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
Well said.
Cite for all 50 States please.
Yes : Ex-mayor, ex-judge, ex-RTA board member, ex-Democrat Party leader...plus his wife is a lawyer .
Their friend, another judge, should have recused himself on the ethical complaint.
There are appeals in the works and hopefully the feds will get a call. The governor is part of the problem, so would likely cover for his friend, too.
Aerial pictures do not apparently validate the claims of a 20 year path created adversely by the perps.
Maybe a two year path ?
Okay, I stand down on the "local" corruption element. It still just seems wrong.
When Kirlin asked McLean why he was attempting to take a part of his land, Kirlin says that he responded that he needed room on the side of his house for ‘access to his back patio’. When Kirlin offered to give McLean five feet of his property for that purpose, Kirlin says that he was told that wasn’t enough. The amount of property that McLean wants is one-third of Kirlin’s land, which will render the remaining two-thirds too small to legally build on. McLean’s motives are transparent.
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. This land obviosly does not fall under that umbrella, and I suspect that, since they live just down the road, the Kirlins simply allowed McLean and Stevens to use that corner of their property (but certainly not for twenty years) simply because they did not want to create hard feelings, and they certainly did not expect this result.
Whatever the intent of 'adverse possession', this ruling is immoral and can be defined as nothing more than theft. The Kirlins faithfully paid taxes on this land for twenty years, and, if the ruling stands, McLean and Stevens will receive one-third of it at no cost to them. The ruling must be overturned, and the judge and the thieves prosecuted.
~ joanie
I suspect that McLean and Stevens began forging that path when they got wind of the fact that the Kirlins were finally planning to build on their land.
The local judge who ruled on this ethical ruling is their friend. He should have recused himself.
Seperate from the core issue.
That is my opinion. There are reports that the perps recently heard that an architect had been hired, so they quickly made this path.
I’ve seen the video (that’s where I lifted the pic at the top of the post). Don Kirlin seems to explain very well most of the ‘facts’ of this case, in a very non-emotional, even-handed way. If you read all of the comments on this thread, the motives and strategies of McLean and Stevens are glaringly obvious, and, if the law winds up siding with them after appeal, it will be a travesty.
Thanks.
Several local tv stations had coverage of this rally, so the word is getting out.
I doubt that even their friend, the governor, can hush this up.
The more I look at this...the more it stinks like the wet cow pie that it is. It is immoral, it should not have been considered, and it is a wresting of the law in question.
All of us should speak out and do what we can, IMHO, to get it overturned.
Well said.
~bookmark~
It’s a case of adverse possession pure and simple. Where was the adversity as pointed out here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverse_possession
Adverse possession doesn’t work here. Especially item number 2.
For the judge to have rights he must have been holding the land adversarially - keeping others out to retain exclusive use, etc. during the time of his “possession”. Looks like he was using it but there is no evidence he was keeping others from using it - until now. That is not enough time for the adversarial part to have been taking place.
And this from wikipidia: “In simple terms, this means that those attempting to claim the property are occupying it exclusively (keeping out others) and openly as if it were their own. Some jurisdictions permit accidental adverse possession as might occur with a surveying error. Generally, the openly hostile possession must be continuous (although not necessarily constant) without challenge or permission from the lawful owner, for a fixed statutory period in order to acquire title. Where the property is of a type ordinarily only occupied during certain times (such as a summer cottage), the adverse possessor may only need to have exclusive, open, hostile possession during those successive useful periods, for the required number of years.”
All that said, there is a reason you want to maintain connections to property you own. Adverse Possession laws were created for a reason.
Aerial pictures apparently do not confirm a long term path...maybe two years and not twenty years. It will be up to the ex-mayor, ex-judge...to prove his case on the core issue. Perhaps he can provide some real evidence ?
Second, the ethical complain should not have been heard by a friend. Rather the friend, the judge, should have recused himself personally. The matter should have been sent to another court where this perp had not worked previously.
The appearance of corruption alone should have demanded this action. The friend knows this just like the any other judge.
>>Cite for all 50 States please.<<
Ask ANY real estate agent in ANY state about it.
Good post. You touched all the bases.
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.