Government of, by and for the Privileged

11/25/07 | joanie-f

[joanie-f]

Don and Susie Kirlin of Boulder, Colordao.

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

Kirlin’s Lost Land

Boulder Couple Accuses Former Judge, Mayor of Land Grab

Hard Feelings on Hardscrabble Drive

~ joanie
Allegiance and Duty Betrayed

[Iwo Jima]

For the last 20 years, did the Kirlins ever set foot on the property? If not, why not? If so, did they see the uses that the Mcleans were putting to the property? If so, what if anything did they do about it? If not, why not?

[Iwo Jima]

Perjury is the sole basis of claim here

Why do you say this? What testimony was perjured? And how do you know that?
and personal favor and bias the basis of judicial action.

Why do you say this? What testimony was perjured? And how do you know that?

What do you think that they judge did that was wrong?

[Iwo Jima]

People buy land everyday in this nation and leave it vacant for years.

And if another person uses it openly and adversely for the statutory period of time, they will lose title. It's the law.

[wtc911]

I do not believe many of us are familiar with the concept of 'adverse possession', but I suspect that it has to do with land that has been neglected.

_______________________________________

Not so. Even in suburbia if your neighbors use part of your yard to park their cars or build a bbq pit or flower garden without your expressed permission and without your expressed protest then you may one day find yourself having to give up that piece of your lot to them.

[Iwo Jima]

Are you saying there was no such testimony by the HOA neighbor or plaintiff witness?

I have not seen a transcript but I read the court's judgment and findings of fact and conclusions of law. The evidence supporting the platinffs was substantial. The Kirlins' evidence was weak. The judgment appears well founded.

IIRC, these people who are now coming forward with "evidence" were not witnesses. The judge had to make his decision based on the evidence at trial -- not what people might come forward to say a month later.

[Cvengr]

IMHO, if the case had been one of adverse possession, then the judge should have been paying property taxes on the land for the past 20 years. Since he hasn’t, shouldn’t the IRS be investigating him for tax evasion?

[Iwo Jima]

They have obviously awakened to McLean's and Stevens' motives and tactics and have now filed an appeal, but they were not on the ball at the outset of this. It appears that they were hit broadside.

Did they have a lawyer?

It sounds that they were as neglectful of the lawsuit as they were of their property, and so they have lost both.

A judgment based on a trial to the court not a jury is just about the hardest thing to get overturned. Based on what we know, I give this judgment a 90% chance of standing on appeal.

I can't think what the grounds for appeal would even be.

[Iwo Jima]

Why do you think that there was corruption in this case?

[wtc911]

Hey I know of some high priced commercial land in my area that the owners have not set foot on in 20 years and no one has improved on it. Now what do you suppose is my odds of moving in taking it from them in court. Not a snownballs chance. One set of rules for thee another set for me right?

_______________________________________________________

If you have been playing softball with your kids or selling lemonade from a stand or growing tomatos on that lot for those twenty years then I'd say your chances of successfully claiming it as yours would be excellent. Use of the land is the point.

[Iwo Jima]

What cronyism do you think was involved in this case? Please let us know what you know and how you learned it.

[cva66snipe]

And if another person uses it openly and adversely for the statutory period of time, they will lose title. It's the law.

In that case we are no longer a nation of laws but of privlidges granted to those who can afford to take others property away. If so then property ownership means zilch and a lot of land speculators holding commerical interset {unattended} should be fair game for Joe Citizen then. Maybe I should go camp out on some. I bet their lawyers {the second oldest profession and most despised due to such deeds as this} would win. There may be a law on the books allowing for stealing of land but that by no means makes it a Constitutional or moral act by any party including our government.

[Iwo Jima]

Adverse possession does not require that the payment of taxes. Who paid the taxes is just about irrelevant. Of course, if the claimant paid the taxes, that would strenghten his claim, but it is not required.

The IRS has nothing to do with property taxes. There is no such thing as "tax evasion" with respect to property taxes.

[Cvengr]

It is interesting to observe those who defend the judge in this situation for it manifests their lack of righteousness.

[Iwo Jima]

It looks like either Susie Kirlin is lying or spunkets is misrepresenting/doesn’t know the contents of the court documents.

Not necessarily. If you read Susie's comments, she never says if these people testified at trial. And, of course, in any trial the factfinder (here, the court) must make decisions based on the evidence at trial, not what appears in the newspaper a month later.

[cva66snipe]

If you have been playing softball with your kids or selling lemonade from a stand or growing tomatos on that lot for those twenty years then I'd say your chances of successfully claiming it as yours would be excellent. Use of the land is the point.

I'd say I wouldn't stand any chance especially if it was a commercial holding by an influential person and we all know there is plenty of that around. In that case vagrants should own many inner city buildings then right? I'm certain they will be glad to hear of their new found fortunes.

As I said this is ridiculous. For over 200 years everyday in this nation persons have bought property and maybe not seen it for over 20 years. It is land they plan to retire to someday. If they pay their land taxes then they are paying for state and county services to that land thus it is maintained and not abandoned. I can not believe some support the stealing of land by others.

[Publius Valerius]

That we even have such a concept of "adverse possession" says volumes about the extreme depth to which this country's legal system has been corrupted.

The doctrine has been around for hundreds of years, and it's frankly good policy. All the rightful owners would had to have done to preserve their title to the land was to commence an ejectment action or a quiet title action against the trespassers. They didn't do that.

Typically society likes to ensure that resources are being put to their best possible use. When land sits vacant for a period of twenty years, well, sorry--time to be a better steward of your stuff.

[Iwo Jima]

Adverse possession has been the law since before this country was founded. It has not been the subject of much abuse or any that I have seen.

Moral of the story: if you do not set foot on your property for 20 years and someone else uses it and takes care of it and improves it for 20 years, you will lose title.

I am fine with that concept and result.

[Iwo Jima]

What did the judge do that was wrong?

[Publius Valerius]

If so, when you purchased it were you advised about “adverse possession”? If not, how exactly were you supposed to know it existed? Were you supposed to divine it?

You don't need to know about the doctrine to know that people are trespassing on your land. If the "owners" would have commenced an ejectment action against the judge during the twenty years during which the judge had openly used the property, then this wouldn't have been an issue, would it?

[Iwo Jima]

Your calm and reasoned response is appreciated. There has been a lot of emotionalism even hysteria on this thread, and unnecessarily so. There was no injustice or outrage here that I can see.