to the stated findings), 'finding' the witnesses for the disfavored side not credible, and ignoring any and all evidence that does not comport with the pre-ordained outcome. But this sort of power play is, given the publicity, in all liklihood too raw for the appellate court to uphold. But go right ahead and defend these scum...your evident lack of ethical standards will never pass muster with the decent folks on FR.
A year ago, we decided to construct a fence, in accordance with our HOA guidelines, as we had been warned by another neighbor that former judge Richard McLean and Edie Stevens, another lawyer, were planning to file this "adverse possession" claim (a land-grabbing technique). It was shortly after that time that paths started to appear on our property. McLean and Stevens were unable to provide any photographs of any paths existing prior to one year ago, even though they claimed these paths were obvious for more than 18 years.
Prior to trial, we tried to accommodate their requests for access to the rear of their house from the western side (though they already had access). We offered to build steps, and were even willing to offer them a small portion of our land to facilitate their needs. They declined all of this. Their objective appeared to be to take away a large portion (34 percent) of our lot, so as to render it un-build able, unusable and worthless on the open market, which is what they accomplished with Judge Klein's assistance.
Since 1984, we have paid taxes, homeowners' dues, complied with our HOA requests for fence maintenance, and city of Boulder requests for weed control. We walked by at least once a week and never saw any indication that the neighbors were using it, much less making a hostile claim to our property. How would you feel, if under these circumstances, someone took your property?
Is it right, moral or ethical that a Boulder judge award a former Boulder judge our property, when in fact they had no photographs or proof of the alleged paths for the past 18 years? In Judge Klein's order, he states "Plaintiffs' attachment to the land is stronger than the true owners' attachment." Oh really? We don't think so!
DON and SUSIE KIRLIN
“CO:38-41-101->102”
Lex mala, lex nulla.
It is? Of course you read it, right? Where is it?
eminent domain is a part of our history. how would highways, railways, dams, etc. be built without it? as long as a “fair” market price is paid, we have recognized in our history a need for such a practice.
Thanks. That’s from the link to the court doc that’s n/g anymore. The CO court system wants $s for it.
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.