Wilson informed John Schafer, Richard Schafer’s father, and [who was] a fellow Council Member, that he planned to take steps to remove MRA from the County [SWMP]. MRA purchased the Gravel Hill property on February 9, 1990.” Richard Schafer denied speaking to his father or to other council members about Wilson’s plan, but did not state that he was unaware of Wilson’s intent. The Hearing Examiner did not make a specific finding on the question of whether MRA president Shafer knew that there was no longer a majority of members on the newly constituted County Council who supported locating a rubble fill on the Property. This absence is not critical because the knowledge of these facts was certainly available to MRA, even if it did not have actual knowledge. See Bauer, 662 A.2d at 1194 (<HOLDING>). Certainly, MRA failed to prove that it
holding there was no rule 404b violation where the evidence was admitted to show knowledge and knowledge was an element of the crime charged holding that knowledge possessed by officials of the united states may be highly relevant such knowledge may show that the defendant did not submit its claim in deliberate ignorance or reckless disregard of the truth holding that party claiming zoning estoppel must exercise due diligence to ascertain the truth and not only lack knowledge of the true state of things but also had no convenient means of acquiring that knowledge holding that the knowledge requisite to knowing violation of a statute is factual knowledge as distinguished from knowledge of the law holding that daubert applies not only to testimony based on scientific knowledge but also to testimony based on technical and other specialized knowledge