Serious question: if he was your client, would he win the trial knowing the circumstances? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Without getting too deep and not actually knowing the FACTS of the situation all I can say is like any legal question it depends...Rule of thumb is you are never allowed to booby trap, even your own property. There's an old case out there about a burglar getting his leg blown off by a shotgun and trip wire that sets that precedent. The land owner, if he is the booby trapper would be liable, but for what damages if any? No damages no case. But say hypothetically suspected trespasser got some paint in his eye and it caused eye damage, the land owner would be liable even though the guy was supposedly trespassing. We all owe a legal duty to others in the eyes of the law, even trespassers.
now all the slob needed was the gun to go off as he leaned over it and cleaned paint off the trigger with his snot rag.....IDIOT !
An elderly deer hunter who was sprayed with paint while trespassing on a neighbor’s property on opening morning of the 2013 Pennsylvania deer season has had the charges stayed by the State. The charges will most likely be dropped in early August if he does not have further complaints filed against him. In another twist, the landowner who set the paint bomb was also ticketed in the incident — on charges of criminal mischief and criminal harassment for allegedly rigging up a trip wire that was attached to an explosive device that discharged a paint bomb on opening day of Pennsylvania’s 2013 gun-deer season. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I hated that court precedent. I believe that case entailed an elderly gentleman whose home had been broken into like eight times in just a few years. He rigged a bobby trap window in his bathroom with a shotgun which eventually did a great job and blew away a burglar. Our country has become WEAK>.
yeah, I wonder how that case would be adjudicated in a state w/ "stand your ground" or castle doctrine laws. For instance, what's the difference between someone who has a device (alarm or video surveillance) is alerted to the intruder, and goes in blasting w/o a verbal warning (likely completely justified under both SYG and Castle Doctrine) than a situation where a guy who has a tripwire/shotgun device? In both cases, a device is triggered to an illegal entry and then is dispatched by the property owner. I'm not advocating one side or the other here (atho anyone who follows my posts could probably figure me out) but honestly what is the difference?
Give it to 'em. I fully understand that permission to hunt a property is hard to come by, but if you can't obtain permission the legal way, you're like a doe at the end of the season; fair game. I try and do everything by the book and the right way, yet, people stilll 'try' and take advantage. However, I have faith and believe in karma...
