Instead of editing the original post, here is a more sanitized version.
typically, I'm not happy with people posting private communications here. but just as newbies get hassled for obvious indiscretions, shouldn't experienced jumpers be treated the same?
In reply to:
An email chain I recieved.
> Background:
>
> A guy named [jumper 3] moved here from Florida a few months ago with a handful
> of jumps. He found *** online and asked me about it. I told him that
> we jump it regularly and didn't hear anything else about it from him. That
> was months ago. Monday [jumper 3] writes me an email and says that three
> people got busted there on Saturday. One was [jumper 4] who posts online as
> [jumper 4 username] and lives in [deleted], one was [jumper 5] who posts online
> as [jumper 5 username] and lives in [deleted]. The other we don't know yet. [jumper 4] found out
> about the tower from [jumper 3] who said it would be ok to jump it. Aparently
> [jumper 4] thought that counted as contacting a local. [jumper 3] was going to go
> with them but had a conflict. No one ever talked to me or [jumper 2].
>
> [jumper 2] and I have been jumping *** for almost 5 years since he and
> [another dude] opened it. We kept going back because of the LOW bust factor, large
> landing area, easy access, easy climb, and the large platform at the top.
> It was a great place to take newer jumpers and out of town jumpers. It was
> a great place to go to get back to back low key jumps in. We had a good
> system for getting in and out without being seen and we knew the routines
> of the cops and neighbors in the area.
>
> The Bust:
>
> These three dingleberries parked in the parking lot which is well lit and
> visible from the busy biway and climbed the front side of the fence which
> is also well lit and visible from the busy biway. To me that is a stupid,
> lazy, careless and obvious mistake which could have been avoided with a 10
> minute conversation with me or [jumper 2]. The other side of the fence is dark
> and about three feet away from dense trees. The cop let them go because he
> is ex-military and [jumper 4] is currently in the military. But now the cops
> know that the tower was being jumped and I don't think our former
> procedure for getting in and out of there is safe anymore.
>
> In Maryland we've been lucky to have gone years without having unethical
> jumpers in the area, but we may be at the end of that era. As stupid as
> they were, [jumper 3] and [jumper 4] have been pretty apologetic about the whole
> thing. They seem to realize they screwed up and don't want to repeat the
> mistake. [jumper 5] on the other hand doesn't seem to get it (see her response
> to [jumper 2] below). Lesson: watch out for this chick. She's trouble.
>
> -[jumper 1]
>
>
> Hi [jumper 2],
>
> It is a pleasure to finally meet you...if only online. I actually
> contacted you on February 16 to let you know that I would be jumping in
> this area, but you never wrote back. [another guy] told me about you.
>
> You asked what happened at the tower and I think that [jumper 4] already
> explained that to you. It was just bad luck. It was completely silent
> outside, then all of a sudden a cop just pulled in there out of nowhere
> and caught us. They found it amusing and let us go. The cop was just
> pulling in there to do paperwork..he hadn't suspected a thing.
>
> A friend of mine had contacted [jumper 3], another local, who told us about
> this object and although he couldn't go with us, he said it would be okay
> for us to go on our own. So I did contact a local. But, I am also a local
> myself. I live in [deleted] and will be actively jumping the area. I'll be in
> Norway jumping the fjords for the next few weeks, but once I return I will
> be out and about so I'd appreciate it if you'd take me out to the local
> objects. Are you willing to do that?
>
> Best,
> [jumper 5]
it was "completely silent" until the cops arrived? are they supposed to announce themselves? should they be preceded by a marching band?
there are a ton of lessons to be learned here...