Trespassers brag on Internet that they infiltrated former Discovery Island at Walt Disney World

Ken Jones said:...most people who do this kind of stuff only look to cause damage or burn something :(

You're jaded because of what happened at "your" park. Don't ask me how I know but, actually, MOST don't. The standard rule is to document only, never take or destroy.

Oh, but yes, he is a fool to post proof on the internet. (at least using his real name)

It is not just what happened at my home park but what happens at lots of places each year.

Most (Not All) only do it to look for trouble.

Bill2 said:
What a jack ass this guy and his crew are for filming it and publishing it on the internet. He just provided all the proof Disney needs to pursue charges. I love stupid criminals, they are so much easier to prosecute.

Available charges here so far;

- Trespassing.
- Burglary - Felony
- Vandalism (even if they broke one piece of rooting wood).
- Criminal Mischief.
- Whatever else Disney lawyers could throw in there....

Total morons... I hope Disney pursues prosicutions just on principle alone... After-all, if one of these idiots got hurt there, they would probably try to sue Disney as liability (no big fences and hundred guards on the site to make sure Darwin Award bound idiots try to get to the island.

Other than just suing to be an American stereotype, where is/was the harm?

@Ken. While I respect your view, you're missing the point I'm making. Look at the recorded media presented by any true urban explorer. This guy is not in it to get off on the vandalism, he and his group document interesting abandoned places.

I'm just saying, don't lump him into the category of juvenile delinquent just looking to cause destruction for a quick adrenaline high. This, and what many "others" do, is not remotely the same.

I wonder if this is beyond a statute of limitations, because the actual trespassing took place a couple of years ago (or so I managed to infer from the story). I'm not a lawyer, nor do I claim to have much interest in studying law, but maybe there's a reason they didn't publish the blog right away.

I was just coming in here to comment on statute of limitations.

The Statute of Limitations for bringing an action for trespass on real property is four (4) years, pursuant to section 95.11(3)(g), Florida Statutes.

So there you have it. Besides, Disney has bigger fish to fry. Like people who have strokes a month after riding Tower of Terror.

If there is any response by Disney, I would hope it would be to have more boat patrols overnight. Suing someone sends a message, but that doesn't make it any more difficult for someone else to sneak in.

I personally don't see a response forthcoming. Sure I bet The House of Mouse isn't happy that it has happened, but are they going to spend money to legally do something to someone who did it quite some time ago?

That's money they could invest in tighter security measures, if they deem it necessary.

I dunno... live alligators seem like a pretty tight security system to me. :)

kevin38 said:
I really do not think disney would let gators stay in this water
for very long without relocating them.

Which would be about as effective as relocating mosquitos in Michigan, or rattlesnakes in Arizona.

Unless a particular animal has shown to be a threat to the guests, they aren't going to take the time to try and relocate every one that's spotted. The cost far outweighs the benefit.

djDaemon said:
I dunno... live alligators seem like a pretty tight security system to me. :)

Didn't keep these idiots out ;).

I'm not a lawyer, and I don't play one on TV. But if Disney doesn't prosecute trespassers -- even ones who distribute proof of their exploits on the vast Interwebs -- mightn't they be setting themselves up for possible future legal culpability if someone else gets the bright idea to visit that island and gets hurt somehow?

I wouldn't think so. Trespassing is law and well defined. It's not like trademark, where you have to actively defend it to keep it.

obxKevin said:
@Ken. While I respect your view, you're missing the point I'm making. Look at the recorded media presented by any true urban explorer. This guy is not in it to get off on the vandalism, he and his group document interesting abandoned places.

I'm just saying, don't lump him into the category of juvenile delinquent just looking to cause destruction for a quick adrenaline high. This, and what many "others" do, is not remotely the same.

How are they different?

Aside from different intentions, do they not all have to climb over a fence or go past the "No Tresspassing" sign? While not all look for trouble I just don't think they should be treated different when they all commit the same crime.

^ Legally they might not be different (I'm not a lawyer either, so I don't know if intentions matter). I think Kevin was referring to the way people are branding them as bored punks out to cause trouble and destroy property. As far as I can tell, that couldn't be farther from the truth, as these guys are regular urban explorers who simply like to take photos and video of abandoned spaces. I enjoy UE too, but I wouldn't have attempted what they did.

^ I know what he ment.

Juggalotus said:

kevin38 said:
I really do not think disney would let gators stay in this water
for very long without relocating them.

Which would be about as effective as relocating mosquitos in Michigan, or rattlesnakes in Arizona.

Unless a particular animal has shown to be a threat to the guests, they aren't going to take the time to try and relocate every one that's spotted. The cost far outweighs the benefit.

Maybe they only move the mosquitoes that exceed 5 feet long

CoasterDemon said:

Bill2 said:
What a jack ass this guy and his crew are for filming it and publishing it on the internet. He just provided all the proof Disney needs to pursue charges. I love stupid criminals, they are so much easier to prosecute.

Available charges here so far;

- Trespassing.
- Burglary - Felony
- Vandalism (even if they broke one piece of rooting wood).
- Criminal Mischief.
- Whatever else Disney lawyers could throw in there....

Total morons... I hope Disney pursues prosicutions just on principle alone... After-all, if one of these idiots got hurt there, they would probably try to sue Disney as liability (no big fences and hundred guards on the site to make sure Darwin Award bound idiots try to get to the island.

Other than just suing to be an American stereotype, where is/was the harm?

The fact that it is private property owned by Disney was the harm. If they wanted people on that island, they would provide boats to get to it.

I am also sure Disney has bigger fish to fry than these morons. This will be the end of it. If they continue, they will eventually get caught in the act or hurt. After all these jack asses were surprised about alligators around (to bad they were not that day). I wonder if they would be surprised to find out that Cottonmouths are also in the area?

On a side note, one of the funny comments they made is that they felt like Navy SEALS. Shows again how ignorant they are... Our local boyscotts team could have made that swim...

Again, wathing for these idiots to be my potential vote for the next Darwin award.I may send them some ideas.

What's a boyscott? Is that anything like a henweigh?

If you say what these guys did was OK because there was no harm, do you also believe that people finding their way inside coaster fences are OK as long as they don't get whacked by a passing train? If you still think that's cool, please post your addresses here. I might want to check out your house and stuff someday while you're out. It's OK, right?