So even after being caught, he went back and stole the rest? Why is he not in jail?

"I myself state that this property is abandoned," Morrison said in February. "It's like a shipwreck. If a ship sinks, that's abandoned and it's fair game."

Um...no maritime laws don't apply on land.

I don't get it either. This is a pretty straight forward theft of property that didn't belong to him but it doesn't even say a police report was filed. When the agency knew the thefts were occurring why didn't they watch the area and arrest those cutting it up?


Just notes a list of different environmental violations that are being placed against him.

Something isn't adding up.....

If it's the Feds, they might be building their case before the warrant comes to his door.I think this is what's going to nail him.

p51,

True, but those violations tend to take years to enforce and collect any type of financial remuneration. That doesn't stop him now.

Really shocked he went back and took the rest of the bridge but it goes to show the first legal go around was not enough to scare him off.

Someone needs to make a final, legal determination who own(ed) it. There is no such thing as no one owning it. If the railroad tried to give it away and it was not accepted then it's probably still the railroad. You may rest assured that if someone injured themselves in some tort way on the structure or what's left the lawyers would either figure out who owned it or sue everyone who might have owned it leaving the potential defendants to show how they in fact were not the owner.

If in fact the railroad did own it it would be very much in their interest to sign off on a theft warrant as they sure don't want to have some spur they haven't used in a while to be considered to be free for the taking. Plus some nudging from local prosecutors would help. But that's the first step. Find out who he stole it from. In the mean time attach all his accounts as potentially containing the results of theft.

PS: If it irks you as it does me feel free to circulate this story in social media that a fellow stole an entire railroad bridge and the powers that be are doing nothing except looking at whether a few dried up old timbers splashing in the water broke some rule. Maybe fear of being made out a laughingstock will coax them into action.

http://1071thez.com/region-news/idem-lo ... n-hammond/



I find it hard to believe no legal action has been done on this guy, if something is up we don't know. but there's no permission for the bridge to be scrapped and was not OK'ed to be scrapped. Grand theft Bridge. You have to stop this or someone like him could go off and scrap away other bridges.

This case will never go anywhere. CSX donated it, and wrote it off their books. The city never accepted the donation, so it never got ON their books. The bridge is in limbo, so who is going to press charges? He can quite literally say it was his bridge because he says so, if no one else will claim ownership!

When you add that onto the typical reluctance they seem to have to nail the scrap thieves to the wall, you will get...nothing!

Just another clue that we need to watch our own stuff like a hawk. Once it's on their truck, the best we can hope for is they get a slap on the wrist. We will be left with thousands or 10s of thousands in repair, or the complete loss of irreplaceable things.

Being that CSX’s donation of the bridge was never accepted by the recipient; I wonder if CSX might still own the bridge and be liable for any damage caused by the unlawful removal of the bridge.

You would have to show the donation following thru or it did not happen making CSX still the owner, they could not write it off.
I think there are plenty of other issues like from the Better Business bureau.

Just recall the City already said NO to this guy and he didnt listen. There are no excuses for this.

Oh I don’t think there is any question as to the responsibility of the person who scrapped the bridge. But I also would not jump to the conclusion that CSX is off the hook for all the environmental damage.

This bridge theft was a long and publically obvious process that was observed by the authorities. All parties with a stake in the bridge should have been aware and taken appropriate action. So their inventory of environmental damages may ultimately come back to bite them. I would not be surprised if they just forget it ever happened. They may even pay the scrapper to close the deal with him.

Yeah but what's the damage? Treated wood that's been outdoors for many decades is not going to have any creosote left.

The damage is the destruction of the bridge, used/unused wont matter.

Randall -

I found this on the internet today when looking for something else:

http://forgottenchicago.com/articles/br ... ad-bridge/

Not only does this article have a photo and story about the Page bridge still in existence in Chicago, it also references the now defunct Monon bridge, including a photo.

Les

Thanks, that's better than I could do. In any case, I just haven't been down that way lately.

Yes, dinwitty, I agree. But so far the best they seem to come up with is water pollution and even that charge is pretty specious since wood that old isn't going to cause any. I am going to be very disappointed if this man is not charged with grand theft at some point.