How is this breaking news if this has been discussed for a few days?

Some opposing viewpoints might have made for a more interesting piece, especially since Mr Bennett has not been convicted of a crime; though I am guessing perhaps that you were not able to find anyone sympathetic to his cause (even after canvassing the area, presumably for like-minded neighbors).

As I commented before on the previous article, human emotions probably got the better of him. I don't think he should have reacted in that manner, by assaulting the kid, but saying that he should know what to expect when he bought the house next to a baseball field . When he bought the house he probably didn't think the situation with the field would become a nuisance to his live hood. I don't know if he complained to the school or the town but if he did, and nothing satisfied his frustration ,he probably just had enough! People always think that they would not react in this manner, but if something really frustrates you, maybe you might just think of it! Where you live should be your sanctuary and peace of mind, having these schools and fields should not be in someone's backyard! But anyways, I hope the kid is doing ok.

I also think this story needs to be put to rest! Putting him in the square to hang will not achieve anything. Hopefully he will apologize to the boy and his family. The End.

There is no opposing the viewpoint that it was wrong for Bennet to go after the kid. Having said that, this is a culmination of a long history of disputes, and UC is ALSO a responsible party. I know only what I read on Patch, but I have not seen enough evidence of UC making any effort to help the situation.

A homeowner shouldn't be forced to fence himself in, but riddle me this - if the owners put up a simply 5' tall picket fence along the property line between the houses & the school, it might not stop pop fly's, but surely, no one would be able to enter the property to retrieve them. This issue has so many solutions and so many people are "wrong" in the arguments (going back to the original articles last year). Reasonable minds have long ceased to be a part of the greater issue at play here.

I would like to beg that no more trees are killed in the reporting of this story, but alas, that was never the case. What is the current analogy I can use?

Although I do not condone the actions taken by Mr Bennett, I do question if Coach Reagan has ever asked the neighbors for permission to retrieve foul balls from their properties.

Ok how many foul balls could it possibly be? 5? 10? 20? all landing in one yard? C'mon people this is ridiculous. Mr Bennett is a moron. As I said before if this is your biggest problem in life....YOU ARE BLESSED.

I give so much credit to the young man that used restraint when Mr. Bennett attacked him. It was in his right to defend himself yet he took the high road. On that note, his parents and UC should also be celebrated because it's the values taught to this student that enabled him to see clearly and not deck him. I'll let the readers try and imagine the various scenarios if this went the other way. This man's behavior is totally unjustified. He acted like a bully....the very thing we are trying to teach our children to not tolerate from other students. This is a grown man!! We aren't talking about a few foul balls here....we are talking about a man that obviously has issues that go way beyond. I hope you seek help and pray for forgiveness. It bothered me deeply how this man acted but more importantly again I want to congratulate the young man, his parents and UC on keeping us safe and not letting the incident get further out of hand. These are the type of stories that should be reported and discussed. This kid is a hero and obvioulsly well prepared to enter into the next phase of his life - good for you!! The resolution is simple.....1) get help, 2) don't ever think about coming after a child EVER!!! 3) If you can't keep your hands to yourself, please move..... Have a nice weekend.

@grace86 exactly. Problems with foul balls are left for the court room, which the court and neighbors have already resolved their issues peacefully and neighborly.

The problems with neighbors and foul balls would have not existed if the UC request had been handled correctly by the SP govt, if UC had included/involved the adjacent neighbors in the initial planning (UC had been built in a residential zone) and not tried to, and in some cases, succeeded in positioning structures in places not permitted figuring it would not be required to removed those structures. Where were the balls going to go if hit fould? Mr Reagan as UC's 'point person', acted with arrogant impunity rather than Christian ideals toward the neighbors. After all the problems between the UC and the neighbors, did UC have written permission to retrieve the balls beyond the property lines?

OK.....enough is enough. Everybody agrees that Bennett did wrong...no doubt. Yes, UCC was there long before the houses, but that does not provide them with any rights to adjouring properties which is not theirs. Maybe Bennett should have more carefully evaluated the location of his house before he bought the house. The fact of the matter is that UCC appears to have known for some time that they are infringing other peoples' property rights so some fault lies in their hands too. There are two issues here: 1) Bennett's actions and 2) UCC's actions. Each needs to be addressed individually. As for a net...what an eyesore. I don't know what the solution is. But watch what will happen when someone is "beaned" and injured in their own backyard by a stray foul ball. The Patch will go into overload if that happens. And the lawyers will have plenty of proof that UCC knowingly continued this dangeous activity. Cynical view.....certainly.

You are making it about what UC should have or shouldn't have done. This isn't about that, it's about an assault on a child which should NEVER be justified. In this case, this student acted more the man than Bennett; a grown man. Until you've taken the time to go through all the research and investigation that it requires to be informed of the situation involving the dispute between UC and the neighbors, you can't speak to the facts so please don't. You're obviously not up to date on the latest events. Enough is enough.......as Donna Summers would say....RIP...

YES grace86 - enough is enough. hopefully after this mess, UC will make sure no one trespasses on their neighbor's properties - no matter how many foul balls go into them. There is no excuse - it is quite obvious that baseball players, coaches, spectators - trespassers - are not permitted. As for Mr. Bennett - innocent until proven guilty - what happened to that? Maybe we could all practice some civility and actually wait until all the facts are known...

For everyone talking about "facts," what are your facts proving the kid trespassed, since that is being disputed by Union Catholic and the ball was RIGHT on the property line between the two

3. Reagan, the school’s assistant principal, said that he, Hart and Piasecki – the principal and associate principal – fully understood that by installing the stanchions, they would be violating the permit and, by extension, breaking the law. He described the action as an attempt to cut potential future costs. Asked whether he and school officials had decided to simply beg forgiveness instead of ask permission, Reagan replied, “That's customary construction protocol,” adding in a follow-up interview two days later that “the construction company” and “our engineer” had told him “it’s standard procedure.”
4. Long, project manager at The LandTek Group, the construction company, said that he had neither recommended installing the stanchions nor told Union Catholic officials that performing more work than allowed by permit was standard or common procedure
5. LaCosta, replying in a letter dated Oct. 26, reiterated that the permit he had granted prohibited the installation of scoreboard and light stanchions. Union Catholic then appealed LaCosta’s directive to the Construction Board ofAppeals

FormerFanwoodian's post is sheer idiocy!

Wow Former Fanwoodian needs to move to an area with no neighbors, or children or animals. Hope the foxes never pooped in his lawn, who would he blame or leaves or branches blew into it. Those branches kill a lot more folks every year than foul balls. Former Fanwoodian should apologize to the wildlife his house displaced, I'm sure they were upset over the placement of brick and frame where open field once existed. So you are so upset over minor things you still troll the town the bulletin board for the town you hated. Yes my neighbors kids balls come into my yard, a hockey puck hit my car, the parents paid for a new window. I've had dog poop in my yard and deer in my bushes, I've had trash blow from an overturned neighbors can and god forbid leaves from my neighbors trees. So far the only person I'm angry at is the one guy whose dog has done it multiple times(oh wait he stopped after I asked what he was doing), and of course the idiot who screams at the neighbor kids for playing outside and critiques us for trees that produce too many leaves. Oh and the guy who comes home angry and drunk several days a week but hes a block away and my kids are in by dark, If you wanted to live in a sterile suburb, there are many fine adult communities that don't allow children, pets, noise or people under 55.

Well I view it as this. its legal to play ball there, they are using their land, yes balls do pop out, but so do neighbors balls, leaves and trash. Mostly though UC was present and is using their land as they have the right too. The neighbor moved in knowing the land belonged to the school and usage could change, just as usage changes in mixed zone areas, and I still hear folks complain. Even though the area was clearly zoned mixed use when they bought the house. Yes, i checked the zoning where i live, I checked the schools and even the cancer rates. While the school did violate code with their construction, however, that is pretty normal in NJ. I can list 6 incidents near me in SP. Most importantly that has nothing to do with an adult attacking what very easily could have been a minor. I doubt he asked are you 18 before he grabbed him.

Hypothetically, if Mr. Bennett has a wiffle ball game in his backyard over the memorial day weekend and the ball happens to accidentally leave his yard and go on to Union Catholic property, do you think he'll go and get the ball?

I just want to know if it is trespassing if there is no "No Trespassing" signs on the property? Does anyone know the actual law about this and not just what they think the law should be. Surely anyone who cuts across your lawn is not guilty of trespassing are they?

Who cares!!! I just had a kid come onto my lawn over the weekend to get a ball, and no I didn't come out screaming and grabbing him!! It happens people without even backing up to a field. All I thought about was how natural it is to see kids playing outside. Remember before video games when kids use to actually play outside? I can go 12 rounds with property law....and it still doesn't matter and will never change the fact Bennett is wrong. I will never fault a kid for not stopping what he was doing to ring the doorbell of this person. Yeah like he would have said sure young man, go get your ball....it's okay....

stop trying to justify being hateful and angry, a setback means no building, thats it, not no yard, or baseball field, which was there already. It doesn't mean no fence or shed. it means no "building". Please stop trying to justify an alleged adult being a pile of garbage, I don't try to justify when the guy a block away gets a DUI, and I hate those people who do. Stanwick please tell why you are so desperate to somehow make this CRIME, somehow magically alright because(sniff, sniff) Union Catholic used their property in a legal way. Look I've been pissed at kids, a couple of years ago, I had some girls drunk boyfriend 2 blocks away try to pick a fight with me because I was walking two "fruity" dogs. He even had his varsity jacket on, nice big SPFHS on it, I walked away, and told her parents the next morning that the kids were drinking at their house. I wasn't friends with them before, and after they yelled at me for five minutes I certainly wasn't going to be then. Now I am a big boy, and it hurt my hillybilly self to walk away, but that is what being an adult is all about. I'm not perfect, I'm sure my kids have a list of all my faults, but attacking a kid over a yard or a stream of insults sure ain't one of them, being an adult means taking responsibility, If I'm brawling, it better be worth it.

You know...I have been reading these comments since they first appeared. It is rather obvious who has connections to UCC and who does not. Besides living in Scotch Plains I have connections to neither. I do not know Mr. Bennett nor did my children or anyone in my family attend UCC. I agree Mr. Bennett was 100% wrong. What amazes me is that all those supporting UCC never address the issue, nor the question, was UCC being a 'good neighbor' by breaching the terms of their permit??? That is a really big issue as I read this. That issue probably annoyed these neighbors to no end and fueled this argument like no other. As a Scotch Plains resident I am more than curious as to what the ramifications were for UCC going beyond what was approved on the permit. Was UCC fined? They are both in the wrong and shame on the town for letting the situation get to this point.

Here is what should concern everyone, there is a man that abuts a school that doesn't know how to control himself around a child because of a foul ball that may or may not have come on his property. Bennett should apologize to this boy and his family and for that matter to UC and Plainfield School for his rediculous behavior. I don't care about what's between UC and the neighbors and any perceived violations of a permit. If you really want to go down this road, take a look at your own property and ask yourself if you have obtained a permit on every single improvement you've made to your house/property? Take a look at your own backyard before pointing fingers at others. You would be shocked how many are in violation and some don't even know it until they try to sell and the buyers can't obtain a mortgage because of work that was done without permits. As for connections to UC - I do not hae vested interest in the outcome of what happens and again it doesn't impact me either way. I do care about the thoughtless mother I saw this morning with her son and dog in the car driving while texting past UC weaving in and out almost hitting a young kid that was walking and I certainly care about a man that grabs a kid that's completely unjustified.