Jackuul wrote:If you ask someone to leave, and they do not leave, is that not trespassing?
pitbullmamaliz wrote:An arrest isn't necessarily the goal here - a paperwork trail is. That way if, GOD FORBID, this asshat does something, there is already proof that he has acted threateningly before.
amazincc wrote:P.S.
Jody, who's NOT-a-vet-but-plays-one-on-TV has diagnosed him w/"situational deafness".
amazincc wrote:P.S.
Jody, who's NOT-a-vet-but-plays-one-on-TV has diagnosed him w/"situational deafness".
TheRedQueen wrote:It wouldn't hurt to set up some scenarios with friends/helpers...we have people act funny in puppy class for this reason...we don't want the service dog pups getting upset about weird movements, strange mannerisms, etc.
Jackuul wrote:If you ask someone to leave, and they do not leave, is that not trespassing?
14‑159.13. Second degree trespass.
(a) Offense. – A person commits the offense of second degree trespass if, without authorization, he enters or remains on premises of another:
(1) After he has been notified not to enter or remain there by the owner, by a person in charge of the premises, by a lawful occupant, or by another authorized person; or
(2) That are posted, in a manner reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders, with notice not to enter the premises.
(b) Classification. – Second degree trespass is a Class 3 misdemeanor. (1987, c. 700, s. 1; 1993, c. 539, s. 102; 1994, Ex. Sess., c. 24, s. 14(c).)
So what we have is very clearly a Second Degree Trespass 14.159.13(a)1, which is a Misdemeanor charge. He remained on the property because he failed to immediately obey the order of the property owner to leave. This took me two minutes to find, via Google, BTW.
amazincc wrote:So what we have is very clearly a Second Degree Trespass 14.159.13(a)1, which is a Misdemeanor charge. He remained on the property because he failed to immediately obey the order of the property owner to leave. This took me two minutes to find, via Google, BTW.
I might want to pass this little tidbit of info on to Concord PD, because, clearly, they don't.
Google, I mean.
Like I told you... "no money/gun exchanged hands, guy left eventually, NOTHING reportable transpired, Ma'am... I'm TELLING you!" - out of the mouth of the desk lady on duty.
So, I'm not knocking the PD as a whole... I guess we're just a little more lacksadaisical about interpretation of the law in these here parts.
Now... can we all stop losing sleep and friends over this thread?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users