Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It does not require notification and you can NOT enter for no reason.
At common law a trespass was not criminal unless it was accomplished by violence or breached the peace. Some modern statutes make any unlawful entry onto another's property a crime. When the trespass involves violence or injury to a person or property, it is always considered criminal, and penalties may be increased for more serious or malicious acts. Criminal intent may have to be proved to convict under some statutes, but in some states trespass is a criminal offense regardless of the defendant's intent.
To be unlawful you must be notified. That is why rural places put up signs and Casinos have their guards tell you to leave. You cannot be unlawful without notification.
It becomes criminal trespass when you're asked to leave property by either the owner if private, or a government official if public, and do not comply. If they refused to leave after being asked to leave by a Citibank employee, they are in fact breaking the law.
Although I still don't see how that applies to the girl on the sidewalk. Which is why I said the tape needs to be reviewed.
...and private property is not necessarily criminal trespass if not open to the public, except when there is an obvious boundary present such as a door if a dwelling/building, or a fence if land, and you went through/over it.
Wrong. It becomes criminal trespass when YOUR INTENT for entering the property comes into question. They do NOT have to be asked to leave if their INTENT was malicious. Since ONE person closed their bank account and NO ONE ELSE conducted business on the property, what was their INTENT for entering the bank?
Under your scenario, you think its ok for people to come and enter your home and walk around and do whatever they want, and only AFTER you ask them to leave, was them entering a crime? I doubt you believe that seriously.
If they were marching into the bank chanting and disrupting business, I could understand it, but in this instance it was three women who went in quietly to close their accounts--one was carrying a sign and that was it. The bank told them to leave and called the police. The women made a stink after that, but not before. Since when does a bank have the right to refuse to release funds to a legitimate customer if they're not obstructing business?
Wrong. It becomes criminal trespass when YOUR INTENT for entering the property comes into question. They do NOT have to be asked to leave if their INTENT was malicious. Since ONE person closed their bank account and NO ONE ELSE conducted business on the property, what was their INTENT for entering the bank?
Wrong. Citibank doesn't post a sign that says "no protesters". Their intent can be anything as long as it's a lawful act. Protesting is a lawful act. There might be some disorderly conduct issues, but that wasn't evident on the video we saw, so again, the police/court needs to review the CB security tape.
As the CB statement said though, they were "asked to leave". That's where it became a crime, if they did not comply.
...but I get it. You disagree with their ideas, so therefore you'll pretty much write up the legislation out of your own mind to support your position.
My advice? Call the police and ask them. As someone who has been charged with the security of various small businesses in the past, and has had to have folks removed, I know the law and it's pretty clear.
This is pure mutiny and treason now. You can't even go into a bank without getting manhandled or you can't even request to close your bank account (it's YOUR money) without being arrested?
I'll chip in to these folks' bail myself. Normally I wouldn't say this, but all the Wall Street bankers who approve of this, or allow this to happen without speaking up deserve a severe blow to the head. It's unconstitutional and inhumane, plain and simple.
In fact the title to the you-tube video includes the word PROTESTORS. They went in there to create a disturbance, filming it no less and were arrested which is pretty much to be expected and a little civil disobedience is the goal of these types of protests else you don't attract attention.
The posters claiming they were arrested to prevent a bank run or just for trying to remove money is quite frankly indicative of what I can only surmise is some sort of closed head injury or over medication.
Can you guys be a little more dishonest? Maybe walk naked into Mcdonalds and try to order some mcnuggets? When you are arrested you can blame the beef cartel for having you arrested for ordering chicken! Conspiracy!
Wrong. Citibank doesn't post a sign that says "no protesters". Their intent can be anything as long as it's a lawful act. Protesting is a lawful act. There might be some disorderly conduct issues, but that wasn't evident on the video we saw, so again, the police/court needs to review the CB security tape.
I stopped here laughing so hard, that I almost fell off my chair. Private property owners dont need to post that you dont have permission to enter THEIR property to protest. Its THEIR property, you need to ask THEIR permission to tresspass on THEIR land.
I cant believe for a second that we have people who actually believe the nonsense you posted. Its NOT a lawful act if you do it ON PROPERTY YOU DONT OWN WITHOUT PERMISSION
Quote:
Originally Posted by Had2SaySumthin
As the CB statement said though, they were "asked to leave". That's where it became a crime, if they did not comply.
Wrong, they were asked to leave but that doesnt make their trespassing a NON crime.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Had2SaySumthin
...but I get it. You disagree with their ideas, so therefore you'll pretty much write up the legislation out of your own mind to support your position.
My advice? Call the police and ask them. As someone who has been charged with the security of various small businesses in the past, and has had to have folks removed, I know the law and it's pretty clear.
I dont need to call the police and ask them. You need a permit to protest on public land, owned by the "taxpayers", what on gods earth makes you believe you are allowed to enter someone elses land without permission to protest?
They were all there for information on opening a new account. They weren't through reading the 75 pamphlets that CB and every other bank spreads all over the place, when they were asked to leave.
When one lie doesn't work (closing their accounts) the college kiddies come up with this beaut, (opening new accounts).
Just more proof the OWS college kiddies and aging hippies are clueless...
I stopped here laughing so hard, that I almost fell off my chair. Private property owners dont need to post that you dont have permission to enter THEIR property to protest. Its THEIR property, you need to ask THEIR permission to tresspass on THEIR land.
I cant believe for a second that we have people who actually believe the nonsense you posted. Its NOT a lawful act if you do it ON PROPERTY YOU DONT OWN WITHOUT PERMISSION
Good to know. Next time I go to the bank I'll stick my head in the door first and shout "Hey guys, can I come in?"
Thanks for the laugh. Apparently laughter really is contagious.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Which is why I said the tape needs to be reviewed.
They went in there to create a disturbance, filming it no less and were arrested which is pretty much to be expected and a little civil disobedience is the goal of these types of protests else you don't attract attention.
