Well this is going to get interesting

[gst]

What do you expect when the answer has been given yet you keep asking the same question! I can't even fathom what you must have been like as a child! I'm truly shocked you weren't smothered to death by age ten!

Mr Nelson, exactly what personal whiney ass shit did I spout towards you as a person to elicit such childish responses?

I simply asked you to share with us exactly how you would have handled this from the start to prevent all this. A mature response would have been to simply hit the quote icon on the response you gave previously to show the answer.

But your presumptive insult laden post about the Morton County sheriff when they did their jobs as you said they should do probably tells us what we need to know.

Growing up I was always told, the best way to learn something is to ask questions. I had great parents that had the patience to teach me how to do many things. They also taught me to respect people based on their actions. Your statements on here towards Morton County law enforcement .........well I don't have much respect for those that can not formulate a simple statement without doing so in the manner you did.

 

[dean nelson]

When I was growing up in was told if you ask a stupid question you get a stupid answer!

 

[PrairieGhost]

Looks like the real three stooges to me.

 

[gst]

MR. Nelson to speak directly to your insult laden post regarding the Morton County Sheriff. You do know that ND is a state that requires notification of posted land correct?

So the lands these people were charged with trespass on had to have been posted right? (otherwise they have the right to enter unless specifically told by a tenant, representative of the owner or the owner)

So if these lands were posted to warrant trespass charges, would that reporter be able to claim "implied consent" to be present on that property or was she just breaking the law like others?

Perhaps the Morton County sheriff and County states attorney understand the law a bit better than you. Yes she may likely sue. Maybe the charges get dropped. The fact remains law enforcement did their jobs like you said they should and you responded like an arrogant, petulant child.

- - - Updated - - -

When I was growing up in was told if you ask a stupid question you get a stupid answer!

That might just explain things............

 

[Kurtr]

When I was growing up in was told if you ask a stupid question you get a stupid answer!

I

 

[deleted___account]

#SiteNeedsMoreGST ;:;popcorn

 

[deleted_account]

#SiteNeedsMoreGST ;:;popcorn

ive got a disease, and the only cure is more gst and plainsman sword fighting.

 

[Davy Crockett]

Looks like the real three stooges to me.

You mean like this ?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NuoETI4QmCE

 

[svnmag]

G is correct about land posting and strangely defending LE.

 

[dean nelson]

MR. Nelson to speak directly to your insult laden post regarding the Morton County Sheriff. You do know that ND is a state that requires notification of posted land correct?

So the lands these people were charged with trespass on had to have been posted right? (otherwise they have the right to enter unless specifically told by a tenant, representative of the owner or the owner)

So if these lands were posted to warrant trespass charges, would that reporter be able to claim "implied consent" to be present on that property or was she just breaking the law like others?

Perhaps the Morton County sheriff and County states attorney understand the law a bit better than you. Yes she may likely sue. Maybe the charges get dropped. The fact remains law enforcement did their jobs like you said they should and you responded like an arrogant, petulant child.

- - - Updated - - -



That might just explain things............

Have you ever thought about a career in NASCAR? If not you should because you are insanely good at going around and around in a circle and never actually going anywhere!

 

[Kurtr]

Have you ever thought about a career in NASCAR? If not you should because you are insanely good at going around around in a circle and never actually going anywhere!

Around an around

 

[Obi-Wan]

welcome to the party shep you are number four

Looks like the real three stooges to me.

 

[gst]

ive got a disease, and the only cure is more gst and plainsman sword fighting.

That is a very terrible disease. You have my sympathies.

- - - Updated - - -

Ah Mr. Nelson, once again you avoid answering a simple question that was asked because of your "Constitutional scholars" claim about this arrest. Why not simply answer the question? Would this reporter be able to stand behind an implied consent argument in this situation?

 

[svnmag]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJ5u8JWHhMM

 

[gst]

#SiteNeedsMoreGST ;:;popcorn

Sorry, I am trying to limit myself.

- - - Updated - - -

https://www.rcfp.org/reporter’s-field-guide/private-property




Private Property

Newsworthy events such as arrests, fires or demonstrations frequently occur on private property. But property owners or police sometimes deny journalists access to homes, businesses, and even seemingly public places such as shopping centers and privately owned housing developments. Even when reporters gain access without being stopped, they can be arrested for trespass and property owners may sue them after the fact, seeking damages for trespass or invasion of privacy. (Even though this is an access guide, some of the privacy cases will be discussed because they can create new standards of allowable access to property, although they don't directly interfere with the gathering of news.)
The U.S. Supreme Court has not yet considered whether the media have the right to follow news onto private property. Lower courts that have examined the issue have rendered widely varying opinions.
Courts frequently focus on whether the media had consent either from the owner or from law enforcement officials to enter the property to gather news. When reporters receive explicit consent, they should have little or no problem gaining access or defending coverage from any trespass and privacy suits.
In many cases, journalists enter without asking permission and the owner is not present to object, or is present but fails to voice objection. The court must then determine whether the owner's silence amounted to "implied consent."
Reporters do not have a right to knowingly trespass just because they are covering the news. When Bryon Wells, a reporter for the East Valley Tribune in Phoenix, Ariz., ignored a "no trespassing" sign, opened an unlocked gate and rang a former police officer's doorbell in November 2003, he was charged with criminal trespass, even though he immediately left when the officer's wife told him to. A Superior Court judge ruled in July 2004 that the First Amendment didn't protect Wells. "Reporters who are in violation of a criminal trespass statute are not exempt from prosecution simply because they are exercising a First Amendment right," the judge wrote. (Arizona v. Wells)
Problems also occur when deception is used to gain access to a private place. Two producers for ABC's PrimeTime Live were able to enter the "employees only" sections of a Food Lion store by obtaining jobs based on falsified credentials, rather than identifying themselves as reporters and asking for consent. The resulting story reported unsanitary food handling practices at the store. Food Lion sued for fraud and trespass, alleging that the journalists were guilty of wrongdoing based not on what they reported but instead on the "deceptive" means used to gather information. The store initially won a $5.5 million jury verdict in January 1997, and while the U.S. Court of Appeals in Richmond (4th Cir.) upheld the claims for trespass and breach of a duty of loyalty, it found that those acts had not caused any damage and awarded Food Lion only two dollars. (Food Lion v. Capital Cities/ABC)
"Ride-alongs," in which journalists accompany law enforcement officers during searches and arrests, present unique problems. Because ride-alongs often involve news that happens on private property -- especially private residences -- journalists need to take care to get the proper consent from the appropriate people.
Courts differ on what kind of consent to enter is required. Some courts have stated that the owner's silence alone is enough to imply consent. Others have found that police permission is sufficient if the owner is not present and cannot be asked for consent.
In Florida, an invasion of privacy suit was filed against The (Jacksonville)Florida Times-Union over a published photograph of the "silhouette" left on the floor by the body of a 17-year-old girl killed in a house fire. The local fire marshal and a police sergeant investigating the fire invited the news media into the burned-out home to cover the story.
In court the officials testified that their invitation was standard practice. The property owner, the victim's mother, was out of town at the time of the fire and therefore could not be asked to consent. The Florida Supreme Court agreed with the media that they had implied consent to enter the house based on the common practice of reporters entering private property without the owner's explicit consent in the course of covering crimes or disasters. However, the court added that if the owner had been present and objected to the reporter's presence then the reporter might have been held liable for invasion of privacy. (Florida Publishing Co. v. Fletcher)
Other courts have ruled that consent may never be implied. For example, a Rochester, N.Y., Humane Society investigator obtained a search warrant to enter a private home where he suspected animals were being mistreated. Before going to the home, the investigator called three television stations and invited them to accompany him. Two news teams entered with the investigator over the objections of the owner. They filmed the interior of the house and broadcast the story on the evening news.
When the owner sued the media for trespass, a New York state appellate court held that "the gathering of news and the means by which it is obtained does not authorize, under the First Amendment or otherwise, the right to enter into a private home by an implied invitation arising out of a self-created custom and practice." The court also compared the case to the previous case in Florida, finding the Humane Society investigation less newsworthy than a fire that claimed the life of a young person. Further, the court noted the property owner's vociferous objections to the presence of the journalists. (Anderson v. WROC-TV)
However, courts are divided about whether as a rule ride-alongs -- or more specifically, those parts of the ride-along that involve entering private property or a residence -- violate property owners' Fourth Amendment right to freedom from unreasonable searches. Even though the journalists themselves may not be liable for alleged violations, the Fourth Amendment may still represent a barrier to ride-along coverage of investigations. If officers fear that the media's presence will lead a court to reject evidence from a search or find the officers liable for violating the subject's civil rights, they will not give journalists permission to accompany them.
However, the limitations of search warrants do not automatically exclude the press. When the owner of an animal shelter in Sanilac County, Mich., sued sheriff's deputies who allowed a camera crew from a TV station to accompany them on a search of the shelter and a private residence, the court held that because the search warrant specifically granted permission for videotaping and photographing, the owner's rights had not been violated even though the warrant itself said nothing about the TV news crew. (Stack v. Killian)
Journalists should be aware that in some cases, notably one involving a CNN camera crew that followed a federal Fish and Wildlife Service crew on a raid of a ranch, courts have held that when the media's actions are too "intertwined" with the officials' actions, the reporters become "joint actors" who can themselves be liable for improper searches. CNN settled the case with Montana ranchers Paul and Erma Berger in 2001 for an undisclosed amount. (Berger v. CNN)
In the end, journalists need to be concerned and aware any time they enter private property without an invitation or the permission of the owner.

 

[deleted_account]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJ5u8JWHhMM

this deserves many thumbs up

 

[Ericb]

Now that makes complete since, I mean who would of thunk. It only fun and games when someone gets caught meeloshing with a bottle of crown. Warren Buffet strikes again

So whats your problem?

Ive heard lead paint chips are a bitch!

- - - Updated - - -

ive got a disease, and the only cure is more gst and plainsman sword fighting.

 

[lunkerslayer]

I don't have a problem I'm way smarter then you and my dad can beat up your dad. At least you can admit you have a problem with drinking

 

[Ericb]

I don't have a problem I'm way smarter then you and my dad can beat up your dad. At least you can admit you have a problem with drinking

I think of it as more of a solution than a problem.

 

[lunkerslayer]

I would say you would be talking out of both sides of your mouth.