Wyoming Corner Crossing Jury Trial Live Stream

It all depends on how the law reads, and exactly what the evidence and testimony shows in regards to violating that law or not. That should be a fairly simple concept either way it goes.
 
If they go so far as to bring in the violation of airspace, there's going to be serious trouble on the horizon for drone pilots....
 
If they go so far as to bring in the violation of airspace, there's going to be serious trouble on the horizon for drone pilots....
Just like airplanes, they should have to stay above a specific distance above the private. We certainly don't need drones buzzing above our properties all the time.
 
If they go so far as to bring in the violation of airspace, there's going to be serious trouble on the horizon for drone pilots....
And commercial aircraft, and communications/navigation satellites, and.....

Super slippery slope there!
 
An altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/tex...de of 500 feet,vessel, vehicle, or structure.

14 CFR § 91.119 - Minimum safe altitudes:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/tex...de of 500 feet,vessel, vehicle, or structure.
Interesting case going on with famous youtuber Trent Palmer regarding this as well.
 
Attorneys and judge were supposed to begin arguments without the jury at 8 MT, jury was supposed to be there at 9 MT. Nothing on the stream yet.
 
I hope I am wrong, but from the bits and pieces I listened to, I going with guilty.
 
You guys are too pessimistic. I think the defense is making a good case. Though I never listen to court cases so I don’t have a reference
 
The co-council is like listening to paint dry. Should have left it with just the one closing argument.
agreed. easy to arm chair quarterback, and im no lawyer, but I would have simply asked every witness "did my clients ever touch private property?" and in closing say "my clients never once touched private property". I dont know why they are getting so in the weeds and making things so drawn out and complicated... its obvious they were hunting, they killed an elk, so for the defense to say theres no evidence of them ever hunting, is going down the wrong path IMO.
 
It's surprising to me that the defense has not broached several aspects (unless I've missed it- I've occasionally had to stop listening to focus on other things):

If moving over 18" of private property without touching the property is trespassing, then every person in carbon county who has walked down a sidewalk or a road and extended an inch of their body over the edge of the legal easement is guilty of trespass. If you walk down a sidewalk and point at a bird at someone's feeder, you've likely trespassed.

The chain is not allowed to cross federal property- even the infinitesimally small point of the shared corner.

The most notable instance of airspace being public (that I'm aware of) stream and river access in Wyoming. You can be on the river on private property, occupying the landowners airspace as long as you aren't touching the real property beneath the water.
 
Last edited:
Just hearing silence... guessing the prosecution rested and its now on the jury?
 
Back
Top