Errr, "saboteur"
You reap what you sew.
Oh God, the comment section…
And the bikers that drove her and her dogs from the trail? Should they be charged?
Fucking LOL! :lol:
Ride, don't slide.
Skull Trail Saboteur Arrested and Charged
quoted for lunacy
Lunacy you say?
So, if it were a 20-year old male perpetrating those same criminal acts of vandalism with intent to injure, would we demand the same forgiveness?
Howabout if the perp was Mike Vanderman? :-)
"She put some branches down to slow them down" is not my understanding of the facts. Please correct me if im wrong.
Before today I felt as heckler does that maybe she deserves a break. However Mr. Kraals and Ms Cravers comments have rubbed me the wrong way.
It takes a pair to redirect blame back at bikers for what she did. How dare they publish anything other than an apology?
This case must end in a criminal conviction.
I too felt like Heckler, now to me she is nothing more than a nimby coward. Go to court, face the music. She made her own bed,now it's nap time. Do you think maybe she would sign my copy of todays Province?
Should just randomly leave boulders and "logs" on her doorstep, and see how she likes it.
The best things in life all start with the letter B
Hooray for: Bacon, Bikeys, Boobies, Boards, and Beer!
So, if it were a 20-year old male perpetrating those same criminal acts of vandalism with intent to injure, would we demand the same forgiveness?
I am not in that business. Therefore Forgiveness is between her and what ever higher power she believes in.
She's been shamed nationally, charged criminally, and banned from the trails that she loved visiting. That's a hefty price that would take a toll on any of us. I'm OK with any sentence a judge doles out (or not).
Sunny, warm, clear trails, long weekend coming up, frosty beer being cracked right about… now
!!!! X11 http://nsmb.com/saboteurs-husband/ holy shit!
e-mail, when deleted's, not so deleted..
Is there a Vancouver in Taiwan?! I had no idea!!
Nothing sums up my life's achievements like my stuffed corpse, suplexing a cougar.
^ offside, imo. No one wins from posting personal photos here.
Gone…..but it was one of a couple of PUBLIC pictures - the other one being used all over the media. Anyway, I just liked his slippers, and so do his friends judging by the comment :)
treezz
wow you are a ass
Just to clarify, while Quarry is signed Hiking Only. Its considered in the Fromme Trail Classification study as Multi-use. If this area were actually properly maintained and signed a lot of this misconception could be avoided. We all have a right to be here.
http://www.dnv.org/upload/pcdocsdocuments/lnhq01!.pdf
Pg31
26. Quarry Court
Steep fall-line access route to the Baden Powell trail.
Single-track.
Moderate level of use.
Multi-use trail.
Rated advanced.
Low level of volunteer stewardship.
Very poor condition (erosion).
Very low harmony.
RECOMMENDATION: Manage. Re-route to a sustainable alignment and
connect to a new community access node at Dempsey Road west of Mountain
Highway. Sign as hiking only
Her husbands email ( good find cam! ) is interesting since we've seen debris on Quarry and other trails in that area since the mid 2000's. Wonder why she decided to target a mountain bike primary trail? I wonder if they're are the ones who have been vandalizing the signs? At least in that area.
http://mtbtrails.ca/ Author of Locals' Guide to North Shore Rides and Locals' Guide to Fraser Valley Rides.
Just wondering out loud but the defense can simply state that riding a mountain bike fast thru the forest is inherently dangerous so you abandon all rights to safety right there.
And a few branches here and there ~ seriously? That's "sabotage"? Were there long nails or spike boards buried under loose leaves? No. This was no West Coast interpretation of Vietcong "Panji Traps".
Sounds like the mountain bikers are channeling their inner old ladies here.
Fact is no one was injured and that goes directly to her intent to do no harm. A mild nuisance at worst. Actually much like mountain bikers who have altered trails (illegally on many occasions) she was simply making the trail more challenging.
A real mountain biker with elementary skills would simply ride thru or around or over any obstructions. They would man up and just ignore some old woman's feeble placing of a few sticks. Much ado about nothing since mountain bikers have in the past illegally tailored the forest for their own benefits. This hypocritical behaviour highlights a sense of elitism and self-entitlement amongst the well-heeled bicyclists that is traditionally the home of rich old white women and men.
Quite frankly if you can't handle grandmother nature tossing you a challenge here or there then you should stick to Stanley Park.
Case dismissed.
A certain radio personality has tried to argue that women that enjoy rough sex implicitly submit to acts of violence. Both society and our courts reject such victim-blaming tactics.
One cannot compare sexual violence to sabotage of bike trails, but the attempt to manipulate information and blame the target of violence is the same…as is the premise that proves this ignorant strategy wrong.
When you engage in mountain biking you accept CERTAIN risks. The creation of traps, sabotage of structures (as outlined by Cam), and the placement of dangerous obstacles at key positions where you are in the midst of a descent are NOT among the risks that any reasonable person submits to when they get on a bike. Simply put, no reasonable person should expect to encounter obstacles that are placed with the intent of making them crash or stop in the middle of a rock face.
Builder-made obstacles are entirely different, just in case anyone or some excuse-spewing defendant tries to go there. Trail-builders indeed create structures and position rocks and logs to provide a course of riding that enables continuous motion and while providing a test of skill. They DO NOT place obstacles in areas that catch people by surprise for the expressed purpose of deterring trail use or stopping riders.
No one has been proven to be hurt HERE yet, as all those affected have not yet told their story. However, we have numerous examples of riders in other locations seriously injured because of the same types of actions….the exact same types of actions. You do not need to prove harm to a person to obtain a guilty verdict. You only need to show that harm was possible and likely, and that the person doing the sabotage should have (reasonably) foreseen the potential for harm to others by their action. The standard of care in foreseeing the harm is not "beyond a reasonable doubt", but rather that of a reasonable person. The intent to do the physical act is inarguable. The intent to achieve a specific end is the only issue that (from my perspective) is at play. Here, the saboteur placed the traps on biker-made trails, where bikers frequent, admittedly for the expressed purpose of deterring the said bikers. This is more than a mild nuisance, as indicated by the pattern of trail sabotage observed over a long period of time. In fact, numerous witnesses were so disturbed by what they saw, that they took extensive measures to document the behaviour. The police have obviously agreed that the behaviour was serious enough, and there was enough potential to cause harm, that criminal charges were to be recommended.
Mountain bikers are not channeling anything other than a demand to be safe from the threat of harm from people that create obstacles (intended to disrupt riding, not enhance it) and hidden threats to their well-being. The are also channeling a desire to have positive relations with other trail users that are cooperative and friendly, and not characterized by having to place cameras to catch structure sabotage and trail traps placed by those few anti-MTB extremists that only care about themselves.
And to correct Shrankman- the trails are NOT "traditionally the home of old white women and men." They do not hold any special title to the lands, and riders have worked extremely hard to ensure that their trail building and maintenance activities fall in line with the regulations and polices of our democratically elected governments. In this case they are public lands, and the trails in question were built by bikers. The expectation to be free from the threat of sabotage is higher here than in any other possible location. A group of punk-ass kids from out of town, dirt jumping and mouthing off, have the same rights as a sweet old lady walking her dogs, and the same rights as a family out together for a bike ride in the woods. We all have the right to be free from the threat of violence from others, and there are rules that we all must abide by. In this case, the accused disagrees and clearly believes that her sense of what is right trumps that of the Criminal Code. I hope she is proven wrong.
Forum jump:
