A mining company closed down operations at an isolated mine it owned and informed the electric company that electricity in the power poles that led to the mine should be cut off. However, the electric company, following its standard policy, left the power running in the line to deter thieves from stealing valuable transformers and cables. The mining company was unaware that the power was left on. A hitchhiker who was passing by the entrance to the mine saw that it was closed, so he went onto the property and climbed up a power pole to steal a transformer. He received an electric shock and fell from the pole, suffering serious injuries.If the hitchhiker sues the mining company, which is the mining company's strongest defense?
A. The hitchhiker was a trespasser.
B. The hitchhiker was a thief.
C. The mining company asked the utility company to turn off the power.
D. The mining company was unaware that the utility company had not turned off the power.

The hitchhiker's was a trespasser is the mining company's strongest defense. Therefore the mining company owed no duty to the hitchhiker, and is not liable for the injuries of the hitchhiker because a property owner owes no duty to an undiscovered trespasser.

Although, option C and D can also be used as a defense, the best option that the mining company can use is option A. The hitchhiker was a trespasser completely relieving the mining company of any liability for his injuries.