What must the angry man in the trespassing scenario prove to convict Sally?

To secure a conviction for trespassing, it is essential for the angry man to demonstrate that Sally had knowledge of her presence on his land. This is critical because trespassing involves an intentional or negligent intrusion onto someone else's property. The requirement of proving that Sally knew she was on his land reinforces the notion that trespassing is not merely about being on the property; it also involves the trespasser's awareness of their location and the unauthorized nature of their presence.

If Sally was unaware that she had crossed onto the angry man's property, it could be argued that her actions did not meet the threshold of intentional trespassing. Knowledge of the trespass is a key element, as it reaffirms the intentional aspect of the offense. In contrast, other options do not directly speak to the core legal standard necessary for establishing a case of trespassing where the ownership and permission aspects are not as pivotal in this scenario.