Evergreen Dazed wrote:
The guy didn't do the damage himself. It was unfortunate.
Although he is ultimately responsible for the site, I think that fact makes a very big difference.
It was however an informed landowner responsible for the stewardship and care of an ancient monument who failed in that duty. He was at best grossly negligent. The notion that because it wasn't actually him driving the digger, he is in someway removed from his duty of care is a little bit scary. Its his land the work was being done on under his direct care, he is directly responsible and should pay. Although he is ultimately responsible for the site, I think that fact makes a very big difference.
It may come as a disappointment to some here, but the truth is that it wasn't a maddened farmer, laughing insanely as he angrily bulldozed an ancient site.
It was a different scenario altogether.
