To be more clear on the article; it wasn't his personal view, it was for the view of a property he was developing. I go back and forth on which is worse.
On top of the criminal mischief charge, the landowner on whose property the trees reside may have a case for many times the value of the trees that were harmed.
Where will the arraignment and trial be? We should all send letters to the judge about how heartbroken we are. He should hang, figuratively, of course. Sort of.
My mom had two huge maple trees behind the house and people up the hill were always contacting her to ask her to cut them down so they could have a view. She always refused and then, one year the left one just died, like in a matter of months. She had someone come out and they guessed that someone had poisoned the tree because it shouldn't have died that quickly or that soon. We didn't cut it down and so for a long time the people up the hill got a view of one beautiful maple and one huge dead maple until it finally blew over in a storm. People who poison other people's trees are fucked up.
OK, I have little doubt that he's guilty. But I missed the part where there's any evidence that's not breathtakingly circumstantial. Let's do the math on this-- he bought a bunch of salt. Does anyone think a wealthy person won't be able to find an attorney that will be able to buy him reasonable doubt? Or that someone will provide him with an (false) alibi? Yes, he's a jerk and he's probably guilty. But I don't think it will even make to court, let alone result in a guilty verdict.
I live in Chelan. I know these trees. They are planted in a single row along the property line purposely just to block the great up lake view. My understanding was the dispute goes back to before Schtrth took over this development. The victimized tree planter put them there to spite the previous developer due to some dispute. Schroth is still a jack ass but so is the guy who planted the row of poplars.
Better still, strap him down on a mound of earth and pour a couple bags over him.
To be more clear on the article; it wasn't his personal view, it was for the view of a property he was developing. I go back and forth on which is worse.
On top of the criminal mischief charge, the landowner on whose property the trees reside may have a case for many times the value of the trees that were harmed.
a. Leave the dead things standing. That would enhance the view no end at Ghostly Grove Estates. Or would it be Ghastly Glade Ranch.
b. Cut a firebreak to protect the rest of my property.
c. With the civil damages money replant with taller trees.