Tree Cutting News

[Polar Bear]

From today's news...

THE VILLAGES - District 5 supervisors announced Friday that they would not take legal action against the party or parties responsible for illegal tree cutting activity along Lake Miona last year, if the district is reimbursed for its costs of replacing the trees. CDD5 supervisors said those responsible could submit restitution anonymously.

[Bogie Shooter]

Finally a factual post on this topic.

[billethkid]

Very Interesting! I would have loved to hear the discussion leading to that conclusion.

[villagetinker]

I would have liked to see a cutoff date included. JMHO

[adeleb]

Does this mean they have identified those responsible?
I personally believe that naming the culprits might be best as fear of public embarrassment may prevent any others so inclined from doing the same.
Kind of like the police blotter in my local paper that prints names of DWI's.

[joldnol]

If You've Got the Dime you won't do time. Works out Well for the perp

[outlaw]

Kinda sounds like an offer to whomever...Doesn't sound like they definitively know who did it.

[Polar Bear]

Kinda sounds like an offer to whomever...Doesn't sound like they definitively know who did it.

Agree.

[Boomer]

Interesting proposal.

A quote from Erma Bombeck came to mind: "Guilt: The gift that keeps on giving."

But then I thought about how the cost of sleep varies.

Will see.

Treed? Or not?

[NavyNJ]

From today's news...

THE VILLAGES - District 5 supervisors announced Friday that they would not take legal action against the party or parties responsible for illegal tree cutting activity along Lake Miona last year, if the district is reimbursed for its costs of replacing the trees. CDD5 supervisors said those responsible could submit restitution anonymously.

Interesting position/approach to take, for sure. However, I'm not so sure it is entirely just their call to make. For instance, aren't all CDD's south of 466A, like 5-10, all sharing in the costs on this? Why would only 1 CDD get to make the call on pursuing prosecution? The other thing that may not be entirely clear here is whether the local (County) or State authorities actually need any entity within TV to pursue legal action, in order for them to bring charges against those involved, once they knew who they were, and had sufficient evidence to bring charges.

[Chatbrat]

There are not that many tree removal company's around--the firm who didn't get the job, knows who asked them to bid the job

[CFrance]

How could they bring legal action against the responsible parties unless they know who they are? Makes me think somebody somewhere knows something.

[Warren Kiefer]

from today's news...

The villages - district 5 supervisors announced friday that they would not take legal action against the party or parties responsible for illegal tree cutting activity along lake miona last year, if the district is reimbursed for its costs of replacing the trees. Cdd5 supervisors said those responsible could submit restitution anonymously.

they are kidding right ???

[tuccillo]

The guilty party will just drop off a suitcase of small, unmarked bills in the garbage can on the northeast corner of the LSL square.

they are kidding right ???

[Cedwards38]

An offer of amnesty! Anything is progress.:coolsmiley:

[Village Kid 2]

Interesting position/approach to take, for sure. However, I'm not so sure it is entirely just their call to make. For instance, aren't all CDD's south of 466A, like 5-10, all sharing in the costs on this? Why would only 1 CDD get to make the call on pursuing prosecution? The other thing that may not be entirely clear here is whether the local (County) or State authorities actually need any entity within TV to pursue legal action, in order for them to bring charges against those involved, once they knew who they were, and had sufficient evidence to bring charges.
You are correct that the State Attorney decides whether or not to bring charges in any criminal case, even if the victim does not want to press charges. So it is not strictly up to The Villages and they cannot elect to drop charges unless the State Attorney agrees. It is totally different in a civil case. And then there is the question of who the perpetrator is. One can't really bring criminal or civil charges without someone to charge. It sounds like they have come up with the easiest solution to remedy the problem with no mea culpas.

[rubicon]

You are correct that the State Attorney decides whether or not to bring charges in any criminal case, even if the victim does not want to press charges. So it is not strictly up to The Villages and they cannot elect to drop charges unless the State Attorney agrees. It is totally different in a civil case. And then there is the question of who the perpetrator is. One can't really bring criminal or civil charges without someone to charge. It sounds like they have come up with the easiest solution to remedy the problem with no mea culpas.

Hi Village Kid: First the OP's post generates more questions than it answers.
However the rest of your story is a civil action vis a vis a criminal. If there is as much information available as the OP's comments suggest then if CDD-5-10 are called upon to pay damages they have a right to sue the responsibility parties under tort law. An attorney representing the district, CDD's etc cna and should file against the tree cutting company. the tree cutting company would sue the people that hired them for relief. Provided the tortfeasors are known as the OP's comments suggest

[justjim]

Good grief ---did somebody die from this? Who knows but what anyone of us wouldn't have done the same thing if some trees had grown up blocking our view we had paid "thousand" of dollars on the lake.

Maybe the parties (including the professional tree trimmers) didn't know the trees couldn't legally be cut. Rip rap could solve the problem without blocking a view of the lake---matter of fact a better solution than a government one.

This has nothing to do with how much money a person may saved and worked a
Lifetime to accumulate. It's a matter of fairness.

[Bogie Shooter]

This thread is going in the same direction as the previous one. Some of the posts look like duplicates. Same old, same old...............

[bagboy]

CDD 5 does not know who did it ! They are simply offering an amnesty of sorts if those responsible come forward in public or private and make restitution to the district. Period ! And Ms. Tutt has checked with the state attorneys office and YES, amnesty can be offered and accepted by the district. I am only assuming the information reported by the on line news is factual in this case.

[joldnol]

Good grief ---did somebody die from this? Who knows but what anyone of us wouldn't have done the same thing if some trees had grown up blocking our view we had paid "thousand" of dollars on the lake.

Maybe the parties (including the professional tree trimmers) didn't know the trees couldn't legally be cut. Rip rap could solve the problem without blocking a view of the lake---matter of fact a better solution than a government one.

This has nothing to do with how much money a person may saved and worked a
Lifetime to accumulate. It's a matter of fairness.

Nice satirical post, at first I thought you were serious :)

[Villageswimmer]

From today's news...

THE VILLAGES - District 5 supervisors announced Friday that they would not take legal action against the party or parties responsible for illegal tree cutting activity along Lake Miona last year, if the district is reimbursed for its costs of replacing the trees. CDD5 supervisors said those responsible could submit restitution anonymously.

Hate to be the one to say it, but could this just be a bone thrown to the masses to make it look like someone (supervisors et al) is REALLY trying to find the culprits. Maybe poli tically expedient.

It may not even be true, and if it is, IMO nothing will come of it. The amount in question rose from 40k to 100k or so already. Puleez don't let them hire lawyers!

[Challenger]

Hate to be the one to say it, but could this just be a bone thrown to the masses to make it look like someone (supervisors et al) is REALLY trying to find the culprits. Maybe poli tically expedient.

It may not even be true, and if it is, IMO nothing will come of it. The amount in question rose from 40k to 100k or so already. Puleez don't let them hire lawyers!

To me, restitution is appropriate but really financialy rather insignifigant.
This crime begs for prosecution. If pressure is maintained , it is my opinion that someone will eventually crack or slip.

I don't understand why the CDD's don't raise the the reward. It won't cost anything unless valid info is given.

[blueeagle65]

I bet if they sent a bill to everyone on that street that someone would 'rat out' the guilty party.

[Mleeja]

I bet if they sent a bill to everyone on that street that someone would 'rat out' the guilty party.

In essence we are all paying the bill. I haven't seen any "rats" tuning yet. Just the ones in plam trees... Is $1000 enough is may someone turn on thier neighbor?

[tuccillo]

It doesn't work that way - you can't just send a bill to someone for something they didn't do. You can sue them but without evidence you may not prevail. If there was evidence then we wouldn't have this thread.

I bet if they sent a bill to everyone on that street that someone would 'rat out' the guilty party.

[Advogado]

It is really surprising that the sheriff's department, which had shown itself to be very competent in solving other crimes has not been able to solve this one. It makes one wonder WHY?

In an earlier life, I worked on some fairly sophisticated criminal investigations and solving this crime looks like child's play. It seems obvious that one or more of four homeowners is the perpetrator. Since all four homeowners benefited by the tree cutting, it is likely that the initiator contacted the other three to request sharing of the costs. In addition, when one looks at the number of houses in close proximity to the scene of the crime and thinks of the noise and commotion involved in taking down the trees, the operation must have been the talk of the neighborhood. It was certainly observed by a number the neighbors who must know who is responsible for it.

In addition, the perpetrator had to contact and pay a tree-cutting service to do the actual work. That contacting and payment would have left a trail that could be uncovered.

Therefore, a serious investigator would take steps like the following:
1. Subpoena the phone, credit card, and bank records of the four logical suspects for the relevant period of time.
2. Interview/subpoena, and perhaps offer immunity to, any tree-cutting services called or paid, by any of the four.
3. Subpoena, before a grand jury, the neighbors in the immediate vicinity and find out what they really know about the matter. How many people are willing to risk a perjury conviction to cover for a neighbor?
4. Subpoena all four of the suspects, cutting a deal if necessary to nail the initiator of the project.

However, this kind of rigorous investigation would engender a lot of bad publicity, perhaps even nationwide bad publicity, for The Villages.

[Bogie Shooter]

Never mind.................

[joldnol]

It is really surprising that the sheriff's department, which had shown itself to be very competent in solving other crimes has not been able to solve this one. It makes one wonder WHY?

In an earlier life, I worked on some fairly sophisticated criminal investigations and solving this crime looks like child's play. It seems obvious that one or more of four homeowners is the perpetrator. Since all four homeowners benefited by the tree cutting, it is likely that the initiator contacted the other three to request sharing of the costs. In addition, when one looks at the number of houses in close proximity to the scene of the crime and thinks of the noise and commotion involved in taking down the trees, the operation must have been the talk of the neighborhood. It was certainly observed by a number the neighbors who must know who is responsible for it.

In addition, the perpetrator had to contact and pay a tree-cutting service to do the actual work. That contacting and payment would have left a trail that could be uncovered.

Therefore, a serious investigator would take steps like the following:
1. Subpoena the phone, credit card, and bank records of the four logical suspects for the relevant period of time.
2. Interview/subpoena, and perhaps offer immunity to, any tree-cutting services called or paid, by any of the four.
3. Subpoena, before a grand jury, the neighbors in the immediate vicinity and find out what they really know about the matter. How many people are willing to risk a perjury conviction to cover for a neighbor?
4. Subpoena all four of the suspects, cutting a deal if necessary to nail the initiator of the project.

However, this kind of rigorous investigation would engender a lot of bad publicity, perhaps even nationwide bad publicity, for The Villages.

not to mention ticking off some very wealthy people

[billethkid]

Everyone has automatically assumed the restittion is being offered to one of the folks who live on that street that allgedly did the deed.

Some other hypothesis?

The no questions asked restitution offer could be for anyone responsible. For example what if one of the listers of the property for sale where the trees were removed was a guilty party? I am not saying they are but one guess is as good as another with no proof to date.....that we are aware of anyway.

Or how about some "agent" of TV (take a wild guess...any could suffice for this example) was responsible. Not possible? Probably not, but stranger things happen. I can just visualize somebody on the named street calling whoever to report trees being cut down in a protected area. The report is processed. Then all of a sudden there is a loud and thunderous.....OH S**T!

Just like folks on TOTV like to play games like 3 word sentences or word continuation.....how about other possibilities.

To date I have not heard anything that is publicly available tha would allow me to accept with a reasonable doubt that it was in fact one of the home owners. Certainly they are the most likely suspects.

As I have posted previously I am suspect at how quickly the folks at TV rolled over and announced they were picking up the tab. Things like this just do not move that quickly in TV.

I may be as wrong as wrong can be but I am entitled to how I see it.

Assigning the cause to the "wealthy" as some few would trumpet only shows lack of understanding. I would be willing to bet a beer there are more wealthy people living in non premier homes in TV than there are in premier homes. Additionally there are no doubt many non wealthy people living in premier homes......anyway the fantasy of wealth at the root of the issue is a lark....for some few.

OK let the creativity flow like a good mystery.

[Cedwards38]

It is really surprising that the sheriff's department, which had shown itself to be very competent in solving other crimes has not been able to solve this one. It makes one wonder WHY?

In an earlier life, I worked on some fairly sophisticated criminal investigations and solving this crime looks like child's play. It seems obvious that one or more of four homeowners is the perpetrator. Since all four homeowners benefited by the tree cutting, it is likely that the initiator contacted the other three to request sharing of the costs. In addition, when one looks at the number of houses in close proximity to the scene of the crime and thinks of the noise and commotion involved in taking down the trees, the operation must have been the talk of the neighborhood. It was certainly observed by a number the neighbors who must know who is responsible for it.

In addition, the perpetrator had to contact and pay a tree-cutting service to do the actual work. That contacting and payment would have left a trail that could be uncovered.

Therefore, a serious investigator would take steps like the following:
1. Subpoena the phone, credit card, and bank records of the four logical suspects for the relevant period of time.
2. Interview/subpoena, and perhaps offer immunity to, any tree-cutting services called or paid, by any of the four.
3. Subpoena, before a grand jury, the neighbors in the immediate vicinity and find out what they really know about the matter. How many people are willing to risk a perjury conviction to cover for a neighbor?
4. Subpoena all four of the suspects, cutting a deal if necessary to nail the initiator of the project.

However, this kind of rigorous investigation would engender a lot of bad publicity, perhaps even nationwide bad publicity, for The Villages.

Thank you. I agree.

[justjim]

Thank you. I agree.

Are you serious? Some trees were cut down---nobody was shot!

[redwitch]

You really need more than conjecture and supposition to get a judge to sign a subpoena. Let's face it. We have a lot of theories but not one iota of proof that would stand up in court. It could just as easily have been vandals or someone cut the wrong trees.

As to neighbors knowing who the culprits are, I wouldn't bet on it. I know that if I heard someone cutting trees on property owned by a government agency, my first thought would be to wonder why -- disease or maybe something going to be built in that spot. After that, I would grouse about the noise and never think a thing about it unless it was brought up by someone else. All the guilty party has to do is act as bewildered as the rest of the neighborhood.

Whether we like it or not, the odds of solving this crime are slim to none. It will only happen if someone confesses. A neighbor claiming they know who did it without some real proof is worthless. Subpoenaing the records of potentially innocent people is not going to happen. The laws of the United States protect us from things like that happening, as they should.

Feel free to rant, rave and speculate all you want but do try to understand that the Sheriff's hands are tied. There just isn't enough credible proof to charge anyone with anything at this time. Nor is there enough circumstantial evidence to issue subpoenas. Ditto a grand jury. There has to be more than speculation by law.

[manaboutown]

It is really surprising that the sheriff's department, which had shown itself to be very competent in solving other crimes has not been able to solve this one. It makes one wonder WHY?

In an earlier life, I worked on some fairly sophisticated criminal investigations and solving this crime looks like child's play. It seems obvious that one or more of four homeowners is the perpetrator. Since all four homeowners benefited by the tree cutting, it is likely that the initiator contacted the other three to request sharing of the costs. In addition, when one looks at the number of houses in close proximity to the scene of the crime and thinks of the noise and commotion involved in taking down the trees, the operation must have been the talk of the neighborhood. It was certainly observed by a number the neighbors who must know who is responsible for it.

In addition, the perpetrator had to contact and pay a tree-cutting service to do the actual work. That contacting and payment would have left a trail that could be uncovered.

Therefore, a serious investigator would take steps like the following:
1. Subpoena the phone, credit card, and bank records of the four logical suspects for the relevant period of time.
2. Interview/subpoena, and perhaps offer immunity to, any tree-cutting services called or paid, by any of the four.
3. Subpoena, before a grand jury, the neighbors in the immediate vicinity and find out what they really know about the matter. How many people are willing to risk a perjury conviction to cover for a neighbor?
4. Subpoena all four of the suspects, cutting a deal if necessary to nail the initiator of the project.

However, this kind of rigorous investigation would engender a lot of bad publicity, perhaps even nationwide bad publicity, for The Villages.

Thank you. This sums up the situation.

[DonH57]

Are you serious? Some trees were cut down---nobody was shot!

We don't know that!:jester:

[Justus]

As distressing as it is to acknowledge that the perpetrator has gotten away with this, the cost of seeking remedy, i.e., police investigation and court costs, would quickly reach the point of diminishing returns.

While it offends our sense of justice, the fact is that someone got away with a criminal act, and we are stuck with the tab...just like paying high prices at the grocery store because there are dirtbags out there shoplifting or looting.

If someone is dishonest enough to have done this and not come forward by now, the offer of amnesty is probably just so much chitchat in order to placate an outraged public.

[Cedwards38]

Are you serious? Some trees were cut down---nobody was shot!

I am serious or I would not have posted my comment. Is your criteria for a serious investigation that someone must be shot? I'd like to see this fully investigated and solved, or have a reasonable explanation as to why it can not be.

[shanson99]

What if the perpetrators and the victim were in cahoots, then an anonymous payment and amnesty deal with law enforcement would make sense. Or am I watching too many crime shows.

[Barefoot]

You really need more than conjecture and supposition to get a judge to sign a subpoena. Let's face it. We have a lot of theories but not one iota of proof that would stand up in court. It could just as easily have been vandals or someone cut the wrong trees.

As to neighbors knowing who the culprits are, I wouldn't bet on it. I know that if I heard someone cutting trees on property owned by a government agency, my first thought would be to wonder why -- disease or maybe something going to be built in that spot. After that, I would grouse about the noise and never think a thing about it unless it was brought up by someone else. All the guilty party has to do is act as bewildered as the rest of the neighborhood.

Whether we like it or not, the odds of solving this crime are slim to none. It will only happen if someone confesses. A neighbor claiming they know who did it without some real proof is worthless. Subpoenaing the records of potentially innocent people is not going to happen. The laws of the United States protect us from things like that happening, as they should.

Feel free to rant, rave and speculate all you want but do try to understand that the Sheriff's hands are tied. There just isn't enough credible proof to charge anyone with anything at this time. Nor is there enough circumstantial evidence to issue subpoenas. Ditto a grand jury. There has to be more than speculation by law.

:agree:Redwitch, I think that you are absolutely right.
People have valid suspicions and theories, but that's not enough.
Unfortunately, without credible proof, it's all mere speculation.

[luckylilly]

Once again...money talks and BS walks
Take the money & run
The American way

[rubicon]

With a furrowed brow I wonder why a person(s) would walk onto this particular property without knowing to whom it belong and without permission strategically cut certain trees? Was it an act of vandalism? Did the actors cut these trees for personal or commercial use?

This question along with the myraid of questions posed by TOTV posters on this subject begs the second question of does "Occam's Razor" apply?

[Madelaine Amee]

"Good police work, gate cameras foil appliance thief" quoted from this morning's dot com newspaper. The story of picking up the person stealing appliances from Pine Ridge through the use of the gate cameras.

I presume this same police investigative work could be applied to the gate cameras at Lake Miona? More and more it appears that no one really wants to pursue this tree cutting fiasco.

[Advogado]

It is really surprising that the sheriff's department, which had shown itself to be very competent in solving other crimes has not been able to solve this one. It makes one wonder WHY?

In an earlier life, I worked on some fairly sophisticated criminal investigations and solving this crime looks like child's play. It seems obvious that one or more of four homeowners is the perpetrator. Since all four homeowners benefited by the tree cutting, it is likely that the initiator contacted the other three to request sharing of the costs. In addition, when one looks at the number of houses in close proximity to the scene of the crime and thinks of the noise and commotion involved in taking down the trees, the operation must have been the talk of the neighborhood. It was certainly observed by a number the neighbors who must know who is responsible for it.

In addition, the perpetrator had to contact and pay a tree-cutting service to do the actual work. That contacting and payment would have left a trail that could be uncovered.

Therefore, a serious investigator would take steps like the following:
1. Subpoena the phone, credit card, and bank records of the four logical suspects for the relevant period of time.
2. Interview/subpoena, and perhaps offer immunity to, any tree-cutting services called or paid, by any of the four.
3. Subpoena, before a grand jury, the neighbors in the immediate vicinity and find out what they really know about the matter. How many people are willing to risk a perjury conviction to cover for a neighbor?
4. Subpoena all four of the suspects, cutting a deal if necessary to nail the initiator of the project.

However, this kind of rigorous investigation would engender a lot of bad publicity, perhaps even nationwide bad publicity, for The Villages.

Contrary to the misstatements about criminal-procedure and constitutional law set forth in responses to my above post, the kinds of investigative steps I outline in that post are both legal and common. This crime has not been solved because the Sheriff's Department has made a decision not to solve it. Why? I don' t know. There is a range of possible explanations.

[Polar Bear]

Contrary to the misstatements about criminal-procedure and constitutional law set forth in responses to my above post, the kinds of investigative steps I outline in that post are both legal and common...

But applicable to this case? You've watched too many CSI's.

[Bogie Shooter]

We don't know that either..............

[tuccillo]

I suspect nobody outside of the sheriff's office knows exactly what evidence, if any, exists and whether it is sufficient to obtain a subpoena. Let the speculations, including my own, continue.

Contrary to the misstatements about criminal-procedure and constitutional law set forth in responses to my above post, the kinds of investigative steps I outline in that post are both legal and common. This crime has not been solved because the Sheriff's Department has made a decision not to solve it. Why? I don' t know. There is a range of possible explanations.

[fred53]

Time to move on you've wasted enough of your life on a useless pursuit....

[Advogado]

But applicable to this case? You've watched too many CSI's.
No, I have conducted too many real-life criminal investigations and put too many real-life criminals in prison. The suggested investigative steps are applicable to this case if the Sheriff's Office wants to devote the time and resources to apply them.

[Cedwards38]

You really need more than conjecture and supposition to get a judge to sign a subpoena. Let's face it. We have a lot of theories but not one iota of proof that would stand up in court. It could just as easily have been vandals or someone cut the wrong trees.

As to neighbors knowing who the culprits are, I wouldn't bet on it. I know that if I heard someone cutting trees on property owned by a government agency, my first thought would be to wonder why -- disease or maybe something going to be built in that spot. After that, I would grouse about the noise and never think a thing about it unless it was brought up by someone else. All the guilty party has to do is act as bewildered as the rest of the neighborhood.

Whether we like it or not, the odds of solving this crime are slim to none. It will only happen if someone confesses. A neighbor claiming they know who did it without some real proof is worthless. Subpoenaing the records of potentially innocent people is not going to happen. The laws of the United States protect us from things like that happening, as they should.

Feel free to rant, rave and speculate all you want but do try to understand that the Sheriff's hands are tied. There just isn't enough credible proof to charge anyone with anything at this time. Nor is there enough circumstantial evidence to issue subpoenas. Ditto a grand jury. There has to be more than speculation by law.

There is no one on TOTV whose opinion I respect more than yours, but please allow me a few observations. You may be right. The odds of solving this crime become longer as time passes, but:

(a) the vandalism speculation seems a long shot. Vandalism is typically a quick crime for the purpose of destruction only. To cut these trees down and stack the wood would have taken a considerable amount of time and more than a little labor. Vandals would probably not have stacked the wood after cutting the trees. A vandal could have picked a much easier means of attacking. The odds of this seem so long it's hardly worth pursuing.

(b) the "someone cut the wrong trees" seems unlikely also. If someone cut the wrong trees, why were they cutting trees at all? And it's pretty unlikely that a contractor hired to cut trees would proceed to cut without a direct confirmation from the payer as to which trees should be cut. Possible? Yes. Likely? Not by any reputable contractor who wants to avoid costly mistakes.

(c) it is correct as to your speculation that the neighbors may well be completely in the dark about what happened, by who, and why, but it seems to me that it would have been very unlikely to happen without some of the neighbors at least witnessing what happened. The action, the time required to complete the action, and the noise would draw attention. In my neighborhood in The Villages, any time someone does something new to their home or yard, good neighbors notice, watch, and often even inquire about what is being done. Maybe the Village where the crime occurred is different, but I doubt it.

(d) you are spot on when you say that "a neighbor claiming they know who did it" will not provide court worthy proof, but suppose an investigation occurred where you found a neighbor who was asked to join in the crime but chose to decline, or a neighbor who saw a truck with a company name, or a neighbor who overheard a conversation between some of the criminal collaborators, or maybe even one of the collaborators whose conscience or sense of security is moved to provide more insight into this crime? Is that not more worthy as probable cause? Are eyewitnesses not considered reliable proof?

(e) as for subpoenaing the records of potentially innocent people, aren't all persons potentially innocent until proven guilty? Thus, law enforcement subpoenas the records of potentially innocent people every day in America in order to investigate crimes. That is often how they are solved. I completely agree that this should not be done without probable cause, but probable cause might exist if all the facts are known and investigated.

I guess I am one of those ranters and ravers, and I plead guilty to being one of the speculators to which you refer. I speculate because the community has never been fully informed about the circumstances for which the "collective we" must pay for this crime instead of the perpetrators.

[manaboutown]

Of great concern to me is that not relentlessly pursuing the guilty party or parties sets a precedent which is all too likely to encourage others to criminally and/or tortiously act to rid themselves of perceived nuisances such as view blocking trees without fear of reprisals.

For whatever reason(s) it seems the powers that be have been attempting to sweep this under the rug in hopes it will soon be forgotten. Unfortunately, it will not.

[billethkid]

Does anybody recall how the the cut trees were discovered?

[Advogado]

There is no one on TOTV whose opinion I respect more than yours, but please allow me a few observations. You may be right. The odds of solving this crime become longer as time passes, but:

(a) the vandalism speculation seems a long shot. Vandalism is typically a quick crime for the purpose of destruction only. To cut these trees down and stack the wood would have taken a considerable amount of time and more than a little labor. Vandals would probably not have stacked the wood after cutting the trees. A vandal could have picked a much easier means of attacking. The odds of this seem so long it's hardly worth pursuing.

(b) the "someone cut the wrong trees" seems unlikely also. If someone cut the wrong trees, why were they cutting trees at all? And it's pretty unlikely that a contractor hired to cut trees would proceed to cut without a direct confirmation from the payer as to which trees should be cut. Possible? Yes. Likely? Not by any reputable contractor who wants to avoid costly mistakes.

(c) it is correct as to your speculation that the neighbors may well be completely in the dark about what happened, by who, and why, but it seems to me that it would have been very unlikely to happen without some of the neighbors at least witnessing what happened. The action, the time required to complete the action, and the noise would draw attention. In my neighborhood in The Villages, any time someone does something new to their home or yard, good neighbors notice, watch, and often even inquire about what is being done. Maybe the Village where the crime occurred is different, but I doubt it.

(d) you are spot on when you say that "a neighbor claiming they know who did it" will not provide court worthy proof, but suppose an investigation occurred where you found a neighbor who was asked to join in the crime but chose to decline, or a neighbor who saw a truck with a company name, or a neighbor who overheard a conversation between some of the criminal collaborators, or maybe even one of the collaborators whose conscience or sense of security is moved to provide more insight into this crime? Is that not more worthy as probable cause? Are eyewitnesses not considered reliable proof?

(e) as for subpoenaing the records of potentially innocent people, aren't all persons potentially innocent until proven guilty? Thus, law enforcement subpoenas the records of potentially innocent people every day in America in order to investigate crimes. That is often how they are solved. I completely agree that this should not be done without probable cause, but probable cause might exist if all the facts are known and investigated.

I guess I am one of those ranters and ravers, and I plead guilty to being one of the speculators to which you refer. I speculate because the community has never been fully informed about the circumstances for which the "collective we" must pay for this crime instead of the perpetrators.

I agree with most of the above, but you are mistaken when you say that probable cause is necessary for a subpoena to issue. That is true for search warrants. If that were true for subpoenas, the investigative process would be crippled. Subpoenas just require that the subpoenaed items/testimony be relevant to the investigation.

[Wavy Chips]

Of great concern to me is that not relentlessly pursuing the guilty party or parties sets a precedent which is all too likely to encourage others to criminally and/or tortiously act to rid themselves of perceived nuisances such as view blocking trees without fear of reprisals.

1. Exactly!

2. If residents continue to call the sheriff to get updates on the progress of the investigation, the squeaky wheel will get greased.

3. If stacked wood from the trees was found on a residents property, and that resident did not report the fact that wood mysteriously showed up on his/her property, would that not fall under "receiving stolen property"? If so, that might be the first person to investigate.

[tuccillo]

I understand that the "burden" for getting a subpoena for phone records is much less than a wire tap and other searches. This leads to a couple of possible conclusions:

1) The sheriff's department could not make the case that a subpoena of phone records was relevant to the investigation.

2) They chose not to pursue a subpoena of phone records for some unknown reason. Perhaps they did not want to expend the resources. The most nefarious reason would be that they were told to back off.

3) They did obtain a subpoena for phone records but there wasn't a smoking gun.


If someone really wants to know what is going on they could try to FOIA the investigation. I have no idea if that would be successful.



I agree with most of the above, but you are mistaken when you say that probable cause is necessary for a subpoena to issue. That is true for search warrants. If that were true for subpoenas, the investigative process would be crippled. Subpoenas just require that the subpoenaed items/testimony be relevant to the investigation.

[Challenger]

1. Exactly!

2. If residents continue to call the sheriff to get updates on the progress of the investigation, the squeaky wheel will get greased.

3. If stacked wood from the trees was found on a residents property, and that resident did not report the fact that wood mysteriously showed up on his/her property, would that not fall under "receiving stolen property"? If so, that might be the first person to investigate.

Finally ,people are beginning to ask the right questions. Continued public pressure will bring a break in this case. Unlike the painting ot the MM paths,
the money is not the main concern for me here. What is important is that people get the message " no one is above the law"

[manaboutown]

By an amusing coincidence when I pulled up this web page to check on its latests posts the ad at the top read "Quotes for tree trimming"! I cannot stop chuckling.

[redwitch]

The fines, to me, are irrelevant. The cutting down of perfectly healthy trees is a true obscenity. I'm probably the only person you know that literally cried when the beautiful pines were torched in a sci-fi movie (Blade Runner? Soylent Green? One of that era, anyway.) so, it is a big deal to me.

Do I think my scenarios of vandalism or accidental cutting are likely? Not in the least. Do I think a good defense attorney could use these arguments to create reasonable doubt? You betchya.

I have no idea how much or little investigation was done by the Sheriff's Department but I'd prefer to give them the benefit of the doubt and leave it that they have a pretty good idea who did this but not enough proof to do anything about it.

The pragmatic side of me understands these jerks got away with it and, barring some incredible luck on the part of investigators, will never be convicted of a dang thing. A true travesty but I, personally, refuse to let this ruin one iota of the good things here. So, I stand by my post of way back when and say, "Let it go." Sucks, but it is what it is.

[shanson99]

I understand that the "burden" for getting a subpoena for phone records is much less than a wire tap and other searches. This leads to a couple of possible conclusions:

1) The sheriff's department could not make the case that a subpoena of phone records was relevant to the investigation.

2) They chose not to pursue a subpoena of phone records for some unknown reason. Perhaps they did not want to expend the resources. The most nefarious reason would be that they were told to back off.

3) They did obtain a subpoena for phone records but there wasn't a smoking gun.


If someone really wants to know what is gon they could try to FOIA the investigation. I have no idea if that would be successful.
Whatever happened to the agency who was supposed to investigate this case. They are also certified law enforcers, namely, Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission? They mysteriously disappeared.

[Polar Bear]

...The suggested investigative steps are applicable to this case if the Sheriff's Office wants to devote the time and resources to apply them.

Couldn't agree more...and there's the rub. It's rarely going to happen in a case of this nature. And I'm not sure it should. It would put a lot of innocent people out, risking legal action which would probably be warranted.

[Villageswimmer]

There is no one on TOTV whose opinion I respect more than yours, but please allow me a few observations. You may be right. The odds of solving this crime become longer as time passes, but:

(a) the vandalism speculation seems a long shot. Vandalism is typically a quick crime for the purpose of destruction only. To cut these trees down and stack the wood would have taken a considerable amount of time and more than a little labor. Vandals would probably not have stacked the wood after cutting the trees. A vandal could have picked a much easier means of attacking. The odds of this seem so long it's hardly worth pursuing.

(b) the "someone cut the wrong trees" seems unlikely also. If someone cut the wrong trees, why were they cutting trees at all? And it's pretty unlikely that a contractor hired to cut trees would proceed to cut without a direct confirmation from the payer as to which trees should be cut. Possible? Yes. Likely? Not by any reputable contractor who wants to avoid costly mistakes.

(c) it is correct as to your speculation that the neighbors may well be completely in the dark about what happened, by who, and why, but it seems to me that it would have been very unlikely to happen without some of the neighbors at least witnessing what happened. The action, the time required to complete the action, and the noise would draw attention. In my neighborhood in The Villages, any time someone does something new to their home or yard, good neighbors notice, watch, and often even inquire about what is being done. Maybe the Village where the crime occurred is different, but I doubt it.

(d) you are spot on when you say that "a neighbor claiming they know who did it" will not provide court worthy proof, but suppose an investigation occurred where you found a neighbor who was asked to join in the crime but chose to decline, or a neighbor who saw a truck with a company name, or a neighbor who overheard a conversation between some of the criminal collaborators, or maybe even one of the collaborators whose conscience or sense of security is moved to provide more insight into this crime? Is that not more worthy as probable cause? Are eyewitnesses not considered reliable proof?

(e) as for subpoenaing the records of potentially innocent people, aren't all persons potentially innocent until proven guilty? Thus, law enforcement subpoenas the records of potentially innocent people every day in America in order to investigate crimes. That is often how they are solved. I completely agree that this should not be done without probable cause, but probable cause might exist if all the facts are known and investigated.

I guess I am one of those ranters and ravers, and I plead guilty to being one of the speculators to which you refer. I speculate because the community has never been fully informed about the circumstances for which the "collective we" must pay for this crime instead of the perpetrators.


Thanks for your post. You sound far more knowledgeable about criminal investigations than just about all of us who have posted. Would you be willing to call the Sheriff and ask a few questions? Perhaps they'd be willing to shed some light on their findings.

They likely don't enjoy looking like they dropped the ball and might be eager to share some information that might finally put this to bed. We all pay their salaries and, IMHO, they should be accountable, right?

You, clearly, would know what questions to ask in a respectful manner.

[Cedwards38]

Thanks for your post. You sound far more knowledgeable about criminal investigations than just about all of us who have posted. Would you be willing to call the Sheriff and ask a few questions? Perhaps they'd be willing to shed some light on their findings.

They likely don't enjoy looking like they dropped the ball and might be eager to share some information that might finally put this to bed. We all pay their salaries and, IMHO, they should be accountable, right?

You, clearly, would know what questions to ask in a respectful manner.

Right, and this is a good suggestion.

First, I really am not an expert on criminal investigations. My knowledge is no greater than the average person about how they are conducted. I do know that some who are following and contributing to this thread do have experience in criminal investigation and I appreciate their comments when they make them.

I did call the Sumter County Sheriff's office on Thursday morning, July 23, to inquire about the status of this investigation. The person who answered the phone was extremely nice and respectful and conveys a very positive public image for the office. I began by telling her in a very pleasant way how much I respect the Sumter County Sheriff's office and complimenting her on what a good job they typically do.

I then asked about the status of the tree cutting investigation. She had no idea what I was talking about. I described what I knew from newspaper accounts and she was still baffled. She first thought that the incident did not occur in Sumter County. I assured her that it did and gave her the name of the village where it occurred. She then agreed that it was Sumter. She then told me that it did not sound like something the Sheriff's Office would investigate and suggested that some other agency might be investigating the crime. I replied that I was pretty sure it was within their purview and that newspaper reports indicated that it was being done by their office. She then asked if I would give my name and phone number so that she could inquire about this issue and call me back with information. I gave her both, and got her name. She did not call back.

Today, July 24, I called the Sheriff's office again. The same person answered the phone. Again we exchanged pleasant greetings. I told her my name and reminded her of my call yesterday. She seemed puzzled and asked, "didn't they call you?" I replied that they did not, so she proceeded to tell me that this was a current and continuing investigation and that was all she could share with me. I suggested that I would continue to monitor any progress of the investigation by reading The Daily Sun and she agreed that I should do that. I thanked her for her time and trouble, and I report this now.

Bottom line is that I don't know any more now than I did before I called, other than the case does not appear closed. I'll give it some time and call them again. Might not be a bad idea for others with concerns to inquire as well.

[downeaster]

Thank you Cedwards38 for the proceeding Post. In fact, thank you for all of your posts.

[outlaw]

Right, and this is a good suggestion.

First, I really am not an expert on criminal investigations. My knowledge is no greater than the average person about how they are conducted. I do know that some who are following and contributing to this thread do have experience in criminal investigation and I appreciate their comments when they make them.

I did call the Sumter County Sheriff's office on Thursday morning, July 23, to inquire about the status of this investigation. The person who answered the phone was extremely nice and respectful and conveys a very positive public image for the office. I began by telling her in a very pleasant way how much I respect the Sumter County Sheriff's office and complimenting her on what a good job they typically do.

I then asked about the status of the tree cutting investigation. She had no idea what I was talking about. I described what I knew from newspaper accounts and she was still baffled. She first thought that the incident did not occur in Sumter County. I assured her that it did and gave her the name of the village where it occurred. She then agreed that it was Sumter. She then told me that it did not sound like something the Sheriff's Office would investigate and suggested that some other agency might be investigating the crime. I replied that I was pretty sure it was within their purview and that newspaper reports indicated that it was being done by their office. She then asked if I would give my name and phone number so that she could inquire about this issue and call me back with information. I gave her both, and got her name. She did not call back.

Today, July 24, I called the Sheriff's office again. The same person answered the phone. Again we exchanged pleasant greetings. I told her my name and reminded her of my call yesterday. She seemed puzzled and asked, "didn't they call you?" I replied that they did not, so she proceeded to tell me that this was a current and continuing investigation and that was all she could share with me. I suggested that I would continue to monitor any progress of the investigation by reading The Daily Sun and she agreed that I should do that. I thanked her for her time and trouble, and I report this now.

Bottom line is that I don't know any more now than I did before I called, other than the case does not appear closed. I'll give it some time and call them again. Might not be a bad idea for others with concerns to inquire as well.

Sounds like it's been moved to the cold case file....

[NavyNJ]

Right, and this is a good suggestion.

First, I really am not an expert on criminal investigations. My knowledge is no greater than the average person about how they are conducted. I do know that some who are following and contributing to this thread do have experience in criminal investigation and I appreciate their comments when they make them.

I did call the Sumter County Sheriff's office on Thursday morning, July 23, to inquire about the status of this investigation. The person who answered the phone was extremely nice and respectful and conveys a very positive public image for the office. I began by telling her in a very pleasant way how much I respect the Sumter County Sheriff's office and complimenting her on what a good job they typically do.

I then asked about the status of the tree cutting investigation. She had no idea what I was talking about. I described what I knew from newspaper accounts and she was still baffled. She first thought that the incident did not occur in Sumter County. I assured her that it did and gave her the name of the village where it occurred. She then agreed that it was Sumter. She then told me that it did not sound like something the Sheriff's Office would investigate and suggested that some other agency might be investigating the crime. I replied that I was pretty sure it was within their purview and that newspaper reports indicated that it was being done by their office. She then asked if I would give my name and phone number so that she could inquire about this issue and call me back with information. I gave her both, and got her name. She did not call back.

Today, July 24, I called the Sheriff's office again. The same person answered the phone. Again we exchanged pleasant greetings. I told her my name and reminded her of my call yesterday. She seemed puzzled and asked, "didn't they call you?" I replied that they did not, so she proceeded to tell me that this was a current and continuing investigation and that was all she could share with me. I suggested that I would continue to monitor any progress of the investigation by reading The Daily Sun and she agreed that I should do that. I thanked her for her time and trouble, and I report this now.

Bottom line is that I don't know any more now than I did before I called, other than the case does not appear closed. I'll give it some time and call them again. Might not be a bad idea for others with concerns to inquire as well.

By any chance, did she happen to mention who "they" might or should have been, who were supposed to call you back?? Someone (an Investigator or Detective) in the Sumter Sheriff's Office? Some other County or State agency?

[Cedwards38]

By any chance, did she happen to mention who "they" might or should have been, who were supposed to call you back?? Someone (an Investigator or Detective) in the Sumter Sheriff's Office? Some other County or State agency?

She did not, and I did not inquire. I assumed that it was an investigator in the Sheriff's office but I'm not sure.

[graciegirl]

She did not, and I did not inquire. I assumed that it was an investigator in the Sheriff's office but I'm not sure.



I can't think what else a law enforcement agency could do at this point. They could sit outside the peoples home so they won't do it again. They could bring in landscapers and tree cutters one at a time and interrogate them, that would take months, maybe years, and I am guessing if they had done it they would lie. They could call members of the suspects families and talk to them, but I am thinking you can't do stuff like that without some solid evidence. I am sure that there have been leads, but someone pointing a finger anonymously at a person can only take you so far.


I feel bad for you, because this is really, really upsetting to you, but I can't think what else can be done at this point.


It may never be "solved" and the perps brought to justice. You could go and talk the people who live in those homes, but I think that isn't a good idea. There are probably laws against that.


Sometimes the puzzle pieces can't be found to put unjust things at rest.

Maybe if you called and talked to the Environmental Authority that fined the District, you might find something to make it more clear. I can't remember it's name, but it isn't the St. John's River Authority. Someone will remember. It is on this thread somewhere. They might me able to tell you who reported it, or how it was discovered by them.

[Happydaz]

Just raise the reward to $10,000 and one of the tree workers will talk. Raise it to $20,000 and the tree cutter in charge will turn himself in. Offer immunity to the person claiming the reward, except for the homeowner who contracted to have the trees cut down. Maybe the tree cutters are minors, and not professionals?

[TheVillageChicken]

Just raise the reward to $10,000 and one of the tree workers will talk. Raise it to $20,000 and the tree cutter in charge will turn himself in. Offer immunity to the person claiming the reward, except for the homeowner who contracted to have the trees cut down. Maybe the tree cutters are minors, and not professionals?

If they do, it will probably be in Spanish.

[manaboutown]

What I find so disturbing is that this "unsolvable" blatant crime was a totally public and "in your face" act logically attributable to only a handful of suspects.

Now, what additionally troubles me is that the person on the phone at the sheriff's office claimed to know nothing of the caper or its investigation (if any) - and no one returned cedwards' call. No information regarding an investigation of any kind has been obtainable from the sheriff's office or any other police authority. This act was not some hallucination or fantasy. It happened and to all appearances none of the powers that be has done or is doing a darned thing about it! I really wonder why...

[graciegirl]

What I find so disturbing is that this "unsolvable" blatant crime was a totally public and "in your face" act logically attributable to only a handful of suspects.

Now, what additionally troubles me is that the person on the phone at the sheriff's office claimed to knowing nothing of the caper or its investigation - and no one returned your call. No information regarding an investigation of any kind has been obtainable from the sheriff's office or any other police authority. This act was not some hallucination or fantasy. It happened and none of the powers that be is doing a darned thing about it! I really wonder why...



I really think that a "bloodless" crime is not a top priority around the old jail house. It is important to us, but they are dragging around wife beaters and child molesters and bloodied up drunks in car accidents. I don't think it is a cover up, just not a priority. If you brought it up to your kids, they would probably say, "uh huh" and change the subject.

[DonH57]

I would think an investigation of tree cutting would be turned over from a police to a Florida environmental authority.

[TheVillageChicken]

The investigation is de facto over. The Villages has agreed to pay and replant. The only people still interested are the ones who feel like they are footing someone else's bill.

[Laurie2]

Never mind

[NavyNJ]

Well, I think it's been mentioned at least a couple times in the 8+ pages of posts, but one avenue of public inquiry that doesn't seem to have been pursued up to this point is a Public Records request of all the public agencies involved in this incident, which would include any CDD or CCDD.

I can't recall the poster's online name, but I recall someone in other threads talking about starting some sort of massive govt documents research project via letter writing back in like 1967 or something. Can't remember the point of it, but the person wrote to everyone from Richard Nixon to Pete Rose. Maybe if he sees this thread, he could take up the cause of those asking for "more" to be done, and "all info" to be shared? Who knows?? Remember how Watergate started to become unraveled when someone inadvertently mentioned that there was a recording system put into the Oval Office?? lol

At any rate, more info about Florida's Sunshine (Open Records) Law can be found at the link below, including how to go about starting a request, for anyone interested in continuing to carry the torch on this. :)

Florida Sunshine Law (http://myfloridalegal.com/pages.nsf/Main/DC0B20B7DC22B7418525791B006A54E4)

[CFrance]

I really think that a "bloodless" crime is not a top priority around the old jail house. It is important to us, but they are dragging around wife beaters and child molesters and bloodied up drunks in car accidents. I don't think it is a cover up, just not a priority. If you brought it up to your kids, they would probably say, "uh huh" and change the subject.

There aren't that many crimes around the old jailhouse, bloodless or otherwise, that they can't thoroughly investigate them all. This isn't NYC. Somebody is shoving this one under the rug for some reason, in my opinion. The poster whose opinion it is that TV does not want the publicity has the answer, methinks.

[Challenger]

Was the tree cutting act a crime that might rise to the level of a state enforcement agency? Isn't a resulting log pile on one's property not " prima facia'" evidence that the property owner was involved or at least famaliar with the facts of the crime? Is an agreement among people knowledgeable of the fact "not to talk" if fact a criminal conspiracy? Might there be a group in the community that would have standing to bring civil action against the receiver of "stolen" public property? POA? HOA? CDD?

I firmly believe that the act was commited by persons who have done similar arogant and selfish things to others, many , many times . I know that there are folks who are tired of hearing about this issue, but the are also many who agree that this act should not be allowed to stand when there is so much info that points to a small number of people.

[Advogado]

There aren't that many crimes around the old jailhouse, bloodless or otherwise, that they can't thoroughly investigate them all. This isn't NYC. Somebody is shoving this one under the rug for some reason, in my opinion. The poster whose opinion it is that TV does not want the publicity has the answer, methinks.

I think I am the poster you refer to. To clarify: my point was that the desire to avoid bad publicity is one possible explanation for the Sheriff's decision not to aggressively investigate what appears to be a solvable case. (See my earlier post re possible investigative actions.). There are also other possible explanations -- some more benign and some more sinister.

However, this crime involves a loss of around $40,000. To dismiss it as inconsequential, as some posters do, is both naive and absurd.

Furthermore, if the Sheriff did start to turn up the heat in the investigation, the likely outcome would be that the perpetrator(s) suddenly find Jesus and hire a lawyer. The lawyer goes to the prosecutor. A deal is cut for reimbursement, a guilty plea to a misdemeanor, and a fine.

[Challenger]

I think I am the poster you refer to. To clarify: my point was that the desire to avoid bad publicity is one possible explanation for the Sheriff's decision not to aggressively investigate what appears to be a solvable case. (See my earlier post re possible investigative actions.). There are also other possible explanations -- some more benign and some more sinister.

However, this crime involves a loss of around $40,000. To dismiss it as inconsequential, as some posters do, is both naive and absurd.

Furthermore, if the Sheriff did start to turn up the heat in the investigation, the likely outcome would be that the perpetrator(s) suddenly find Jesus and hire a lawyer. The lawyer goes to the prosecutor. A deal is cut for reimbursement, a guilty plea to a misdemeanor, and a fine.

I think that your last paragraph would be the most likely outcome if we keep up the pressure. I would be satisfied if that were the case and the name of the felon (s) were made available to the public.

[Cedwards38]

Without strict enforcement of laws, this will happen again, and again, and again. We ALL have to live by the rules, and for those who don't there should be consequences. And we depend on our elected officials to enforce that for the collective US. Yes, this is a matter of law, but also a matter of principle, and none in this community should be above either. I am moved by Challenger's signature quote:

“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”
― Edmund Burke

[CFrance]

It's surprising to me that people are so up in arms over the MMP striping at $3/person but think this $40,000 tree cutting fine issue should just be forgotten about.

[Mleeja]

It's surprising to me that people are so up in arms over the MMP striping at $3/person but think this $40,000 tree cutting fine issue should just be forgotten about.

They are north of 466 and the tree cutting fine does not come from thier pockets?

[Polar Bear]

I don't think the issue should just be forgotten about at all. But I also don't believe good men are doing nothing. I simply believe there is not enough real evidence at this time to file any charges. Call me naive, but I don't think there is any conspiracy or coverup.

[Cedwards38]

Apparently the amnesty offer has not caused the perpetrators to come forward, and why should it! Though I applaud the offer of prosecution amnesty, why should they come forward since it seems we are no closer to solving this crime than we've ever been?

[graciegirl]

I don't think the issue should just be forgotten about at all. But I also don't believe good men are doing nothing. I simply believe there is not enough real evidence at this time to file any charges. Call me naive, but I don't think there is any conspiracy or coverup.


That is it in a nutshell


I cannot think of anyone gaining anything at all by hiding real knowledge of what happened. Maybe someone witnessed it or heard it but they don't know for sure which person, or how many were involved. Maybe the people who are behind this are very intimidating and the person who heard something is timid. There are all kinds of neighborhood dynamics that might be at play. Being awfully sure and testifying that you are completely sure are two separate things.


When our older daughter was here, we spent several hours by the pool in our backyard. That afternoon there was a lawn cutting service who was working on several lawns nearby. Their machines were so noisy, and some sounded like buzzsaws. I think that it is entirely possible that the noise could have been overlooked as lawn maintenance. The homes are large and widely spaced and have a lot of side yard landscaping that screens the backyards from view of the street. The trees were removed from an area way to the back and completely off their property. The streets wind around there and the view of it happening may have been obscured by how the homes are placed. It isn't a new straight street like many of us live on with new landscaping that people can see across several yards.


I don't know. I didn't do it, don't know who did it. I think they should pay, and maybe will eventually.

[CFrance]

There is no way someone could be cutting down trees in your next-door neighbor's yard and you wouldn't know it. Tree cutting does not sound like lawn mowing.

The only explanation is that everyone around for three homes on either side were away. Unlikely. And since this goes back to at least January, that is doubtful.

[2BNTV]

Latest news, (several days ago), in the DS, said the investigation of who did this, is at a dead end with no leads.

They offered not to prosecute, if the person/s responsible, would pay for the damages. Personally, I think several people were in collusion to make this happen and no one knows who did it? Sounds fishy to me.

I think if they haven't found who did this yet, no one is going to come forward and pay 25K or so, to correct this injustice. IMHO

[janmcn]

There is no way someone could be cutting down trees in your next-door neighbor's yard and you wouldn't know it. Tree cutting does not sound like lawn mowing.

The only explanation is that everyone around for three homes on either side were away. Unlikely. And since this goes back to at least January, that is doubtful.

The first report of this incident was asking if anyone had any information of the event, which occurred between November 15th and December 31st of last year.

[bimmertl]

That is it in a nutshell


I cannot think of anyone gaining anything at all by hiding real knowledge of what happened. Maybe someone witnessed it or heard it but they don't know for sure which person, or how many were involved. Maybe the people who are behind this are very intimidating and the person who heard something is timid. There are all kinds of neighborhood dynamics that might be at play. Being awfully sure and testifying that you are completely sure are two separate things.


When our older daughter was here, we spent several hours by the pool in our backyard. That afternoon there was a lawn cutting service who was working on several lawns nearby. Their machines were so noisy, and some sounded like buzzsaws. I think that it is entirely possible that the noise could have been overlooked as lawn maintenance. The homes are large and widely spaced and have a lot of side yard landscaping that screens the backyards from view of the street. The trees were removed from an area way to the back and completely off their property. The streets wind around there and the view of it happening may have been obscured by how the homes are placed. It isn't a new straight street like many of us live on with new landscaping that people can see across several yards.


I don't know. I didn't do it, don't know who did it. I think they should pay, and maybe will eventually.

Seriously, " I can't think of anyone gaining anything by hiding real knowledge of what happened". For starters how about the person who hired the crew to cut down the trees for their own benefit. Not really much of a stretch to come to that conclusion. Amazing!

[Polar Bear]

Seriously, " I can't think of anyone gaining anything by hiding real knowledge of what happened". For starters how about the person who hired the crew to cut down the trees for their own benefit. Not really much of a stretch to come to that conclusion. Amazing!

I seriously doubt gg was referring to the actual perpetrator. I agree with her post.

[Advogado]

Two observations:

1. The Distict was optimistic if it thought that the perpetrator(s) would turn themselves in after the District announced that the Sheriff had closed the investigation.

If the District really wants the perpetrators to turn themselves in, the Distict should now announce that: The Sheriff is going to aggressively reopen the investigation (and have the Sheriff do so). If the perpetrator(s) turn themselves in before they are arrested and offer to pay restitution, their cooperation will be taken into consideration by the prosecutor. If they do not do so, the prosecutor will charge them with a felony with no plea bargain, and they will face 5 years in prison.

2. Our calls to the Sheriff's Office have not resulted in a vigorous investigation (subpoenas etc.). Maybe we should try calling the County Commissioners. One of them, Don Hahnfeldt, former VHA president and current candidate for the state legislature, lives quite close to the crime scene. Perhaps he could both encourage the Sheriff to take further action and urge any neighbors with relevant information to come forward.

[graciegirl]

Two observations:

1. The Distict was optimistic if it thought that the perpetrator(s) would turn themselves in after the District announced that the Sheriff had closed the investigation.

If the District really wants the perpetrators to turn themselves in, the Distict should now announce that: The Sheriff is going to aggressively reopen the investigation (and have the Sheriff do so). If the perpetrator(s) turn themselves in before they are arrested and offer to pay restitution, their cooperation will be taken into consideration by the prosecutor. If they do not do so, the prosecutor will charge them with a felony with no plea bargain, and they will face 5 years in prison.

2. Our calls to the Sheriff's Office have not resulted in a vigorous investigation (subpoenas etc.). Maybe we should try calling the County Commissioners. One of them, Don Hahnfeldt, former VHA president and current candidate for the state legislature, lives quite close to the crime scene. Perhaps he could both encourage the Sheriff to take further action and urge any neighbors with relevant information to come forward.



If you were the Sheriff, what would you be doing to further the investigation? If you lived there, just exactly would you say and how would you say it to the neighbors to release their relevant information? I can't think of anything that can be done at this point and neither can anyone else. I think it's a cold case.

[CFrance]

I think Advogado's #2 might work.

[Advogado]

If you were the Sheriff, what would you be doing to further the investigation? If you lived there, just exactly would you say and how would you say it to the neighbors to release their relevant information? I can't think of anything that can be done at this point and neither can anyone else. I think it's a cold case.
Please refer to my earlier post in which I point out specific investigative steps that could be taken to solve this case. I find it hard to believe that a simple case like this, in which there are only four suspects, cannot be solved if there is the will to solve it.

[Polar Bear]

...a simple case like this, in which there are only four suspects...

With all due respect, this statement shows your willingness to assume things that are not necessarily true...something investigators simply cannot do.

[rubicon]

There is no way someone could be cutting down trees in your next-door neighbor's yard and you wouldn't know it. Tree cutting does not sound like lawn mowing.

The only explanation is that everyone around for three homes on either side were away. Unlikely. And since this goes back to at least January, that is doubtful.

I agree and think of the Oops when the clearing appeared.

[rubicon]

The fines, to me, are irrelevant. The cutting down of perfectly healthy trees is a true obscenity. I'm probably the only person you know that literally cried when the beautiful pines were torched in a sci-fi movie (Blade Runner? Soylent Green? One of that era, anyway.) so, it is a big deal to me.

Do I think my scenarios of vandalism or accidental cutting are likely? Not in the least. Do I think a good defense attorney could use these arguments to create reasonable doubt? You betchya.

I have no idea how much or little investigation was done by the Sheriff's Department but I'd prefer to give them the benefit of the doubt and leave it that they have a pretty good idea who did this but not enough proof to do anything about it.


Given your comments about torched trees can you imagine how many people feel regarding the destruction of the Amazon forest

The pragmatic side of me understands these jerks got away with it and, barring some incredible luck on the part of investigators, will never be convicted of a dang thing. A true travesty but I, personally, refuse to let this ruin one iota of the good things here. So, I stand by my post of way back when and say, "Let it go." Sucks, but it is what it is.

[rubicon]

While i contribute to this thread never did I believe that it would lead to anything. The trail's run cold, the investigators moved on and yet in the back of my mind I keep saying the culprits were not professionals. The trees did not cut themselves down. the trees had to be cut during daylight hours.

[Advogado]

With all due respect, this statement shows your willingness to assume things that are not necessarily true...something investigators simply cannot do.

No. My posts in this thread reflect my experience in conducting criminal investigations and putting bad guys in prison.

[billethkid]

I still maintain there is room for other than the obvious conclusions expressed!
What if none of the residents were responsible/involved?

[Challenger]

Interesting position/approach to take, for sure. However, I'm not so sure it is entirely just their call to make. For instance, aren't all CDD's south of 466A, like 5-10, all sharing in the costs on this? Why would only 1 CDD get to make the call on pursuing prosecution? The other thing that may not be entirely clear here is whether the local (County) or State authorities actually need any entity within TV to pursue legal action, in order for them to bring charges against those involved, once they knew who they were, and had sufficient evidence to bring charges.

No atty would accept this deal. There are many affected people and groups who have standing in this case and this would be dissasterous for the for the responsible party.

[Advogado]

I still maintain there is room for other than the obvious conclusions expressed!
What if none of the residents were responsible/involved?

If I ever am charged with committing a crime and the evidence against me is overwhelming, I want you on my jury.

[Challenger]

I still maintain there is room for other than the obvious conclusions expressed!
What if none of the residents were responsible/involved?

I would take that bet and give you great odds.

[shotgunpeople]

BEST kept secret in The Villages.

Still baffles me. Had to be aliens from another planet to take out all of those trees without a trace of removal.

[billethkid]

If I ever am charged with committing a crime and the evidence against me is overwhelming, I want you on my jury.

Perhaps you have or think you have more knowledge than some of the rest of us. I will just ignore the intent of the comment made. When I have the facts it is easy to conclude. Until then it is no more than conjecture or plain old opinion.....which we are all entitled to have.

I would take that bet and give you great odds.

As the saying goes, some of us know what we don't know.

With the overwhelming commentary of what should be investigated and how investigated and how to procede to get justice would kinda sorta imply that there are more than just me that do not know.

[Jim 9922]

BEST kept secret in The Villages.

Still baffles me. Had to be aliens from another planet to take out all of those trees without a trace of removal.
I thought that's one of the things Neighborhood Watch is watching for.

[Polar Bear]

No. My posts in this thread reflect my experience in conducting criminal investigations and putting bad guys in prison.

To assume that there are only four suspects with no proof is not part of a criminal investigation.

[Advogado]

To assume that there are only four suspects with no proof is not part of a criminal investigation.

To assume anything else in this case is ridiculous. Have you even gone out to look at the crime scene? I have. There are only four logical suspects.

[Polar Bear]

To assume anything else in this case is ridiculous. Have you even gone out to look at the crime scene? I have. There are only four logical suspects.
I'm not assuming anything. You are. To assume there are only four suspects is what's ridiculous.

[wisphil]

When I read of crimes solved with a discovered human hair, or a match head or a vague tire track, I am befuddled by the inability to get anywhere with the abundance of evidence that must have been left behind by a tree cutting crew, their equipment, witnesses, etc. Apparently, it was "The perfect crime".

[janmcn]

I still maintain there is room for other than the obvious conclusions expressed!
What if none of the residents were responsible/involved?


How would another perpetrator gain access to the district property behind these homes without crossing private property? Is there a public path anywhere along the street back to the lake? Is the district owned property fronting the lake marked 'no trespassing'?

If someone cut down these trees for nefarious purposes, other than to improve their view of the lake, sooner or later they might try to finish those nefarious intentions.

Meanwhile, Southwest Florida Water Management will be monitoring this area for the next five years, as part of the penalty paid by the district, for any signs of tampering.

[graciegirl]

sound of chainsaw felling a tree - Bing Videos (http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=sound+of+chainsaw+felling+a+tree&FORM=VIRE1#view=detail&mid=B6F77CB1215A7BD68FB5B6F77CB1215A7BD68FB5)

sound of leaf blower audio - Bing Videos (http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=sound+of+leaf+blower+audio&FORM=VIRE7#view=detail&mid=892F4D0D4211D05ADF03892F4D0D4211D05ADF03)

[Cedwards38]

I still maintain there is room for other than the obvious conclusions expressed!
What if none of the residents were responsible/involved?

Maybe, but what could have been the motive?

[Madelaine Amee]

sound of chainsaw felling a tree - Bing Videos (http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=sound+of+chainsaw+felling+a+tree&FORM=VIRE1#view=detail&mid=B6F77CB1215A7BD68FB5B6F77CB1215A7BD68FB5)

sound of leaf blower audio - Bing Videos (http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=sound+of+leaf+blower+audio&FORM=VIRE7#view=detail&mid=892F4D0D4211D05ADF03892F4D0D4211D05ADF03)

The trees involved were massive old oaks. They are not just felled, they have to be cut from the top down. First the top greenery and then the branches, one by one, and then the last piece to come down is the stripped trunk. This tree cutting would have taken all day, maybe more than one day, so if you heard a leaf blower going for 12 hours I think you could tell that something was happening other than blowing leaves!

Of course, TV knows who had this work done.

[graciegirl]

QUOTE=Madelaine Amee;1092085
Of course, TV knows who had this work done



Why do you say that? What would make them cover it up? How could the District get anything out of this to benefit them? I just don't understand. WHAT am I missing???????????

Someone said that the tree cutting deal would make The Villages look bad. I say, big whoopin' deal. Sex on the Square makes The Villages look bad. People who don't live here, don't care if people cut down trees. It's not shocking, hardly interesting. If I read that a man from Reynoldsburg, Ohio cut down trees in the middle of their town square, I wouldn't turn up the TV and huddle close. It just isn't news worthy.

[Polar Bear]

...Of course, TV knows who had this work done.
"Of course"?

What seems obvious to you is not so obvious to everybody.

[CFrance]

QUOTE=Madelaine Amee;1092085
Of course, TV knows who had this work done



Why do you say that? What would make them cover it up? How could the District get anything out of this to benefit them? I just don't understand. WHAT am I missing???????????

Someone said that the tree cutting deal would make The Villages look bad. I say, big whoopin' deal. Sex on the Square makes The Villages look bad. People who don't live here, don't care if people cut down trees. It's not shocking, hardly interesting. If I read that a man from Reynoldsburg, Ohio cut down trees in the middle of their town square, I wouldn't turn up the TV and huddle close. It just isn't news worthy.
Sex on the square is something TV can't do anything about. This is different. Considering how closely information about anything is held by TV, to me it is logical that for such a small sum (to them, and especially because they won't have to pay that sum), they would rather not have any publicity at all. I think they would want to control any little damage they could. It's just good business practice.

But to me, I would think that the damage is already done, and they would be better off having the responsible parties right the wrong so they could "show the world" that they are conscientiously trying to protect the environment. Especially with such a black mark as the hunting debacle on their record. And the fact that they chopped down every single healthy live oak on the Pine Ridge property a la 1970s-style development practices. And the poor publicity they brought down on themselves with their enigmatic behavior over the "Berlin Wall" saga, for whatever reason. So is there something else about this that we're not aware of that's making them want to drop the matter?

There are two ways to go with this; bury it or bring it to light and take credit for correcting it. I would hope they choose the latter, but it doesn't look like they have.

[graciegirl]

Sex on the square is something TV can't do anything about. This is different. Considering how closely information about anything is held by TV, to me it is logical that for such a small sum (to them, and especially because they won't have to pay that sum), they would rather not have any publicity at all. I think they would want to control any little damage they could. It's just good business practice.

But to me, I would think that the damage is already done, and they would be better off having the responsible parties right the wrong so they could "show the world" that they are conscientiously trying to protect the environment. Especially with such a black mark as the hunting debacle on their record. And the fact that they chopped down every single healthy live oak on the Pine Ridge property a la 1970s-style development practices. And the poor publicity they brought down on themselves with their enigmatic behavior over the "Berlin Wall" saga, for whatever reason. So is there something else about this that we're not aware of that's making them want to drop the matter?

There are two ways to go with this; bury it or bring it to light and take credit for correcting it. I would hope they choose the latter, but it doesn't look like they have.



That doesn't seem plausible. Hiding something scintillating might be plausible, but tree cutting isn't even...interesting to most people. There are a lot of hunters who don't look at that as a black mark, and many meat eaters don't look down on hunting........... and most people support the keeping out of outside golf carts. It is clear to me they acted when they did to shut the Northern borders when they were negotiating about the Southern borders, that is the reason for the abrupt closure of the wall with no explanation. You don't show your hand at the table.


I think that most people who live here are not all excited about "protecting the environment" to the point that trees cut down would bother them. It is the MONEY that is bothering them. So far none of these reasons are striking a cord with me.

Someone cut the trees down on Village property and the district got fined by a government environmental agency and told to replant trees. I think the someones are folks whose views would have been improved by the trees being gone, because those someone's either wanted a clear view to enjoy, or a clear view to market their home to sell. I don't think there was a conspiracy, just some danged ballsy people who think they can do whatever they want. I think it was cash and no one can prove WHO exactly hired it done or who did the cutting.

I think if the New York Times had it on their front page that it wouldn't dampen the enthusiasm of anyone who wants to move here.

[CFrance]

That doesn't seem plausible. Hiding something scintillating might be plausible, but tree cutting isn't even...interesting to most people. There are a lot of hunters who don't look at that as a black mark, just people that are animal lovers, and many meat eaters don't look down on hunting........... and most people support the keeping out of outside golf carts. It is clear to me they acted when they did to shut the Northern borders when they were negotiating about the Southern borders, that is the reason for the abrupt closure of the wall with no explanation. You don't show your hand at the table.


I think that most people who live here are not all excited about "protecting the environment" the way the minority of residents feel. Sorry. we aren't allowed to name parties or we get whooped. So far none of these reasons are striking a cord with me.

Someone cut the trees down on Village property and the district got fined by a government environmental agency and told to replant trees. I think the someones are folks whose views would have been improved by the trees being gone, because those someone's either wanted a clear view to enjoy, or a clear view to market their home to sell. I don't think there was a conspiracy, just some danged ballsy people who think they can do whatever they want. I think it was cash and no one can prove WHO exactly hired it done or who did the cutting.

I don't think if the New York Times had it on their front page that it wouldn't dampen the enthusiasm of anyone who wants to move here.
There are a lot of people, pro hunters, who look down on corralling animals inside of fences for the sport of shooting.

I don't believe the Berlin Wall was interesting to many outsiders either, but look at the lengths they went to to obscure their actions, despite the reason people think it happened. Why not just come out and say Look, we had to do this to protect our southern borders. Did they think Fruitland Park was not going to find out about it? They have never said why they did it. Just left it up to speculation and waited everyone out. It is just an example of how they keep everything under wraps. And why, in my opinion, they would want this tree-cutting incident to go away. You asked what you were missing, and I am giving you my idea of what you might be missing.

As to the environment, many people are interested in It's protecting it if they have to foot the bill for people who damage it.

You know about big business, Gracie. They will go to any lengths to keep negative publicity at bay. They don't want their name in the paper unless it's going to shine favorable light upon them.

[Jim Stickel]

I wonder if the authorities issued subpoenas to all the residents along the street whose property was blocked by the now departed trees and asked quite simply "did you have it done or do you have any information about who had it done?" With a felony perjury, obstruction, yada,yada hanging over their head maybe they step forward or maybe not.

[Polar Bear]

...There are two ways to go with this; bury it or bring it to light and take credit for correcting it...

Not at all. There's a third way...just go about the investigation without worrying about negative or positive publicity.

[Chatbrat]

Ok-simple way to end this discussion- is to up the anty-$25K to anyone who knows , who was the contractor that cut down the trees-his competitors will rat him out, he will rat out who hired him-$25K goes a long way in the tree cutting community-

And ,add the reward cost to the penalty--its a no-brainer

[IlluminatedView]

If the CDD doesn't know who the responsible parties are, how could they take legal action against them anyway? If the responsible parties have not been determined, how does the promise not to take legal action against them encourage them to provide restitution? My guess is that the CDD does know who they are and have struck a deal with them not to press charges if they pay up and the culprits have agreed to pay up only if they can remain anonymous as well.

[graciegirl]

Boy Howdy.

[Madelaine Amee]

If the CDD doesn't know who the responsible parties are, how could they take legal action against them anyway? If the responsible parties have not been determined, how does the promise not to take legal action against them encourage them to provide restitution? My guess is that the CDD does know who they are and have struck a deal with them not to press charges if they pay up and the culprits have agreed to pay up only if they can remain anonymous as well.

You got it. :boom:

.. and, to add insult to injury, the tree company left the evidence in the form of the tree trunks behind the residences instead of hauling it off through the gate where the camera is located ............. kinda smart when you think about it!

[Chi-Town]

You got it. :boom:

.. and, to add insult to injury, the tree company left the evidence in the form of the tree trunks behind the residences instead of hauling it off through the gate where the camera is located ............. kinda smart when you think about it!
The tree company may have not left evidence but firewood. A neighbor cut down one of his trees and it's firewood today. A good detective would check for wood burning fireplaces.

[rubicon]

QUOTE=Madelaine Amee;1092085
Of course, TV knows who had this work done



Why do you say that? What would make them cover it up? How could the District get anything out of this to benefit them? I just don't understand. WHAT am I missing???????????

Someone said that the tree cutting deal would make The Villages look bad. I say, big whoopin' deal. Sex on the Square makes The Villages look bad. People who don't live here, don't care if people cut down trees. It's not shocking, hardly interesting. If I read that a man from Reynoldsburg, Ohio cut down trees in the middle of their town square, I wouldn't turn up the TV and huddle close. It just isn't news worthy.

Hi GG: i most often agree with you but concerning your thoughts here I might remind you that this thread and a similar one have been ongoing for sometime. And the caption isn't "cutting trees". "Its residents get stuck with big bill because someone cut down trees in a protected area".

As to the couple having sex in the square having sex in public is done in every state in the union the difference here is that this is a 55+ community and that's what made it news but then sex sells in America. Two different issues altogether. I believe the people in charge thought they could play it don and pay without much notice that's why Ceward call to the sheriff got the brush off.

VHA, POA District Developer have an aversion to bad publicity, and/or lawsuits because they protect the brand. that's why the IRS were hush hush until they could not be hushed any longer by any of them. that's why the POA's filing of the amenity lawsuit got settled so quickly and to my thinking the POA caved too quickly

I can see why this issue carries on because its hard to believe that those tall oaks could be removed in such a stealth manner because not much is missed in this community

Personal Best Regards:

[Polar Bear]

...VHA, POA District Developer have an aversion to bad publicity, and/or lawsuits...

Now there's a newsflash...large associations that don't like bad publicity and/or lawsuits.

[graciegirl]

Now there's a newsflash...large associations that don't like bad publicity and/or lawsuits.





Polar Bear, if it weren't for your posts, that clearly show your background in business and your upbringing and your common sense I would throw myself off the Morse Bridge....daily.

[CFrance]

Now there's a newsflash...large associations that don't like bad publicity and/or lawsuits.

Polar Bear, if it weren't for your posts, that clearly show your background in business and your upbringing and your common sense I would throw myself off the Morse Bridge....daily.
Finally got it! That's what several of us have been saying... it's being swept under the rug to avoid publicity.

That would be okay if we peons didn't have to foot the bill.

[manaboutown]

Sweeping it under the rug also protects the perpetrators - and sets a precedent of non action by the authorities in response to such acts.

[Cedwards38]

You can sweep it under the rug, but at some point someone is going to pick up that rug and shake it!

[Bogie Shooter]

The tree company may have not left evidence but firewood. A neighbor cut down one of his trees and it's firewood today. A good detective would check for wood burning fireplaces.

Do you mean Sumter County Sheriff does not have any good detective's??

[Advogado]

You can sweep it under the rug, but at some point someone is going to pick up that rug and shake it!

I hope you are right, but doubt it.

The rug is only going to get shaken if the sheriff's office decides to aggresssively investigate the matter. Since we have no independent newspaper to publicly demand that this be done, this is unlikely to happen. Certainly merely posting on this website will have no effect unless followed up by phone calls to the proper authorities.

[Advogado]

Do you mean Sumter County Sheriff does not have any good detective's??
Those detectives have proven themselves very adept at solving other crimes. That is why it is so surprising that they have not taken the necessary steps to solve this one.

[graciegirl]

Those detectives have proven themselves very adept at solving other crimes. That is why it is so surprising that they have not taken the necessary steps to solve this one.



Look. Most of us would like to see the perps pony up. BUT you just can't go subpoenaing innocent people without strong evidence. The problem is that the laws that protect the innocent, protect the guilty.

[CFrance]

Look. Most of us would like to see the perps pony up. BUT you just can't go subpoenaing innocent people without strong evidence. The problem is that the laws that protect the innocent, protect the guilty.
Someone explained earlier that subpoenas are an investigative tool and don't require the same evidence as a warrant does, as they are a tool for gathering evidence. He also said that without subpoena authority most investigations would get nowhere.

[Polar Bear]

Someone explained earlier that subpoenas are an investigative tool and don't require the same evidence as a warrant does...

That doesn't mean you can get a subpoena without a good reason.

[Advogado]

Look. Most of us would like to see the perps pony up. BUT you just can't go subpoenaing innocent people without strong evidence. The problem is that the laws that protect the innocent, protect the guilty.
i am afraid that you have no concept of how the criminal justice system operates. Subpoenas are used to gather information in a criminal investigation. The vast majority of people subpoenaed are innocent. That is how the system works.

[Polar Bear]

i am afraid that you have no concept of how the criminal justice system operates. Subpoenas are used to gather information in a criminal investigation. The vast majority of people subpoenaed are innocent. That is how the system works.

Again, that doesn't mean you can get subpoenas without some sort of justification.

And subpoenas don't usually imply guilt or innocence anyway. It's just a request for information or for an appearance...with some sort of justification.

[CFrance]

Again, that doesn't mean you can get subpoenas without some sort of justification.
Polar Bear, I think that cut-down and stacked-up trees on the properties would be justification for a subpoena. JMO, but it sure looks suspicious.

[Polar Bear]

Polar Bear, I think that cut-down and stacked-up trees on the properties would be justification for a subpoena. JMO, but it sure looks suspicious.
Maybe. My only point was that subpoenas aren't just issued automatically at someone's request.

[Cedwards38]

Polar Bear, I think that cut-down and stacked-up trees on the properties would be justification for a subpoena. JMO, but it sure looks suspicious.

Yes, that and the fact that you can count on one hand the number of people who would have anything to gain from the cutting of the trees, which goes to motive.

[CFrance]

I get both of you. seems like Advogado knows a lot about what would be appropriate.

[Polar Bear]

Yes, that and the fact that you can count on one hand the number of people who would have anything to gain from the cutting of the trees, which goes to motive.
Without evidence, you can count on as many or as few fingers as you like.

And just to be devil's advocate...

I keep hearing that only a few had anything to gain. Wood has value. If a criminal could somehow be clever enough to get away with cutting down those trees and not get caught, doesn't that make every ne're-do-well on the face of the planet a possible suspect?

[WhoDat]

Having been a police officer assigned to the district attorney's office for 8 years I learned that subpoenas are issued to non-suspects to turn over records related to the crime. In order to get records or other evidence from a potential suspect you have to get a warrant which requires you to provide probable cause.

[Madelaine Amee]

Without evidence, you can count on as many or as few fingers as you like.

And just to be devil's advocate...

I keep hearing that only a few had anything to gain. Wood has value. If a criminal could somehow be clever enough to get away with cutting down those trees and not get caught, doesn't that make every ne're-do-well on the face of the planet a possible suspect?

What are you thinking .............. do you really think a ne're-do-well is likely to leave his ill gotten gains behind someone else's home to come and retrieve them later .......... give me a break!

This is just getting too over the top ridiculous - time to jump off the bridge GG.

[Polar Bear]

What are you thinking .............. do you really think a ne're-do-well is likely to leave his ill gotten gains behind someone else's home to come and retrieve them later .......... give me a break!



This is just getting too over the top ridiculous - time to jump off the bridge GG.

I said devil's advocate and was just making a point...answering ridiculous with ridiculous. Assuming there are four and only four suspects is just as ridiculous.

( And are you sure they left behind 100% of the wood? Or did they just want it to look that way so everybody would assume there are only four suspects??!!?? [emoji23] )

[Barefoot]

Not to be negative, but is it possible some posters with elaborate theories have been watching too many episodes of CSI?
I'm sure the Detectives have explored all the obvious leads and would love to arrest the perps.
As an elected official said to me several months ago, "We know who did it but there is no proof".

[Cedwards38]

I said devil's advocate and was just making a point...answering ridiculous with ridiculous. Assuming there are four and only four suspects is just as ridiculous.

( And are you sure they left behind 100% of the wood? Or did they just want it to look that way so everybody would assume there are only four suspects??!!?? [emoji23] )

OK, if that is a "ridiculous" assumption then give me some non-ridiculous reasons why anyone else would have done this, or caused this to be done, other than for the view? And if, in fact, it was for the view, how many homes do you really think had their view improved by the cutting, thus giving them a motive? And I think we've already had the "cutting for the wood" theory adequately addressed by Madelaine Amee.

[Polar Bear]

I think this horse is long dead. Have fun, gang. :)

[JCMSr]

Although I have not been following this situation from the beginning I am wondering why, if you came home and found a stockpile of wood stacked in your back yard would it not make sense to call someone to find out what the heck was going on? Perhaps this was done but I have not heard that anyone living adjacent to where the trees were cut have said much of anything. That said, I know that over the years I have seen many instances whereby someone acting as if they belong can avoid being questioned vs. someone trying to be sneaky and hide will usually be caught. Guess the perps were hiding in plain sight.

[Bogie Shooter]

Someone explained earlier that subpoenas are an investigative tool and don't require the same evidence as a warrant does, as they are a tool for gathering evidence. He also said that without subpoena authority most investigations would get nowhere.

And every post is the absolute truth.................!

[Bogie Shooter]

Polar Bear, I think that cut-down and stacked-up trees on the properties would be justification for a subpoena. JMO, but it sure looks suspicious.

Where did you read that the wood was stacked up on the properties? The original report stated the wood was staked where the trees were cut down.

[Bogie Shooter]

Not to be negative, but is it possible some posters with elaborate theories have been watching too many episodes of CSI?
I'm sure the Detectives have explored all the obvious leads and would love to arrest the perps.
As an elected official said to me several months ago, "We know who did it but there is no proof".

Now this is new information. Was this elected official allowed to make comments like that? Why would this person discuss information like that?
Did you believe the statement? Why?

[Chi-Town]

Does anyone know when the statute of limitations runs out regarding this? Consider that a rhetorical question.

[CFrance]

And every post is the absolute truth.................!
Well, this someone seems to have credentials and know what he is talking about. I was merely reminding what it was he said.

[Barefoot]

Now this is new information. Was this elected official allowed to make comments like that? Why would this person discuss information like that?
Did you believe the statement? Why?

The comment was made by an elected official who is also a friend. The comment was made in an informal way, not as a spokesperson..
That is why I haven't mentioned his name or position.

Yes, I do believe that law enforcement knows exactly who did it. I also believe there is inadequate proof to charge them. I agree with Polar Bear, this horse is long dead.

[CFrance]

Where did you read that the wood was stacked up on the properties? The original report stated the wood was staked where the trees were cut down.
http://www.**************.com/cdd-5-supervisors-still-hearing-from-angry-residents-over-lake-miona-tree-removal/

Actually, it might be good for all to read this article. 300 x 100 feet of property cleared and nobody heard???????

Oh, sorry, the url won't be permitted. You'll have to go to the online news and do a search for "tree cutting." It's the second article, and the caption under the picture says the trees were removed from this property.

What is your take on all this, Bogie? Can't tell from your comments.

[Cedwards38]

Very little heard from the VHA and POA on this issue. Wonder where they are, and what they could do to get some action!:wave:

[redwitch]

The POA had a very vitriolic article in The Bulletin condemning whoever had the trees cut down and those who might know but are keeping quiet.

Without sufficient proof, there cannot be an arrest. There's also the fact that the fine has already been paid. I doubt the developer wants to seriously delve into this. An arrest, with or without a conviction, would bring some very negative publicity about rich, entitled white folks harming the environment. Not as interesting as having sex in public but far more damaging to TV's image. If you were the Sheriff, would you be actively pursuing this matter?

[Happydaz]

The comment was made by an elected official who is also a friend. The comment was made in an informal way, not as a spokesperson..
That is why I haven't mentioned his name or position.

Yes, I do believe that law enforcement knows exactly who did it. I also believe there is inadequate proof to charge them. I agree with Polar Bear, this horse is long dead.

I heard the same thing from a very trusted source who works for the state of Florida in an environmental area position. He said they know who did it. It is just hearsay on my part, but that is what this person told me. I think he also told me that the tree cutters were young men and for some reason this complicated things? (Not sure of this last statement) This person does not live in The Villages and is in contact with state environment workers. I didn't post it before because it is just hearsay, but other posters here are saying the same thing, that some persons in authority know who did it.

[tuccillo]

As far as I know this is not a Developer issue. I believe it is a residential CDD issue only.


The POA had a very vitriolic article in The Bulletin condemning whoever had the trees cut down and those who might know but are keeping quiet.

Without sufficient proof, there cannot be an arrest. There's also the fact that the fine has already been paid. I doubt the developer wants to seriously delve into this. An arrest, with or without a conviction, would bring some very negative publicity about rich, entitled white folks harming the environment. Not as interesting as having sex in public but far more damaging to TV's image. If you were the Sheriff, would you be actively pursuing this matter?

[Wavy Chips]

Can someone please explain the fines surrounding this incident? I've heard numbers from $30k to $50k. How were they determined and what are they based on? Were these a protected species of tree? Was the amount based on the number of trees cut down or was it a blanket amount? That amount seems out of line for what I would expect for that type of infraction. As someone who still lives in Ohio :sad: I have never encountered or read about anything like this. But if I did, I would guess that the fine would be in the $1k to $5k range at worst. Thanks!

[billethkid]

The problem with hearsay even from " known " sources one never knows the chain if there is one to the original one.

On the assumption true, still leaves room for possible other than resident only . Sorta continues to smell that way........to me anyway.

[Advogado]

The problem with hearsay even from " known " sources one never knows the chain if there is one to the original one.

On the assumption true, still leaves room for possible other than resident only . Sorta continues to smell that way........to me anyway.

No one except the 4 homeowners whose view was improved had the motive to spend the significant amount of money it must have cost to have the trees cut down. it is pure fantasy to suggest that anyone else was responsible. Given the will to do so, by taking the types of investigative measures I earlier suggested, it should be possible for the sheriff to make a case against the guilty party(ies).

Incidentally, unlike the posters who have been writing their own law about the issuance of subpoenas and inventing incredible theories about who perpetrators might be, I have been responsible for putting a couple hundred criminals behind bars--so I have had some experience in this area.

[Challenger]

[QUOTE=Happydaz;1092775]I heard the same thing from a very trusted source who works for the state of Florida in an environmental area position. He said they know who did it. It is just hearsay on my part, but that is what this person told me. I think he also told me that the tree cutters were young men and for some reason this complicated things? (Not sure of this last statement) This person does not live in The Villages and is in contact with state environment workers. I didn't post it before because it is just hearsay, but other posters here are saying the same thing, that some persons in authority know who did it.[/QUOTE

I Heard the same info from a CDD official.

"And the plot thickens"

[Mleeja]

[QUOTE=Happydaz;1092775]I heard the same thing from a very trusted source who works for the state of Florida in an environmental area position. He said they know who did it. It is just hearsay on my part, but that is what this person told me. I think he also told me that the tree cutters were young men and for some reason this complicated things? (Not sure of this last statement) This person does not live in The Villages and is in contact with state environment workers. I didn't post it before because it is just hearsay, but other posters here are saying the same thing, that some persons in authority know who did it.[/QUOTE

I Heard the same info from a CDD official.

"And the plot thickens"

I heard the same thing from the starter at Lopez... :smiley:

[manaboutown]

No one except the 4 homeowners whose view was improved had the motive to spend the significant amount of money it must have cost to have the trees cut down. it is pure fantasy to suggest that anyone else was responsible. Given the will to do so, by taking the types of investigative measures I earlier suggested, it should be possible for the sheriff to make a case against the guilty party(ies).

Incidentally, unlike the posters who have been writing their own law about the issuance of subpoenas and inventing incredible theories about who perpetrators might be, I have been responsible for putting a couple hundred criminals behind bars--so I have had some experience in this area.

I got on mapquest.com, pulled up the 1700 block of Lake Miona Drive. The satellite view showed what appears to be a thickly forested strip immediately behind a handful of homes. The trees are (were?) between them and the lake shore. Although I am not sure if those shown are the grove of trees chopped down, felling a 100' x 300' swath of large oak trees would take significant time, a sizable crew, create a lot of noise and likely cost a few thousand dollars.

Again, I find it a totally "in your face" act, especially the stacking of the logs from the cutting for firewood on a property.

Logic dictates that one or more well connected, powerful folks wanted this to be let go and saw to it that it was.

[janmcn]

I got on mapquest.com, pulled up the 1700 block of Lake Miona Drive. The satellite view showed what appears to be a thickly forested strip immediately behind a handful of homes. The trees are (were?) between them and the lake shore. Although I am not sure if those shown are the grove of trees chopped down, felling a 100' x 300' swath of large oak trees would take significant time, a sizable crew, create a lot of noise and likely cost a few thousand dollars.

Again, I find it a totally "in your face" act, especially the stacking of the logs from the cutting for firewood on a property.

Logic dictates that one or more well connected, powerful folks wanted this to be let go and saw to it that it was.


IMO: this whole idea of stacking firewood is ludicrous. First of all, how many homes in TV have wood-burning fireplaces? Very few.

Second, this wood would be green wood and would need to age (or whatever you call it).

Third, who would want firewood stacked around their home attracting termites? This would be a smorgasbord for bugs.

[billethkid]

No one except the 4 homeowners whose view was improved had the motive to spend the significant amount of money it must have cost to have the trees cut down. it is pure fantasy to suggest that anyone else was responsible. Given the will to do so, by taking the types of investigative measures I earlier suggested, it should be possible for the sheriff to make a case against the guilty party(ies).

Incidentally, unlike the posters who have been writing their own law about the issuance of subpoenas and inventing incredible theories about who perpetrators might be, I have been responsible for putting a couple hundred criminals behind bars--so I have had some experience in this area.

It is all well and good to quote experience. But that experience does not predispose, unless one has proof, that there MAY be others with motive.

And unless proff in hand it is not fantasy to speculate that there could be somone else.

Hence we have in the courts the much used, abused and hidden behind ....REASONABLE doubt.

Some of us believe this case has been very unusual in how it has/had progressed from discovery to actions taken (and not taken).....far from the norm.....so far.

[Bogie Shooter]

I heard the same thing from a very trusted source who works for the state of Florida in an environmental area position. He said they know who did it. It is just hearsay on my part, but that is what this person told me. I think he also told me that the tree cutters were young men and for some reason this complicated things? (Not sure of this last statement) This person does not live in The Villages and is in contact with state environment workers. I didn't post it before because it is just hearsay, but other posters here are saying the same thing, that some persons in authority know who did it.

It's called a rumor....when heard from other sources.

[Bogie Shooter]

I got on mapquest.com, pulled up the 1700 block of Lake Miona Drive. The satellite view showed what appears to be a thickly forested strip immediately behind a handful of homes. The trees are (were?) between them and the lake shore. Although I am not sure if those shown are the grove of trees chopped down, felling a 100' x 300' swath of large oak trees would take significant time, a sizable crew, create a lot of noise and likely cost a few thousand dollars.

Again, I find it a totally "in your face" act, especially the stacking of the logs from the cutting for firewood on a property.

Logic dictates that one or more well connected, powerful folks wanted this to be let go and saw to it that it was.

Basing your assumptions on Mapquest? Why not drive by and look?

[Chi-Town]

Basing your assumptions on Mapquest? Why not drive by and look?
Why not by boat? Probably a better perspective and can be done leisurely.

[handyman]

If someone was found dead in the back yard in question ,would the Sumter county Police department pursue an investigation,or would they just say "not enough evidence" Or should we all be charged with the crime, are some people just above the Law , sure seems like it,I know it is only a dollar or Two to me,but I worked for every Dollar that I have,and I dislike being cheated !

[ricthemic]

Are all thr tree stumps still there? The cost, labor and noise for grinding a stump is more than cutting the tree down. If he stumps are gone I wonder who paid for that.

[Cedwards38]

I can only speak knowledgeably for myself, but I believe a lot of people are like me in that their major frustration with this issue is caused by the fact that we have so little reliable information from so few reliable and official sources. That leads us to some wild speculation. The citizens of The Villages are getting "burned" and we don't know why it has to be that way. If we could just be advised of the status of the investigation and have the obstacles to it's resolution explained, then I think we could at least understand why it is as it is. I understand that not all crimes get solved, but this one seems like an easy one, and apparently experienced investigators who have contributed to this thread agree. I admit that it seems easy to me because there may be information or circumstances of which I am unaware.

VHA and POA, if you're listening, how about focusing one of your monthly meetings on this issue? Invite the Sheriff, District Manager Tutt, members of the various Boards of Supervisors, Chairman Hahnfeldt, a representative from the Developer, residents of the Village in question, a representative from the agency that levied the fine, experienced criminal investigators, or any combination of those or others who might have something significant to contribute to participate in a panel discussion to report to the public and answer questions from the public. I completely understand that, due to the needs of the investigation, lack of credible information, and the desire to avoid liability, they might not be able to answer all questions, but at least telling us that gives us insight, and would make many of us feel better about the way it has been, and is being handled.

Would anyone else like see this happen?

[CFrance]

I can only speak knowledgeably for myself, but I believe a lot of people are like me in that their major frustration with this issue is caused by the fact that we have so little reliable information from so few reliable and official sources. That leads us to some wild speculation. The citizens of The Villages are getting "burned" and we don't know why it has to be that way. If we could just be advised of the status of the investigation and have the obstacles to it's resolution explained, then I think we could at least understand why it is as it is. I understand that not all crimes get solved, but this one seems like an easy one, and apparently experienced investigators who have contributed to this thread agree. I admit that it seems easy to me because there may be information or circumstances of which I am unaware.

VHA and POA, if you're listening, how about focusing one of your monthly meetings on this issue? Invite the Sheriff, District Manager Tutt, members of the various Boards of Supervisors, Chairman Hahnfeldt, a representative from the Developer, residents of the Village in question, a representative from the agency that levied the fine, experienced criminal investigators, or any combination of those or others who might have something significant to contribute to participate in a panel discussion to report to the public and answer questions from the public. I completely understand that, due to the needs of the investigation, lack of credible information, and the desire to avoid liability, they might not be able to answer all questions, but at least telling us that gives us insight, and would make many of us feel better about the way it has been, and is being handled.

Would anyone else like see this happen?
Unfortunately, that would probably not ever happen. Ms Tutt would never go to a POA meeting under those circumstances, and the VHA would never question what the Developers didn't do. I think you are right that there is something going on behind the scenes, and for that reason I doubt the people you mention would agree to such a meeting.

[Barefoot]

I can only speak knowledgeably for myself, but I believe a lot of people are like me in that their major frustration with this issue is caused by the fact that we have so little reliable information from so few reliable and official sources. That leads us to some wild speculation. The citizens of The Villages are getting "burned" and we don't know why it has to be that way. If we could just be advised of the status of the investigation and have the obstacles to it's resolution explained, then I think we could at least understand why it is as it is. I understand that not all crimes get solved, but this one seems like an easy one, and apparently experienced investigators who have contributed to this thread agree. I admit that it seems easy to me because there may be information or circumstances of which I am unaware.

VHA and POA, if you're listening, how about focusing one of your monthly meetings on this issue? Invite the Sheriff, District Manager Tutt, members of the various Boards of Supervisors, Chairman Hahnfeldt, a representative from the Developer, residents of the Village in question, a representative from the agency that levied the fine, experienced criminal investigators, or any combination of those or others who might have something significant to contribute to participate in a panel discussion to report to the public and answer questions from the public. I completely understand that, due to the needs of the investigation, lack of credible information, and the desire to avoid liability, they might not be able to answer all questions, but at least telling us that gives us insight, and would make many of us feel better about the way it has been, and is being handled.

I doubt the VHA would touch this topic with the proverbial ten-foot pole.
I think you should mail your suggestion to the head of the POA.
If anyone would be interested in shedding light on this topic, it would definitely be the POA.

[CWGUY]

I doubt the VHA would touch this topic with the proverbial ten-foot pole.
I think you should mail your suggestion to the head of the POA.
If anyone would be interested in shedding light on this topic, it would definitely be the POA.

:ohdear: Don't you use meters up there? :icon_wink:

[Bogie Shooter]

I can only speak knowledgeably for myself, but I believe a lot of people are like me in that their major frustration with this issue is caused by the fact that we have so little reliable information from so few reliable and official sources. That leads us to some wild speculation. The citizens of The Villages are getting "burned" and we don't know why it has to be that way. If we could just be advised of the status of the investigation and have the obstacles to it's resolution explained, then I think we could at least understand why it is as it is. I understand that not all crimes get solved, but this one seems like an easy one, and apparently experienced investigators who have contributed to this thread agree. I admit that it seems easy to me because there may be information or circumstances of which I am unaware.

VHA and POA, if you're listening, how about focusing one of your monthly meetings on this issue? Invite the Sheriff, District Manager Tutt, members of the various Boards of Supervisors, Chairman Hahnfeldt, a representative from the Developer, residents of the Village in question, a representative from the agency that levied the fine, experienced criminal investigators, or any combination of those or others who might have something significant to contribute to participate in a panel discussion to report to the public and answer questions from the public. I completely understand that, due to the needs of the investigation, lack of credible information, and the desire to avoid liability, they might not be able to answer all questions, but at least telling us that gives us insight, and would make many of us feel better about the way it has been, and is being handled.

Would anyone else like see this happen?
No.

[CFrance]

No.
Speaking for yourself, of course... :boxing2:

[Barefoot]

Don't you use meters up there? :icon_wink:

Haha, how astute of you.
Metric in Canada wasn't implemented until 1970, after I left high school.
It really is true, you can't teach an old :doggie: new tricks.

182 posts on tree cutting and still going strong!

[Cedwards38]

I doubt the VHA would touch this topic with the proverbial ten-foot pole.
I think you should mail your suggestion to the head of the POA.
If anyone would be interested in shedding light on this topic, it would definitely be the POA.

Great suggestion! I emailed it to them yesterday. :agree:

[Bogie Shooter]

I doubt the VHA would touch this topic with the proverbial ten-foot pole.
I think you should mail your suggestion to the head of the POA.
If anyone would be interested in shedding light on this topic, it would definitely be the POA.

It was a front page article in the June bulletin. So I guess they know.

[Barefoot]

Great suggestion! I emailed it to them yesterday. :agree:

It was a front page article in the June bulletin. So I guess they know.

I didn't see the article in the June bulletin.
Hopefully the email from Cedwards will prompt the POA to stay involved, and remind them that residents are very interested in the investigation (or lack thereof).

[Cedwards38]

Someone in another thread stated, "I am having a hard time understanding why you and your ilk cannot come to the accept the fact that the resitution has been made to the satisfaction of the district and probably the law enforcment community. As far as they are concerned this case is closed. When an offer of amnesty is made and accepted, that is usually it. You are not going to get your pound of flesh.

If you have put people behind bars as you say, then your are probably aware settlements are reached and court records are sealed to protect identities. We, the general public, are not going to findout the names of the person(s) responsible for the cutting. All you are doing now is bullying those that disagree with you.

Let's all agree to move on...."

I am going to assume that you are sincerely puzzled by the notion that the "ilk" to which you refer refuses to be satisfied with the current status of the tree cutting saga. I don't want to argue with you or anyone else about this issue. Since it seems you are posing an honest inquiry, I will try to give an honest and completely respectful response. I really can only speak for myself, but I am guessing that my views coincide with those of many who continue to question, ponder, and analyze.

The reason why I have questioned this supposed resolution to the case of the tree cutters is that I believe in justice that is fair, public, equal, swift, and lawful. I believe that publicly elected and/or appointed servants owe their first and only allegiance to the full public they serve including providing us with complete and accurate information. I believe that justice should not be able to be bought, and that just because you have deep pockets does not mean you can break the law and avoid having to be subject to the law. I believe that no one is so important, rich, connected, smart, or beloved that they are above the law.

I don't want a pound of flesh. I don't want anyone to go to jail over cutting these trees.

I do want the perpetrators to pay the full costs, including the fine, and possibly be sentenced to some worthy public service to atone for their wrongdoing. In fact that could turn this bad thing into a good one, and truly give the perpetrators a way to redeem themselves in the eyes of the public. I do not want the citizens of The Villages to pay any of the costs. I do want the guilty parties to be identified and the public notified as to who they are, just like the various drunks, muggers, robbers, traffic offenders, vandals, shoplifters, and violators of public decency that grace our news every day and don't have the strings or the bucks to stay hidden from public scrutiny and justice. And I do not want this justice to take nine months and counting. I do want a full, impartial, and aggressive investigation of this crime, and reports from my elected and appointed officials about it's progress, and why it is taking so long to be solved, or why it ultimately can not be solved.

I do expect that the perpetrators of this crime are good people who made a bad mistake. I suspect that they feel guilty, embarrassed, stressed, and regretful. I honestly feel a little bit sorry for them. But just like the rest of us, they have to have the courage and the morality to come forward and admit their crime. I'm not opposed to a plea bargain or deal, but plea bargains and deals require the guilty to publicly confess, rather than remain hidden in the shadows. I don't want that public confession just to humiliate them, though after all these months of denial I'm sure it will. I want that because that's the way it works for all the rest of us.

In America we have justice. I hope in America we have the morality and backbone to take responsibility for our actions. That's what I was taught by my parents and my schools. That's what I've always believed. And that's why I continue to question this until these conditions are realized.

Now that I've answered your inquiry to the best of my ability, I'd like to pose some for you, or anyone else on this thread. Why are you so offended by those of us who are continuing to ask these questions? Why does it make you so angry, anxious, stressed,, unaccepting, and confrontational? How does it hurt you? How does it effect you at all? Are we insulting you or your family? Are we hurting your loved ones, or your property and possessions? If you don't agree with us, can you not just stop reading this thread instead of insisting that we accept your opinion and stop talking about it? Do we not have the right to ask questions about the public realm that we help fund? Even if you think we are wrong, do we not have the right to speak out? Why are you so adamant that we accept this deal as it stands and raise no further questions? If a criminal action occurred that directly effected you or your family, and the crime was not solved, and there was little indication that it ever would be solved, and someone suggested that you just accept that and move on, would you not continue to question?

I invite anyone who has suggested that we should accept and go on as if justice was served, and seem so annoyed by those of us who do not agree, to give me a clear and respectful explanation to my questions. I'm sincerely puzzled and want to know your rationale.

Here's what I know:

(a) someone cut down environmentally protected trees and stacked at least some the wood on or near the property where it was cut
(b) this crime remains unsolved, though public officials insist that it is still under investigation
(c) there has been some, but very little significant information reported by the local law enforcement, the District, the Daily Sun, the POA, the VHA, or any other entity
(d) many believe, including some experienced law enforcement investigators, that there are more aggressive avenues that this crime investigation could take which might lead to it being solved
(e) this has been going on for approximately nine months
(f) at least one member of one District Board of Supervisors suggested that an offer of prosecution amnesty be offered if the guilty parties came forward and admitted their crime and paid the costs, which may or may not have been the official position of the District leadership, law enforcement, or the local prosecutor
(g) a group about whose leadership, membership, purpose, and history we know nothing, came forward through a local attorney and paid some costs, but I'm not sure it is all the costs that have or will be incurred by the citizens of The Villages
(h) no individual or individuals came forward to take advantage of this prosecution amnesty offer and confessed to the crime

That's all I know. Just speaking for me, that's not enough.

[Challenger]

Someone in another thread stated, "I am having a hard time understanding why you and your ilk cannot come to the accept the fact that the resitution has been made to the satisfaction of the district and probably the law enforcment community. As far as they are concerned this case is closed. When an offer of amnesty is made and accepted, that is usually it. You are not going to get your pound of flesh.

If you have put people behind bars as you say, then your are probably aware settlements are reached and court records are sealed to protect identities. We, the general public, are not going to findout the names of the person(s) responsible for the cutting. All you are doing now is bullying those that disagree with you.

Let's all agree to move on...."

I am going to assume that you are sincerely puzzled by the notion that the "ilk" to which you refer refuses to be satisfied with the current status of the tree cutting saga. I don't want to argue with you or anyone else about this issue. Since it seems you are posing an honest inquiry, I will try to give an honest and completely respectful response. I really can only speak for myself, but I am guessing that my views coincide with those of many who continue to question, ponder, and analyze.

The reason why I have questioned this supposed resolution to the case of the tree cutters is that I believe in justice that is fair, public, equal, swift, and lawful. I believe that publicly elected and/or appointed servants owe their first and only allegiance to the full public they serve including providing us with complete and accurate information. I believe that justice should not be able to be bought, and that just because you have deep pockets does not mean you can break the law and avoid having to be subject to the law. I believe that no one is so important, rich, connected, smart, or beloved that they are above the law.

I don't want a pound of flesh. I don't want anyone to go to jail over cutting these trees.

I do want the perpetrators to pay the full costs, including the fine, and possibly be sentenced to some worthy public service to atone for their wrongdoing. In fact that could turn this bad thing into a good one, and truly give the perpetrators a way to redeem themselves in the eyes of the public. I do not want the citizens of The Villages to pay any of the costs. I do want the guilty parties to be identified and the public notified as to who they are, just like the various drunks, muggers, robbers, traffic offenders, vandals, shoplifters, and violators of public decency that grace our news every day and don't have the strings or the bucks to stay hidden from public scrutiny and justice. And I do not want this justice to take nine months and counting. I do want a full, impartial, and aggressive investigation of this crime, and reports from my elected and appointed officials about it's progress, and why it is taking so long to be solved, or why it ultimately can not be solved.

I do expect that the perpetrators of this crime are good people who made a bad mistake. I suspect that they feel guilty, embarrassed, stressed, and regretful. I honestly feel a little bit sorry for them. But just like the rest of us, they have to have the courage and the morality to come forward and admit their crime. I'm not opposed to a plea bargain or deal, but plea bargains and deals require the guilty to publicly confess, rather than remain hidden in the shadows. I don't want that public confession just to humiliate them, though after all these months of denial I'm sure it will. I want that because that's the way it works for all the rest of us.

In America we have justice. I hope in America we have the morality and backbone to take responsibility for our actions. That's what I was taught by my parents and my schools. That's what I've always believed. And that's why I continue to question this until these conditions are realized.

Now that I've answered your inquiry to the best of my ability, I'd like to pose some for you, or anyone else on this thread. Why are you so offended by those of us who are continuing to ask these questions? Why does it make you so angry, anxious, stressed,, unaccepting, and confrontational? How does it hurt you? How does it effect you at all? Are we insulting you or your family? Are we hurting your loved ones, or your property and possessions? If you don't agree with us, can you not just stop reading this thread instead of insisting that we accept your opinion and stop talking about it? Do we not have the right to ask questions about the public realm that we help fund? Even if you think we are wrong, do we not have the right to speak out? Why are you so adamant that we accept this deal as it stands and raise no further questions? If a criminal action occurred that directly effected you or your family, and the crime was not solved, and there was little indication that it ever would be solved, and someone suggested that you just accept that and move on, would you not continue to question?

I invite anyone who has suggested that we should accept and go on as if justice was served, and seem so annoyed by those of us who do not agree, to give me a clear and respectful explanation to my questions. I'm sincerely puzzled and want to know your rationale.

Here's what I know:

(a) someone cut down environmentally protected trees and stacked at least some the wood on or near the property where it was cut
(b) this crime remains unsolved, though public officials insist that it is still under investigation
(c) there has been some, but very little significant information reported by the local law enforcement, the District, the Daily Sun, the POA, the VHA, or any other entity
(d) many believe, including some experienced law enforcement investigators, that there are more aggressive avenues that this crime investigation could take which might lead to it being solved
(e) this has been going on for approximately nine months
(f) at least one member of one District Board of Supervisors suggested that an offer of prosecution amnesty be offered if the guilty parties came forward and admitted their crime and paid the costs, which may or may not have been the official position of the District leadership, law enforcement, or the local prosecutor
(g) a group about whose leadership, membership, purpose, and history we know nothing, came forward through a local attorney and paid some costs, but I'm not sure it is all the costs that have or will be incurred by the citizens of The Villages
(h) no individual or individuals came forward to take advantage of this prosecution amnesty offer and confessed to the crime

That's all I know. Just speaking for me, that's not enough.

Wish I had said that!!!!

[Advogado]

Someone in another thread stated, "I am having a hard time understanding why you and your ilk cannot come to the accept the fact that the resitution has been made to the satisfaction of the district and probably the law enforcment community. As far as they are concerned this case is closed. When an offer of amnesty is made and accepted, that is usually it. You are not going to get your pound of flesh.

If you have put people behind bars as you say, then your are probably aware settlements are reached and court records are sealed to protect identities. We, the general public, are not going to findout the names of the person(s) responsible for the cutting. All you are doing now is bullying those that disagree with you.

Let's all agree to move on...."

I am going to assume that you are sincerely puzzled by the notion that the "ilk" to which you refer refuses to be satisfied with the current status of the tree cutting saga. I don't want to argue with you or anyone else about this issue. Since it seems you are posing an honest inquiry, I will try to give an honest and completely respectful response. I really can only speak for myself, but I am guessing that my views coincide with those of many who continue to question, ponder, and analyze.

The reason why I have questioned this supposed resolution to the case of the tree cutters is that I believe in justice that is fair, public, equal, swift, and lawful. I believe that publicly elected and/or appointed servants owe their first and only allegiance to the full public they serve including providing us with complete and accurate information. I believe that justice should not be able to be bought, and that just because you have deep pockets does not mean you can break the law and avoid having to be subject to the law. I believe that no one is so important, rich, connected, smart, or beloved that they are above the law.

I don't want a pound of flesh. I don't want anyone to go to jail over cutting these trees.

I do want the perpetrators to pay the full costs, including the fine, and possibly be sentenced to some worthy public service to atone for their wrongdoing. In fact that could turn this bad thing into a good one, and truly give the perpetrators a way to redeem themselves in the eyes of the public. I do not want the citizens of The Villages to pay any of the costs. I do want the guilty parties to be identified and the public notified as to who they are, just like the various drunks, muggers, robbers, traffic offenders, vandals, shoplifters, and violators of public decency that grace our news every day and don't have the strings or the bucks to stay hidden from public scrutiny and justice. And I do not want this justice to take nine months and counting. I do want a full, impartial, and aggressive investigation of this crime, and reports from my elected and appointed officials about it's progress, and why it is taking so long to be solved, or why it ultimately can not be solved.

I do expect that the perpetrators of this crime are good people who made a bad mistake. I suspect that they feel guilty, embarrassed, stressed, and regretful. I honestly feel a little bit sorry for them. But just like the rest of us, they have to have the courage and the morality to come forward and admit their crime. I'm not opposed to a plea bargain or deal, but plea bargains and deals require the guilty to publicly confess, rather than remain hidden in the shadows. I don't want that public confession just to humiliate them, though after all these months of denial I'm sure it will. I want that because that's the way it works for all the rest of us.

In America we have justice. I hope in America we have the morality and backbone to take responsibility for our actions. That's what I was taught by my parents and my schools. That's what I've always believed. And that's why I continue to question this until these conditions are realized.

Now that I've answered your inquiry to the best of my ability, I'd like to pose some for you, or anyone else on this thread. Why are you so offended by those of us who are continuing to ask these questions? Why does it make you so angry, anxious, stressed,, unaccepting, and confrontational? How does it hurt you? How does it effect you at all? Are we insulting you or your family? Are we hurting your loved ones, or your property and possessions? If you don't agree with us, can you not just stop reading this thread instead of insisting that we accept your opinion and stop talking about it? Do we not have the right to ask questions about the public realm that we help fund? Even if you think we are wrong, do we not have the right to speak out? Why are you so adamant that we accept this deal as it stands and raise no further questions? If a criminal action occurred that directly effected you or your family, and the crime was not solved, and there was little indication that it ever would be solved, and someone suggested that you just accept that and move on, would you not continue to question?

I invite anyone who has suggested that we should accept and go on as if justice was served, and seem so annoyed by those of us who do not agree, to give me a clear and respectful explanation to my questions. I'm sincerely puzzled and want to know your rationale.

Here's what I know:

(a) someone cut down environmentally protected trees and stacked at least some the wood on or near the property where it was cut
(b) this crime remains unsolved, though public officials insist that it is still under investigation
(c) there has been some, but very little significant information reported by the local law enforcement, the District, the Daily Sun, the POA, the VHA, or any other entity
(d) many believe, including some experienced law enforcement investigators, that there are more aggressive avenues that this crime investigation could take which might lead to it being solved
(e) this has been going on for approximately nine months
(f) at least one member of one District Board of Supervisors suggested that an offer of prosecution amnesty be offered if the guilty parties came forward and admitted their crime and paid the costs, which may or may not have been the official position of the District leadership, law enforcement, or the local prosecutor
(g) a group about whose leadership, membership, purpose, and history we know nothing, came forward through a local attorney and paid some costs, but I'm not sure it is all the costs that have or will be incurred by the citizens of The Villages
(h) no individual or individuals came forward to take advantage of this prosecution amnesty offer and confessed to the crime

That's all I know. Just speaking for me, that's not enough.

A terrific summary of the situation. Thank you for your effort. Could I suggest you copy it as a letter to the POA, the Daily Sun, the Villages News, and even the VHA. Posting it here will just draw the usual attacks from the small number of chronic posters who want this issue to go away.

[manaboutown]

Someone in another thread stated, "I am having a hard time understanding why you and your ilk cannot come to the accept the fact that the resitution has been made to the satisfaction of the district and probably the law enforcment community. As far as they are concerned this case is closed. When an offer of amnesty is made and accepted, that is usually it. You are not going to get your pound of flesh.

If you have put people behind bars as you say, then your are probably aware settlements are reached and court records are sealed to protect identities. We, the general public, are not going to findout the names of the person(s) responsible for the cutting. All you are doing now is bullying those that disagree with you.

Let's all agree to move on...."

I am going to assume that you are sincerely puzzled by the notion that the "ilk" to which you refer refuses to be satisfied with the current status of the tree cutting saga. I don't want to argue with you or anyone else about this issue. Since it seems you are posing an honest inquiry, I will try to give an honest and completely respectful response. I really can only speak for myself, but I am guessing that my views coincide with those of many who continue to question, ponder, and analyze.

The reason why I have questioned this supposed resolution to the case of the tree cutters is that I believe in justice that is fair, public, equal, swift, and lawful. I believe that publicly elected and/or appointed servants owe their first and only allegiance to the full public they serve including providing us with complete and accurate information. I believe that justice should not be able to be bought, and that just because you have deep pockets does not mean you can break the law and avoid having to be subject to the law. I believe that no one is so important, rich, connected, smart, or beloved that they are above the law.

I don't want a pound of flesh. I don't want anyone to go to jail over cutting these trees.

I do want the perpetrators to pay the full costs, including the fine, and possibly be sentenced to some worthy public service to atone for their wrongdoing. In fact that could turn this bad thing into a good one, and truly give the perpetrators a way to redeem themselves in the eyes of the public. I do not want the citizens of The Villages to pay any of the costs. I do want the guilty parties to be identified and the public notified as to who they are, just like the various drunks, muggers, robbers, traffic offenders, vandals, shoplifters, and violators of public decency that grace our news every day and don't have the strings or the bucks to stay hidden from public scrutiny and justice. And I do not want this justice to take nine months and counting. I do want a full, impartial, and aggressive investigation of this crime, and reports from my elected and appointed officials about it's progress, and why it is taking so long to be solved, or why it ultimately can not be solved.

I do expect that the perpetrators of this crime are good people who made a bad mistake. I suspect that they feel guilty, embarrassed, stressed, and regretful. I honestly feel a little bit sorry for them. But just like the rest of us, they have to have the courage and the morality to come forward and admit their crime. I'm not opposed to a plea bargain or deal, but plea bargains and deals require the guilty to publicly confess, rather than remain hidden in the shadows. I don't want that public confession just to humiliate them, though after all these months of denial I'm sure it will. I want that because that's the way it works for all the rest of us.

In America we have justice. I hope in America we have the morality and backbone to take responsibility for our actions. That's what I was taught by my parents and my schools. That's what I've always believed. And that's why I continue to question this until these conditions are realized.

Now that I've answered your inquiry to the best of my ability, I'd like to pose some for you, or anyone else on this thread. Why are you so offended by those of us who are continuing to ask these questions? Why does it make you so angry, anxious, stressed,, unaccepting, and confrontational? How does it hurt you? How does it effect you at all? Are we insulting you or your family? Are we hurting your loved ones, or your property and possessions? If you don't agree with us, can you not just stop reading this thread instead of insisting that we accept your opinion and stop talking about it? Do we not have the right to ask questions about the public realm that we help fund? Even if you think we are wrong, do we not have the right to speak out? Why are you so adamant that we accept this deal as it stands and raise no further questions? If a criminal action occurred that directly effected you or your family, and the crime was not solved, and there was little indication that it ever would be solved, and someone suggested that you just accept that and move on, would you not continue to question?

I invite anyone who has suggested that we should accept and go on as if justice was served, and seem so annoyed by those of us who do not agree, to give me a clear and respectful explanation to my questions. I'm sincerely puzzled and want to know your rationale.

Here's what I know:

(a) someone cut down environmentally protected trees and stacked at least some the wood on or near the property where it was cut
(b) this crime remains unsolved, though public officials insist that it is still under investigation
(c) there has been some, but very little significant information reported by the local law enforcement, the District, the Daily Sun, the POA, the VHA, or any other entity
(d) many believe, including some experienced law enforcement investigators, that there are more aggressive avenues that this crime investigation could take which might lead to it being solved
(e) this has been going on for approximately nine months
(f) at least one member of one District Board of Supervisors suggested that an offer of prosecution amnesty be offered if the guilty parties came forward and admitted their crime and paid the costs, which may or may not have been the official position of the District leadership, law enforcement, or the local prosecutor
(g) a group about whose leadership, membership, purpose, and history we know nothing, came forward through a local attorney and paid some costs, but I'm not sure it is all the costs that have or will be incurred by the citizens of The Villages
(h) no individual or individuals came forward to take advantage of this prosecution amnesty offer and confessed to the crime

That's all I know. Just speaking for me, that's not enough.

Thank you for presenting the situation so comprehensively and clearly!

[rubicon]

The posts referencing people in the know who passed along possible valid information into the inner workings of this case is exactly the same sort of thing that goes on in Washington and that's scary

[Villageswimmer]

Someone in another thread stated, "I am having a hard time understanding why you and your ilk cannot come to the accept the fact that the resitution has been made to the satisfaction of the district and probably the law enforcment community. As far as they are concerned this case is closed. When an offer of amnesty is made and accepted, that is usually it. You are not going to get your pound of flesh.

If you have put people behind bars as you say, then your are probably aware settlements are reached and court records are sealed to protect identities. We, the general public, are not going to findout the names of the person(s) responsible for the cutting. All you are doing now is bullying those that disagree with you.

Let's all agree to move on...."

I am going to assume that you are sincerely puzzled by the notion that the "ilk" to which you refer refuses to be satisfied with the current status of the tree cutting saga. I don't want to argue with you or anyone else about this issue. Since it seems you are posing an honest inquiry, I will try to give an honest and completely respectful response. I really can only speak for myself, but I am guessing that my views coincide with those of many who continue to question, ponder, and analyze.

The reason why I have questioned this supposed resolution to the case of the tree cutters is that I believe in justice that is fair, public, equal, swift, and lawful. I believe that publicly elected and/or appointed servants owe their first and only allegiance to the full public they serve including providing us with complete and accurate information. I believe that justice should not be able to be bought, and that just because you have deep pockets does not mean you can break the law and avoid having to be subject to the law. I believe that no one is so important, rich, connected, smart, or beloved that they are above the law.

I don't want a pound of flesh. I don't want anyone to go to jail over cutting these trees.

I do want the perpetrators to pay the full costs, including the fine, and possibly be sentenced to some worthy public service to atone for their wrongdoing. In fact that could turn this bad thing into a good one, and truly give the perpetrators a way to redeem themselves in the eyes of the public. I do not want the citizens of The Villages to pay any of the costs. I do want the guilty parties to be identified and the public notified as to who they are, just like the various drunks, muggers, robbers, traffic offenders, vandals, shoplifters, and violators of public decency that grace our news every day and don't have the strings or the bucks to stay hidden from public scrutiny and justice. And I do not want this justice to take nine months and counting. I do want a full, impartial, and aggressive investigation of this crime, and reports from my elected and appointed officials about it's progress, and why it is taking so long to be solved, or why it ultimately can not be solved.

I do expect that the perpetrators of this crime are good people who made a bad mistake. I suspect that they feel guilty, embarrassed, stressed, and regretful. I honestly feel a little bit sorry for them. But just like the rest of us, they have to have the courage and the morality to come forward and admit their crime. I'm not opposed to a plea bargain or deal, but plea bargains and deals require the guilty to publicly confess, rather than remain hidden in the shadows. I don't want that public confession just to humiliate them, though after all these months of denial I'm sure it will. I want that because that's the way it works for all the rest of us.

In America we have justice. I hope in America we have the morality and backbone to take responsibility for our actions. That's what I was taught by my parents and my schools. That's what I've always believed. And that's why I continue to question this until these conditions are realized.

Now that I've answered your inquiry to the best of my ability, I'd like to pose some for you, or anyone else on this thread. Why are you so offended by those of us who are continuing to ask these questions? Why does it make you so angry, anxious, stressed,, unaccepting, and confrontational? How does it hurt you? How does it effect you at all? Are we insulting you or your family? Are we hurting your loved ones, or your property and possessions? If you don't agree with us, can you not just stop reading this thread instead of insisting that we accept your opinion and stop talking about it? Do we not have the right to ask questions about the public realm that we help fund? Even if you think we are wrong, do we not have the right to speak out? Why are you so adamant that we accept this deal as it stands and raise no further questions? If a criminal action occurred that directly effected you or your family, and the crime was not solved, and there was little indication that it ever would be solved, and someone suggested that you just accept that and move on, would you not continue to question?

I invite anyone who has suggested that we should accept and go on as if justice was served, and seem so annoyed by those of us who do not agree, to give me a clear and respectful explanation to my questions. I'm sincerely puzzled and want to know your rationale.

Here's what I know:

(a) someone cut down environmentally protected trees and stacked at least some the wood on or near the property where it was cut
(b) this crime remains unsolved, though public officials insist that it is still under investigation
(c) there has been some, but very little significant information reported by the local law enforcement, the District, the Daily Sun, the POA, the VHA, or any other entity
(d) many believe, including some experienced law enforcement investigators, that there are more aggressive avenues that this crime investigation could take which might lead to it being solved
(e) this has been going on for approximately nine months
(f) at least one member of one District Board of Supervisors suggested that an offer of prosecution amnesty be offered if the guilty parties came forward and admitted their crime and paid the costs, which may or may not have been the official position of the District leadership, law enforcement, or the local prosecutor
(g) a group about whose leadership, membership, purpose, and history we know nothing, came forward through a local attorney and paid some costs, but I'm not sure it is all the costs that have or will be incurred by the citizens of The Villages
(h) no individual or individuals came forward to take advantage of this prosecution amnesty offer and confessed to the crime

That's all I know. Just speaking for me, that's not enough.


Great analysis of this situation. Thank you.

[Xcuse]

Naneiben, great post, completely agree.

[Bogie Shooter]

The End.

[NYGUY]

The End.

Don't you wish, but not a chance in the world..:popcorn::popcorn:

[rubicon]

This topic has an eternal life

[asianthree]

I agree with cedwards38. At this point there has been precedent set on how this event was handled. So if someone doesn't like the tree blocking their view they find someone to cut it down pay them cash and eventually may have to pay some sort of restitution, but less than what the cost would be. So what's to stop others from improving their view.

[Challenger]

This topic has an eternal life

Hope it survives until the perpetrators are identified and make full restitution .

[manaboutown]

I agree with cedwards38. At this point there has been precedent set on how this event was handled. So if someone doesn't like the tree blocking their view they find someone to cut it down pay them cash and eventually may have to pay some sort of restitution, but less than what the cost would be. So what's to stop others from improving their view.

And, they can remain anonymous and evade criminal charges. What a deal!

[bargee]

Whoever has decided that they can allow this situation to be covered by a payoff is setting a very dangerous precedent.

[TheVillageChicken]

This topic has an eternal life

And during that eternity, not a single member of either of the tribes will even consider the merit of the other side's argument.

[Challenger]

And during that eternity, not a single member of either of the tribes will even consider the merit of the other side's argument.

Can you give me an example of any meritorious action by the perpetrators of this act.

[TheVillageChicken]

Can you give me an examole of any meritorious action by the perpetrators of this act.

And what, you'll defect?

[Challenger]

And what, you'll defect?

I assume your answer is no?

[TheVillageChicken]

I assume your answer is no?

I haven't decided. Still trying to figure out what an examole is. I know that exa is a prefix for ten raised the eighteenth power and a mole is the number of atoms in 12 grams of pure carbon-12, so I am quite confused by your challenge.

[Challenger]

I haven't decided. Still trying to figure out what an examole is. I know that exa is a prefix for ten raised the eighteenth power and a mole is the number of atoms in 12 grams of pure carbon-12, so I am quite confused by your challenge.

So, I failed smelling in the 3rd grade. I sumbtimes have trouble with puncteation too! Do you have an answer for my clear concise question?

[TheVillageChicken]

So, I failed smelling in the 3rd grade. I sumbtimes have trouble with puncteation too! Do you have an answer for my clear concise question?

I heard that one of them once rang a bell for the Salvation Army, but I don't have a side in this issue. I don't care of they walk away Scott Free or if they are sentenced to be hanged from the new trees once they are big enough.

[Advogado]

I don't care either, so long as the perpetrators cannot use their money to subvert our criminal justice system -- which is what is happening here. It is outrageous. Friends of Lake Miona? Give me a break.

[billethkid]

I don't care either, so long as the perpetrators cannot use their money to subvert our criminal justice system -- which is what is happening here. It is outrageous. Friends of Lake Miona? Give me a break.

WOW!
That is quite an extrapolation tainted with a hint of prdjudice.

This entire subject is like watching folks on a merry go round being continuously disappointed that after each ride the desitnations don't seem to change!

[Advogado]

WOW!
That is quite an extrapolation tainted with a hint of prdjudice.

This entire subject is like watching folks on a merry go round being continuously disappointed that after each ride the desitnations don't seem to change!l

I'm frankly surprised that you are not as outraged as I am that somebody can buy immunity from prosecution by setting up a front organization and anonymously ponying up 25 grand. But that seems to be what is going on here-- or something more sinister. Because of the lack of transparency, we don't know for sure.

[TheVillageChicken]

l

I'm frankly surprised that you are not as outraged as I am that somebody can buy immunity from prosecution by setting up a front organization and anonymously ponying up 25 grand. But that seems to be what is going on here-- or something more sinister. Because of the lack of transparency, we don't know for sure.

I, for one, am far from enraged. I love it when someone gives the finger to the rest of their world. If the rest of their world breaks that finger off, I have to give props for that as well. I view your use of the word "sinister" as hyperbole. Maybe my 34 years in the service gave me a different interpretation of that word than yours.

[kcrazorbackfan]

I don't care either, so long as the perpetrators cannot use their money to subvert our criminal justice system -- which is what is happening here. It is outrageous. Friends of Lake Miona? Give me a break.

Avogado, have you not heard that the "golden rule" is in effect for these people? Those with the gold make the rules. I think it's hilarious that the "Friends of Lake Miona" probably paid thousands of dollars to have the trees removed and now they've paid $25,000+ to have trees planted back, to avoid prosecution and embarrassment. I may have grown up on a farm in Arkansas but it sounds to me like they've got more money than sense. Is everyone really supposed to believe that no one outside their clique of friends knows who had it done?

[tomwed]

After the new plantings will they have a great view of the lake? I have seen the lake from Heron Golf course side, I think.

[wereback]

In any other circle it would be called bribery I really think you can go to jail for it could be what law is working on?

[Barefoot]

wow!
this entire subject is like watching folks on a merry go round being continuously disappointed that after each ride the destinations don't seem to change! l i k e

[Happydaz]

Avogado, have you not heard that the "golden rule" is in effect for these people? Those with the gold make the rules. I think it's hilarious that the "Friends of Lake Miona" probably paid thousands of dollars to have the trees removed and now they've paid $25,000+ to have trees planted back, to avoid prosecution and embarrassment. I may have grown up on a farm in Arkansas but it sounds to me like they've got more money than sense. Is everyone really supposed to believe that no one outside their clique of friends knows who had it done?

Good points! It is becoming obvious that the rumors were true and some authorities and local residents know who cut the trees down. "Friends of Lake Miona" is such a joke. They are more than friends, they are the perpetrators of the tree cutting. The naysayers and "Village Apologists" couldn't stop the Avalanche of postings on this site. People rose up and demanded action and were not to be deterred. Keep the pressure on. It is effective!

[billethkid]

l

I'm frankly surprised that you are not as outraged as I am that somebody can buy immunity from prosecution by setting up a front organization and anonymously ponying up 25 grand. But that seems to be what is going on here-- or something more sinister. Because of the lack of transparency, we don't know for sure.

That they paid up or how they paid up is only the back end or the reaction by who ever, how ever.

The precipitation came from the offer of immunity being made by one of the lettered organizations in TV.

Why has there been no questioning of why the organiztion would go through what ever approval process was required and then get the leagality of it established and that the offer was made? (unless I missed it).

[outlaw]

The End.

Not even close.

[outlaw]

l

I'm frankly surprised that you are not as outraged as I am that somebody can buy immunity from prosecution by setting up a front organization and anonymously ponying up 25 grand. But that seems to be what is going on here-- or something more sinister. Because of the lack of transparency, we don't know for sure.

I think "outrage" is a bit of an over reaction. Frankly, I'm surprised (not stunned or shocked) that, as a person in the legal system, you are "outraged" by anything that goes on in the courts.

[outlaw]

Not to be negative, but is it possible some posters with elaborate theories have been watching too many episodes of CSI?
I'm sure the Detectives have explored all the obvious leads and would love to arrest the perps.
As an elected official said to me several months ago, "We know who did it but there is no proof".

When I would watch a law and order marathon on a rainy weekend, I would tell my wife I was studying for my law degree....

[tomwed]

After the new plantings will they have a great view of the lake? I have seen the lake from Heron Golf course side, I think.
Hey, I think this is a good question. Hasn't anyone here actually been to the "viewing"?
I use to have a view of the ocean in a condo in Cape May, NJ. Ocean views can raise the property value 60%.

[Happydaz]

Hey, I think this is a good question. Hasn't anyone here actually been to the "viewing"?
I use to have a view of the ocean in a condo in Cape May, NJ. Ocean views can raise the property value 60%.

I was out on the lake in a kayak and observed that the view was clear for four houses. The rest of the shore land was lined with large live oaks. One house in particular had a great view. That house had construction tape around a new lanai that was being built. All the screen had been removed in preparation for some construction. I observed this last winter. Planting new live oaks will obscure their view somewhat, but nothing compared to the wall of huge live oaks that were cut down.

[tomwed]

////

[manaboutown]

i was out on the lake in a kayak and observed that the view was clear for four houses. The rest of the shore land was lined with large live oaks. One house in particular had a great view. That house had construction tape around a new lanai that was being built. All the screen had been removed in preparation for some construction. I observed this last winter. Planting new live oaks will obscure their view somewhat, but nothing compared to the wall of huge live oaks that were cut down.

bingo!

[asianthree]

I was out on the lake in a kayak and observed that the view was clear for four houses. The rest of the shore land was lined with large live oaks. One house in particular had a great view. That house had construction tape around a new lanai that was being built. All the screen had been removed in preparation for some construction. I observed this last winter. Planting new live oaks will obscure their view somewhat, but nothing compared to the wall of huge live oaks that were cut down.

You are a brave person in my book to kayak

[graciegirl]

You are a brave person in my book to kayak



I'll say. On the news this evening they reported a woman in Longwood had her arm bitten off by an alligator.

[manaboutown]

I'll say. On the news this evening they reported a woman in Longwood had her arm bitten off by an alligator.

She was swimming, not kayaking. A canoer pulled her to safety. Woman loses part of arm in Wekiva River gator attack (http://www.mynews13.com/content/news/cfnews13/news/article.html/content/news/articles/cfn/2015/8/8/woman_bit_by_alligat.html)

[Average Guy]

I was out on the lake in a kayak and observed that the view was clear for four houses. The rest of the shore land was lined with large live oaks. One house in particular had a great view. That house had construction tape around a new lanai that was being built. All the screen had been removed in preparation for some construction. I observed this last winter. Planting new live oaks will obscure their view somewhat, but nothing compared to the wall of huge live oaks that were cut down.

Perhaps the perfect solution would be if a large billboard could be put in the area where the trees were removed. The billboard could have a pointed finger with the words in gigantic print

Beware. Illegal Tree Removal Has Been Detected In This Area.

That would make for a nice view until the new tree plantings have had a chance to grow.

[manaboutown]

Perhaps the perfect solution would be if a large billboard could be put in the area where the trees were removed. The billboard could have a pointed finger with the words in gigantic print

Beware. Illegal Tree Removal Has Been Detected In This Area.

That would make for a nice view until the new tree plantings have had a chance to grow.

I love it!

[graciegirl]

She was swimming, not kayaking. A canoer pulled her to safety. Woman loses part of arm in Wekiva River gator attack (http://www.mynews13.com/content/news/cfnews13/news/article.html/content/news/articles/cfn/2015/8/8/woman_bit_by_alligat.html)





If you go to sumterpa.com and put in the street, then click on the map and keep enlarging the map you can see the area. You can use google earth too. Or you can Kayak. I would be upside down in the thing within five minutes. I am not very good at stuff like that.

[Bay Kid]

She was swimming, not kayaking. A canoer pulled her to safety. Woman loses part of arm in Wekiva River gator attack (http://www.mynews13.com/content/news/cfnews13/news/article.html/content/news/articles/cfn/2015/8/8/woman_bit_by_alligat.html)

Never swim with gators!

[ricthemic]

If you go to sumterpa.com and put in the street, then click on the map and keep enlarging the map you can see the area. You can use google earth too. Or you can Kayak. I would be upside down in the thing within five minutes. I am not very good at stuff like that.

What is name of the street? Thanks Grace

[Challenger]

So,

Has there been a settlement in the "Miona Tree Case"?
Facts please

[Advogado]

So,

Has there been a settlement in the "Miona Tree Case"?
Facts please
I have been trying to follow the publicly available information and have seen nothing subsequent to the weird article about the mysterious check from The Friends of Lake Miona. It doesn't look like the Daily Sun is going to provide any more details since the incident does not reflect well on The Villages, and the online newspaper apparently doesn't have the resources to do much real reporting. Hopefully, the Sheriff's Office will reopen the investigation and start issuing subpoenas or a witness will voluntarily come forward.

[graciegirl]

I have been trying to follow the publicly available information and have seen nothing subsequent to the weird article about the mysterious check from The Friends of Lake Miona. It doesn't look like the Daily Sun is going to provide any more details since the incident does not reflect well on The Villages, and the online newspaper apparently doesn't have the resources to do much real reporting. Hopefully, the Sheriff's Office will reopen the investigation and start issuing subpoenas or a witness will voluntarily come forward.



Huh?

[manaboutown]

I have been trying to follow the publicly available information and have seen nothing subsequent to the weird article about the mysterious check from The Friends of Lake Miona. It doesn't look like the Daily Sun is going to provide any more details since the incident does not reflect well on The Villages, and the online newspaper apparently doesn't have the resources to do much real reporting. Hopefully, the Sheriff's Office will reopen the investigation and start issuing subpoenas or a witness will voluntarily come forward.

For some reason I keep thinking of "The Friends of Lake Miona" as "The Felons of Lake Miona".

The $25K "donation" is chicken feed compared to the retainer for a first class criminal defense attorney.

[Challenger]

For some reason I keep thinking of "The Friends of Lake Miona" as "The Felons of Lake Miona".

The $25K "donation" is chicken feed compared to the retainer for a first class criminal defense attorney.

Lets hope they are forced to hire one.

[Cedwards38]

In the end we may never know the full story. I wonder if the persons responsible for cutting the trees even feel guilty or have any remorse!

[billethkid]

Does anybody else wonder why TV decided so quickly to just pay to have the restoration done?

Or why they promptly agreed to waive pressing any charges if the basic "fee" was paid.........even anonymously?

[Challenger]

Did CDD5 accept the money and grant some kind of amnesty- and if so under what authority can they do so?

[Advogado]

Does anybody else wonder why TV decided so quickly to just pay to have the restoration done?

Or why they promptly agreed to waive pressing any charges if the basic "fee" was paid.........even anonymously?

Yes. I also wonder about a number of other things concerning this incident. For example, what exactly is the deal, if any, between the attorney for the Friends of Lake Miona and the prosecutor? Are the circumstances such that that attorney has become an accessory after-the-fact by participating in setting up a phony organization to hide the identity of the perpetrators?

[biker1]

When you say "TV", I assume you mean the developer. I do not believe the developer was involved in this. I believe this was an issue for the CDDs.

Does anybody else wonder why TV decided so quickly to just pay to have the restoration done?

Or why they promptly agreed to waive pressing any charges if the basic "fee" was paid.........even anonymously?

[virgind]

Why dont you check with crime against seniors. Maybe they could answer your questions.Face it this happens a lot if you have enough money sue the attorney that formed the fake organization for illegal practices.

[CFrance]

Yes. I also wonder about a number of other things concerning this incident. For example, what exactly is the deal, if any, between the attorney for the Friends of Lake Miona and the prosecutor? Are the circumstances such that that attorney has become an accessory after-the-fact by participating in setting up a phony organization to hide the identity of the perpetrators?
But aren't deals made all the time? I still think that the developer, as a business practice, does not want a drawn-out investigation due to the publicity. they are probably very amenable to a deal and may well have pushed for the amnesty offer.

And call me suspicious, but I wouldn't be surprised if they are the Friends of Lake Miona and paid the $ themselves.

[billethkid]

When I use TV I am not referring to the developer. I am referring to the many lettered...CCD, VCCD, TWA, etc organizations that in essence administer TV.

[Mleeja]

When I use TV I am not referring to the developer. I am referring to the many lettered...CCD, VCCD, TWA, etc organizations that in essence administer TV.

Here is a novel approach. The settlement offer was made by the CCD5 Board in the July meeting. The offer has been accepted by The Friends of Lake Minoa. I would be willing to bet that the acceptance will be discussed in the August Board Meeting. All of the posters objecting to the settlement attend the CCD5 Meeting next Friday at 8:00 am. I believe the meetings are held at the Lake Minoa Rec Center. You can get you questions answered directly from the decision makers involved with the settlement offer.

[Xcuse]

Here is a novel approach. The settlement offer was made by the CCD5 Board in the July meeting. The offer has been accepted by The Friends of Lake Minoa. I would be willing to bet that the acceptance will be discussed in the August Board Meeting. All of the posters objecting to the settlement attend the CCD5 Meeting next Friday at 8:00 am. I believe the meetings are held at the Lake Minoa Rec Center. You can get you questions answered directly from the decision makers involved with the settlement offer.

Go early to get a good seat!

[Bogie Shooter]

Here is a novel approach. The settlement offer was made by the CCD5 Board in the July meeting. The offer has been accepted by The Friends of Lake Minoa. I would be willing to bet that the acceptance will be discussed in the August Board Meeting. All of the posters objecting to the settlement attend the CCD5 Meeting next Friday at 8:00 am. I believe the meetings are held at the Lake Minoa Rec Center. You can get you questions answered directly from the decision makers involved with the settlement offer.

And then you can go form your posse.........to get your pound of flesh!

[Villageswimmer]

And then you can go form your posse.........to get your pound of flesh!


Interesting comment :confused:

[Whatever]

And then you can go form your posse.........to get your pound of flesh!

My understanding is that Civil Compromise of a Criminal Action is a No, No. However, if the payment of $25K+ satisfies the TOTAL obligation, why beat a dead horse.
I am also concerned as to why the estimate of $50K+ was being bandied about by the powers that be when it seems, that they were wiling to settle, without consequences, for less than half of the "estimated cost."

[Challenger]

And then you can go form your posse.........to get your pound of flesh!

Is total compensation for all cost incured and disclosure of the name of the agreeving parties , in any way, "a pound of flesh"?