This is probably a silly concern, but I was wondering how likely it is for a place owner or the police to find and prosecute somebody suspected of trespassing because of pictures posted online. I know that the risk is not zero, that's why most of us use fake names on this forum and don't clearly write the name of the places, but supposing they can know the real identity of the explorer by doing some research on facebook, what are the circumstances under which they are willing to prosecute after the fact?

Judging by all the people revealing their real name on UER while posting extensive sets of UE pictures, or people writing entire UE books under their real name, I'm assuming the risk is quite low. But I need to come up with a good explanation for a friend who is worried about me because of my facebook pictures.

I've never had an issue, but I got two letters from the Suwon City government for posting pictures of an abandoned amusement park. Oddly they were sent to the content aggregator hosting my pictures, despite the fact that my name and a link to my actual website were clearly present.

This is the location:
http://www.uer.ca/...ow.asp?locid=27784

And here are the letters:
http://www.uer.ca/....asp?storyid=11275

Greetings, This is the web service manager of Suwon City Hall in the Republic of Korea. Suwon City Hall would like to ask you to remove the article "Ghost Rides: Abandoned Parks in South Korea (http://www.darkroa...arks-in-south.html)" posted on your website (http://www.darkroastedblend.com). After contacting the relevant government ministry, we learned that the park mentioned in the article is scheduled to be developed as a self-supporting new town with general administrative complexes and high-tech industrial sites. To start the foundation work for development, the park was closed in the winter of 2007 and enclosed with fencing* in March of 2008 to prevent trespassers and possible accidents. There is even signage warning that "Trespassers will be prosecuted."* (*totally nonexistent) At the same time, the restaurant floating on the water is currently in court for compensation matters, and will be removed after the conclusion of the lawsuit. It appears that the pictures in the article were taken around October this year. If so, it is a clear violation of our warning (prohibiting any trespassers from entering the area). Since the article and pictures give no description about the area, they can generate misunderstanding and possibly damage the image of Suwon City. Once again, we ask you to remove the article from your website. Thank you very much. =============================== Hello! The park of taken picture has been closed since 2007. 10 for our new city development. We prohibited to go inside for our safe(To notice for Keep out) Before that our citizen used the park for playing We worry about misunderstand for the park that is danger and no managemental in pictures So we inform for web site that is "http://www.gwanggyonewtown.or.kr" It's not in english web site but this is our future instead of this place. We will develop like this web site. Thank you!

There is probably a big fat dossier on me in police headquarters, and if I ever get charged with a real crime, they'll probably trot out this as well as many other instances of me trespassing, getting involved with politics, making friends with political prisoners, etc.

There's a law in Ontario that says if you are suspected of trespassing, the charges must be laid within 6 months of the offense. So due to this fact I normally wait a while before posting photos anywhere that's a potential risk. If I know the property owner has caught people there, is looking for the location online, etc. Otherwise, meh. Not really a big deal.

If anything, I've gotten OUT of trouble because of my exploration pictures. You'd be surprised how many property owners let you leave without confrontation once you prove you're only there to take photos. I got out of a B&E Charge (which I didn't do..) with my photos as well haha.

Posted by Steed I've never had an issue, but I got two letters from the Suwon City government for posting pictures of an abandoned amusement park.

That seems more like the city government not wanting to be portrayed negatively. There's a location here that we've explored 3x now. The first two times we were trespassing, but got to explore every bit of the building and rifled through all the nooks/crannies - go wherever we wanted.


Our last visit we got permission to take photos, from the owner/caretaker, but they were worried about us posting any photos online making them look bad (state owned institution). The guy with the keys walked around with us the entire time and told us what we could/couldn't photograph - pretty much didn't get a single good photo on that trip. Plus they didn't show us any of the cool rooms we'd already been in hahaha

I've actually always had thought about this as well. While I do take pictures, the only place I really post them is Facebook. However, I make Youtube videos of my explorations. In the videos my face and my fellow explorers faces are clearly exposed.

I never post the names of locations so I felt the only way of a property owner to find out is if they happen to stumble across my videos.

The statute of limitations for trespassing in Ohio is 6 months. So I just set my cameras's date 6 months behind.

A couple months after climbing an epic landmark in Montreal and posting pictures online, the company who owns the building contacted the police to file a complaint. The police then contacted us, and we agreed on meeting them at the police station. They said that the company asked us to remove the pictures immediatly or else they'd sue us for 100000$.

The cops were very nice to us, complimenting us on our pictures and the balls it took to climb that building on a christmas night. They also told us that they felt all this was a waste of their time.

All in all, we removed our pictures and the company didn't sue us. That's what we call a 100 000$ picture

Here are some of the pics we took that night:

1.


2.

Police in America could learn a thing or two from Canada.

I got in trouble in 2004 , as a matter of fact I think I might have been one of the first to get in trouble for online pictures because my court appearance made it onto Ninjalicous Urbex timeline as a significant event in his book Access all areas


Basically I was going into Danvers state hospital almost nightly, at the time urbex online was new and there wasn't social media, google, flicr etc etc , the cops called me and told me to stay out of danvers state, so instead I went to the old danvers high school they were renovating, when they saw my pictures there, I got a court summons in the mail


I even made the papers because of it, LOL they even mentioned I was holding one of Ninj's infiltration zines in one of the pictures haha

in the end I was court ordered to remove my website, continued without a finding on the breaking and entering, and charged with trespassing

Story from Salem News: October 21 2004

'Urban explorer' admits trespassing at Danvers sites

By Julie Manganis
Staff writer

SALEM — Michael Turcotte says he's simply a history buff who likes to explore old buildings he considers to be endangered.

Danvers police say he's a trespasser who ignored earlier warnings to stay out of local buildings, including Danvers State Hospital
and the Holten-Richmond School. Yesterday, Turcotte, 29, of Danvers, admitted to charges of breaking and entering and
trespassing — charges filed after police discovered photos of Turcotte inside both buildings on a Web site called
abandonedspaces.net. He was fined $160. Prosecutors believe Turcotte is part of a subculture of "urban explorers" who break
into old buildings, rail tunnels and other structures and then document their visits, as Turcotte did on his now-defunct Web site.
An internet search revealed several sites in the United States and Europe that report on the practice.

Judge Dennis Healey was clearly puzzled by the case, however. "What was going on?" he asked Turcotte. "I take pictures of
historic buildings," Turcotte explained, adding that he simply wanted to visit the Holten-Richmond School before it was
renovated. He contends he did not see the no-trespass signs and a gate in the fence was open. "At the time it didn't seem like a big
deal," Turcotte explained to the judge. But prosecutor Jesse Dole said that just weeks before his unauthorized visit to the school
construction site, Turcotte had been given a warning by police after he was found to be in the old Danvers State Hospital.
Despite that warning on April 1, Danvers police said they discovered new photos on Turcotte's site of him at the Holten-
Richmond School by April 29. In one photo, he is holding a magazine called "Infiltration."

Dole said the site also included Turcotte's description of the warning police had given him about staying out of buildings. That's
when they filed criminal charges. Turcotte has no prior record. If he stays out of trouble for six months, the breaking-and-
entering charge, the more serious of the two, will be dismissed.



This is the place I got busted at

http://www.dijital.../turningpoint.html


And the picture mentioned in the article with Ninj's zine

The US army used my photos in a briefing slideshow and didn't even bother to contact me. At least they credited my website



Original document is at http://www.usarak....Public_Meeting.pdf (I'm on pages 5 and 6).

There was a Twilight Zone sort of thing that happened years ago on this forum. Apparently, somebody had infiltrated a large metal building that belonged to a contractor. That person them posted the pics in the forum, and the guy who owned the building and worked out of it every day saw the pics!

Needless to say, there was a huge list of replies after that about trespassing, and "how bad can it be if you're on this site too" kind of stuff. I remember the guy who owned the building was mostly cool about it, and mainly mad that one of his employees left a door unlocked.

IDK, I might be remembering this wrong. Does someone else remember that fiasco? I think the post was called something something Bridge and Building.

I'm currently under heat for *alleged* trespassing. All because I have a cop that goes to my church who knows my face. She *maybe* saw my face on security cameras or something, and told me to come in for questioning. I didn't do it, because there was no warrant, and a week later I start getting calls from another police department in another city for *alleged* pictures I posted from locations in that city months ago.

So obviously this bitch started going through my photostream on flickr and identifying *alleged* locations and notifying the other PDs.

Haven't heard anything for a couple weeks so i'm not sure if it's over yet, but i'm lying low.

So yes. You CAN get into at the very least being harassed by police from posting pictures. Especially if you're acquainted with any officers who know who you are.

Check out CA's revised statues. I'd also wager there's a lawyer in you area that'd give you the answers you seek for fifty bucks.

Here in Colorado, evidence of you simply being there isn't necessarily evidence of trespass. If you've received prior warnings (with a paper trail) or post pictures that plainly show you knew you weren't supposed to be there, it can be used as evidence. Otherwise, it'd have to be proven that you didn't simply walk through an unlocked door and that the area was properly posted at the time you were there.

US Cops are totally free to do what adventuredan experienced. Police are just as free to invite someone to their place of business to have a chat as any other citizen. Everybody's permitted to ask another person a question. And indeed, adventuredan was just as free to blow 'em off - that in itself isn't reasonable suspicion. If she keeps asking him about it, he can file harassment charges against her. If departments from other cities keep calling him, he can file a harassment lawsuit against the county.

Posted by budda The statute of limitations for trespassing in Ohio is 6 months. So I just set my cameras's date 6 months behind.

You clever bastard. This is so simple, but for some reason, it never occurred to me.

Posted by Oelky You clever bastard. This is so simple, but for some reason, it never occurred to me.

I set mine exactly one year in the future just to mess with people, but that is such a better idea.

Never had a problem with my pics. As someone else said, when confronted having the camera helps and often they are just happy you are not stealing, scrapping or vandalizing.
But if my 84 year old Mom ever saw them she'd be calling me freaking out that I am going to fall through a floor one day

The stories I've heard about trouble from pictures came about because another "urban explorer" ratted out someone they didn't like, just to get them in trouble with the police. Anonymously, of course. There are some real haters in this hobby.

Nothing meaningful to contribute but my thanks. There's a fair amount of good to know stuff in this thread. So, thanks guys!

I had posted some photos of a local mine that a few friends and I had explored. It is a pretty popular destination with the Jeep crowd as well as local mine explorers. I received an email from a guy who said he was the mine owner and threatening to have me arrested. I pointed out to him that it is his responsibility to properly mark his property with no trespassing signs. THEN he can call the cops...

Never heard any more from him. One of these days I want to take a ride up to see if he ever did put up the signage. We had been there so many times that it really didn't matter to lose access to it anyway.

Heck, we put up no trespassing signs at our mine. They only cost a few bucks.

Abby Normal

I took the time and date stamp off my camera.