Dave, Utah and LDS are not the same. As I pointed out before it does not
matter if there is no harm here. The LDS Church as an organization that moves
large amounts of money (mainly for building new churches and publishing
materials for use in missionary and teaching work, but still large amounts of
money none the less) and also as a self-insured institution has a clear need to
make sure it gives zero tolerance to dangerous behavior, otherwise it can be
found to be liable in later cases. Beyond this, the nature of
tresspassing charges is that they emerge from the goals of private indivuals,
not the government. The decision to press tresspassing charges is that of the
Church not the city. Some owuld say the Church should not press
tresspassing charges. However such a view ignores the nature of liability
lawsuits and the amount of money that an organization could loose from such.
The responsible use of Church resources means avoiding liability lawsuits,
otherwise much needed church builings in places like Nigeria will be delayed to
pay the family of some irresponsible BASE jumper who dies.
Actually at this point pleading not guilty is almost universal. You plead not
guilty at the first hearing, and then get a plea bargain later. Never admit
your guilt until you have some sort of deal with the prosecution.
The Church needs to make sure these reckless men are punished to the maximum
extent. If it shows any leniancy it could be interpreted as toleration of BASE
jumping, opening the Church up to law-suits later if someone else is injured
while BASE jumping on Church property.
@daveYes dave you may be correct. You are a good example of how many
Utahns over react.
Innocent until proven guilty, right??I bet they are hoping that
there's not indisputable evidence linking them to the jump. So they had large
backpacks; is that enough to convict?
Cats,I recall recently reading some Ensign articles from the 70's
written by a Hartman Rector Jr. I am guessing that this Hartman Rector is
somehow related to him. Possibly his son.
Greetings:As a member of The Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter-day
Saints, I think the criminal charges in this case should be dismissed.Thank you.John Robert MallerneeArmed Forces Retirement
HomeGulfport, Mississippi 39507
I think the issue here has nothing to do with property rights and everything to
do with discouraging future jumpers. They have to show that they are willing to
prosecute and fine anyone who pulls a stunt like this. If not they are saying
they don't mind people base jumping in downtown Salt Lake. It would only be a
matter of time before someone gets killed.
@DaveSo using your logic, if I were to try and shoot someone and missed, I
should not be charged with anything, no harm no foul right?@jack got it
right. While many cities across the country do not have laws against BASE
jumping, they are usually cited for trespassing, which is why more and more of
them are going to Europe (there's an article about this from 2004 in a
@DaveI believe the issue here is property rights, and private property
rights to be specific. BASE jumpers have likewise been charged with trespassing
and other charges in other cities, and from other buildings and bridges. This
isn't just the LDS Church doing it. Perhaps some basic research on your part
would clarify the situation, and relieve the case of colic you seem to have
against the LDS Church.
Re: dave | 4:21 p.m. Jan. 31, 2011The LDS Church isn't who is
charging him. It's the Salt Lake City Prosecutor dave who files the charges.Based on his comment I must assume he wouldn't object to a stranger
walking through his house to jump off his balcony.The general rule
is to behavior yourself when you're on private property.
Ted H. | 4:42 p.m. Jan. 31, 2011 Nice illogical stretch correlating my
comments to political persuasion. Since you started down this
road... A conservative approach would be to not involve government or
regulations. A liberal approach is to whine to the government (police), run it
through governmental channels (courts) thus costing the taxpayers money.
I believe it's irresponsible of KSL and Deseret News to link his YouTube videos
to this article. This is, I believe, the way that Miller "earns" his
living and the more hits to his youtube videos the more sponsors he can get.
That's not what news sites should be doing.
Judging from the photos, he seems to enjoy the attention.
Almost all arraignments are entered as a not-guilty. This opens the door to
further discussion, further hearings, and possible plea agreements.Only a fool admits guilt at an arraignment, so stop acting so surprised,
people. NO sane person will do it, unless they've already had an agreement
structured before their initial appearance.
I don't think it was funny a bit although evidentlyalthough Marshall
Miller seems to think it is. Haven't they got something productive they can do
in their lives? These boys and I repeat "boys" because that is what
they are acting like...grow up and take responsibility for the stupid decision
you made by doing the jump. I hope they nail everyone of you.
Let's see...the Dudes have the guts to jump off the Church office building in
broad daylight....but they don't have the courage to tell the truth about it?
davey boy,If they had been hurt, they would have sued the
Mormons(typical lame liberal non responsiblity-taking attitude). And you would
have agreed with them.I just wish the fine were larger.
So we catch the guy red-handed (tough to run wearing a parachute) and he says
he's "not guilty"?A Democrat. He's definitely a
Democrat....Absolutely detached from reality.
I can't believe that they are charging him. No harm, no foul. Typical Utah
(LDS) overreaction and control.
The charge, I believe, is trespassing.
I want to know if he's pleading not guilty because he claims it isn't a
violation OR is he claiming that it's a case of mistaken identity and he didn't
do it. That's what I'd like to know.Is this Harman Rector the
grandson of the general authority? Seems likely. Does anyone know?
So, what exactly is he 'not guilty' of? Hard to argue with photos.
Base jumping from tall buildings is totally irresponsible. If any of his (or
his friend's) equipment had failed they might have plummeted to the ground and
been killed - and had they hit anyone else, that poor innocent being might have
been killed or terribly injured. I hope they are both found guilty.
He'll spend more money in attorney's fees than the fine would ever have been.
Then, if found guilty he'll pay the fine in addition.