How sad. A baseball coming onto Mr. Bennett's property, even if it happens from time to time during games, doesn't seem a justification for physical assault. I mean really, a baseball!

Maybe the man just had enough, but he shouldn't have assaulted the player, it's not the kid's fault. It's sad that he's going to be charged in his own backyard .Sometimes it's hard to restrain yourself when you're really frustrated being constantly disturbed by having a baseball field in your backyard. I don't know what exactly is the situation, but something has to be done for these homeowners , maybe baseball is more important that living on your property peacefully. Glad I don't live there.

This headline grabbed my attention quickly.........and lost it just as quickly after reading the article. There are "two sides" to this story. In fact, I would say that Union Catholic officials share fault for this incident. The underlying problem appears to be an ongoing feud. Union Catholic are not being good neighbors and provoked this incident. Mr. Bennett's actions were wrong........and so are Union Catholic's. I'm glad that Union Catholic is not using my backyard as part of their playing field.

The rules we preach to our children holds true for adults too...we do not use our hands to settle a problem....shame on Mr. Bennett! He deserves any and all consequences he receives. NOTHING justifies his behavior towards the player. Does he respond in the same manner to solicitors who "trespass" on his property? What about the paperboy who throws a mistaken advertisement on his lawn? In regards to the situation, he may be frustrated because it is baseball season, but I cannot believe he bought this home without even considering that errant balls may find their way onto his lawn? Union Catholic and the ball field were there WELL before he purchased his home. A reasonable individual would realize that was "part of the deal" when living adjacent to a baseball field. If he did not think that living that close to a ball field would result in foul balls landing on his property then he is ignorant! Bottom line ...nothing excuses his display of aggressive behavior and shame on him for accosting a player who retrieved a ball. Hope the ball player teaches Mr. Bennett a strong lesson in court about the consequences of using his hands to express his frustrations!

Baseball has been played on the Union Catholic field for fifty years, since before the neighbor was born, and presumably before he bought his house. Why buy a house next to a playing field if one becomes that unhinged by foul balls?

This is a 44 year old man? How ridiculous. Baseball is played at Union Catholic for less then 3 months out of the entire year. You can't deal with this for that long? How do you buy a house next to a school and not expect to have kids around your property? Maybe YOU should have done your homework before you bought the house? If your really so shallow and small minded that you can't take it ...move.

It is my understanding that Union Catholic has done everything requested by the homeowners in order to allow their students to get back to playing baseball, and at their own great expense. A season which is over in less than two weeks. The residents decreeded what their conditions were and Union Catholic implimented everyone. Shame on this resident. I believe Union Catholic is Celebrating their 50th Anniversary this coming year...how long has he been living there?

Seems like they got taken by the builder when the houses were built in the 90's. They are million dollar homes. Was it Messercola if I recall? I may be incorrect.

This has been going on for years, and the school is at fault for not preventing continuous problems. A simple installation of netting would have resolved it, but the school chose to fight it in court with the neighbors instead of fixing the problem. Now they are told to put up a net, and why has this not been done? Instead, they continue allowing balls to fly into neighboring yards, almost striking neighboring children in the head on a few instances (which could easily be fatal). Will it take the death of a neighbor to finally do something about the issue? It is not the neighbors' responsibility to be keeping an open eye in the sky for foul balls when their child is playing in the sand box. The school, the players, the parents, the coaches have no respect for the neighboring houses and the danger that their own children are in each time a game is played. This is a case where one parent had enough and after numerous requests to stay off his property, and the players/coaches ignored and trespassed. These balls are NOT on the edge of the property, rather, they fly a good 20 yards deep into neighboring properties. The story that is in the paper is not the entire truth of what happened. There were witnesses on both sides of the fence. The 18 year old man was grabbed by the arm to be escorted off the property. There was no assault.

Wasn't Union Catholic Assistant Principal and Head Baseball Coach James Reagan Jr one of the UCHS individuals responsible for the problems with neighbors after 'updating' the field beyond what was allowed by the building permit. I just remember Mr Reagan as acting not very Christian-like toward the school's neighbors.

Former Fanwoodian is correct about Mr Reagan. It should also be known that players have been urinating on this homeowners lawn....I personally being there when it happened....and have taken pictures of it. The homeowner should have filed an indecent exposure complaint against that player.
Another Concerned Neighbor

Good thing we don't have "stand your ground" laws in NJ

Sounds like "concerned citizen" thinks assault was ok. Not classy at all. This person should be ashamed of himself.

I am disappointed at the lack of ability to think freely in this forum. Let me finish the sentence...

Good thing we don't have "stand your ground" laws in NJ or we could be looking at a very different story on Patch.

If in fact the argument is that this student trespassed, as Concerned Neighbor claims, a "stand your ground" law would apply and the student could have been shot dead, hoodie or uniform, with little or no consequence.

Curious Jimmy, who did I threaten?

It's really sad when you defend an assualt. This is what you get for buying a property next to a baseball field. It's also first come first serve, they were there before you.

Concerned Neighbor is a loser

FYI - the trespass and zoning laws don't discriminate between who was first, second or third. Everyone is on the same level. the law doesn't apply differently to one party just because they were there first. So childish whining like "I was here first" really isn't winning UC any points.

SPF resident I haven't seen anything where UC claims that first come first serve concept; it's only been random commenters on this forum. I'm under the impression they aren't arguing any positions anymore as the case has been closed and that's why they are now allowed to play. Once they completed the tasks brought forth from the neighbors the judge cleared them for playing on the field.

What a shame this is...it's never ok to violently put your hands on another..but it's also not ok for a homeowner to just be expected to put up with a new ball field being built that causes baseballs to come flying into their yard, almost hitting the residents or students using their grass as a toilet!! saying they should move or they need to lower their quality of life expectations is wrong too.

wahh.... a baseball landed in my yard. I should attack the kid. Really???

The field has been there for years..don't buy s house near a school, park or field if it bothers you that much!! School was there first! Plain n simple. People are craxy!

The field has been there for years..don't buy s house near a school, park or field if it bothers you that much!! School was there first! Plain n simple. People are craxy!

Some of the comments on here are just mindboggling. Deal with the issue at hand - a 44 year old man put his hands on a high school baseball player. That is not acceptable under any circumstances. It is utterly unconsciounable for anyone to try and excuse or explain away this type of behavior. Being fed up or "having had enough" is no excuse. Really. Are you really trying to justify that? We are all meant to be civil human beings. What would our towns and neighborhoods look like if we all took action every time we were fed up by a neighbor. Should we just write a blank check for bedlam. At this point whatever dispute there is between THE SCHOOL and their nieghbors is mute... this baseball player had nothing to do with it. Think if it was your child. How would you feel if your child came home and said that he was manhandled by a 44 year old man? I would be furious. Talk about safety concerns. A parent shouldn't have to worry about his/her child being in danger from an irate neighbour while playing baseball. Thankfully this is now going to another court and hopefully this neighbour will find out first-hand what happens in a civil society when you act innapropriately.

The UC admin bent over backwards to work out a resolution that would make both sides happy. UC offered to put up a $250,000 netting system that would prevent 99% of the out of play baseballs away from the nieghbors yards. In court, the UC neighbors decided against the larger netting sytem and instead chose to have UC relandscape the area with very large and expensive trees / shrubs. Plus UC went even further and paid for additional backstop netting plus relocated their bleachers.

The UC field has been there forever and it's a shame that the UC students cannot enjoy their own backyard without being threatened in a court of law or physically by a rouge neighbor that cannot control his temper.

At the end of the day the neighbors accomplished what they wanted and that was to eliminate the chance for UC students, parents and guests to be able to enjoy playing the great game of baseball under the lights......

Dave D.

Are we back to this again? Didn't we have enough of this feud the first time? And now we are going to turn a trespass and assault into lights and UC not being able to enjoy their property and how they came first? Seriously? wasnt all that settled? How about this, how about UC agrees to make sure players and coaches don't trespass and pee in neighbir's yards and then the neighbors have no reason to assault anyone. As UC says, if the neighbors agreed to the netting that was installed, then they agreed. Move on! And if your neighbor says stop trespassing to pick up balls, JUST STOP DOING IT! That is how a neighborhood coexists. Good neighbors don't start whining about who came first, therefore I have a right to use and abuse your property. As for the lights... SPF high school doesn't have lights. Neighbors don't want lights, town doesn't want lights. Stop whining about lights! UC is playing baseball, people are attending the games. Just stop trespassing and neighbors calm down. Please! Enough of this!

If I were to comment on all the inaccuracies in this commentary by "residents" and "neighbors" (wonder where they live), we'd be here all day. But let's not forget that nowhere in this article does it say that the kid in this instance trespassed - a huge assumption. And let's also, if we're not going to go "back there" about lights etc., go back there about the urinating incident from a NON UC student that has since been handled.

When it comes down to it, Bennett was wrong. So wrong, in fact, that the NJ Penal Code upgrades a simple assault to 4th degree if it occurs during a sporting event and in the presence of minors. So let's stop going "back there" about issues that are not a part of this article, and let's definitely not even think of in any way condoning what Bennett did.

As usual, The Patch has "reported" half a story. Where are the quotes from Mr. Bennett? Oh, wait, there is one! It's from ten months ago! How relevant.

If Mr. Bennett has regained his senses, he has hired an attorney and will not be quoted regarding this incident. Had he laid his hands on my 18 year old son, he would not be able to be quoted because his jaw would likely be wired shut.

I agree that the school and the field were there before the houses. The people in the houses choose to live near the school, which was visibly thre along with the playing fields before they built there houses. This is very selfish of the residents to think they have the right to dictate what can and can not be done on someone else's property. Furthermore, how dare someone put their hands on a kid. You can say he was trespassing but as a parent who has watched a few games when a foul is hit the coach says to anyone random kid "go gt the foul". The student was following instructions and the coach was merely involved in the game. Fault lies upon an adult who could not control himself if he indeed physically assaulted the boy. However, besides the alleged assault the issue is bigger. The issue is this absurd sense of entitlement people have. Seriously move your deal with it. Maybe go watch a game and become a fan. I hear the Coach is a great guy and I am sure the players are too

And before you jump on me. I see my own typos and say alleged assault so people don't jump on me since surely the homeowner has not been tried in court yet

This is stupid honestly, why did Bennet assault the 18 year old kid if he had a problem he should had confronted Reagan about it not a high school kid. Anyways I dont see anything wrong with urinating in the homeowners property.

If Mr Bennet put his hands on my kid this story would have a very different outcome. As for all the whiners posting about a ball on their property, what the hell did you do when you were a kid? What did you think of the crochety old man who gave you a hard time when your ball went in his yard? Every neighborhood had one. My recollection is these guys was waaaaaaay older then 44. I'm guessing Mr Bennet never played baseball in his life so he has no understanding of how the game works and that this is not intentional.
These young men are doing something constructive with their time. Get a grip and chill out. If this is the biggest worry in your life you're blessed.

Builders are given the ok to build wherever they want. Mc Mansions are being put on postage stamp lots and when people buy these homes, they become victims. Do not build a house if foul balls have been a problem there for 50 years....the builders should not have been given the permission to build. I guess this further proves that the almighty dollar is always more valuable than a towns citizens...Maybe we should address the bullying being done at Town Hall instead of our classrooms...

Wow, UC must have revved up their PR machine again as the same arguments and outright attacks keep coming out from its supporters. Wonder what they are teaching over there. The Patch reported on this "fued" back in July - perhaps we should refer to those before everyone starts making assumptions and blaming the homeowners that it is their fault for choosing to buy an acre of property in a nice town with a good public school system and were under the assumption that people care (allegedly it seems) for one another as a community. If these "neighbors" had no complaints of foul balls Before the field was re-designed then maybe everyone should stop attacking them. Let's be happy that a compromise was reached because the school is playing baseball again. It seems people have forgotten what it means to be courteous, and objective. Sad that there is so much enjoyment out of such negativity.

Perhaps the sign, "Forget the dog, Beware of resident" should be posted.