Nomination For Hero Badge

This is a case where the Cops got punked. They did nothing wrong, followed the law and will be roundly condemned for doing what the law required. You will never hear that from the MSM.

One of two black men arrested for Criminal Trespass in Philidelphia at a Starbucks

Oh whoa is me two black dudes got arrested in Philidelphia for refusing to leave a Starbucks. The police did it. Racist police. The manager did it, racist manager. The CEO should have stopped it, racist CEO. Quick make them write checks for millions of dollars payable to people and organizations that weren’t involved. It is a good thing we have the mainstream media to tell us everything we could possibly want to know about the law and criminal trespass in Pennsylvania. Crickets. You mean none of the stories even mentioned what it took to violate the law? Thought not, that’s why I am here. Starbucks-CEO-Kevin-Johnson-orders-unconscious-bias-training

Here is an abridged version as it applies to the offence at hand:

3503.  Criminal trespass.

(b)  Defiant trespasser.–

(1)  A person commits an offence if, knowing that he is not licensed or privileged to do so, he enters or remains in any place as to which notice against trespass is given by:

(i)  actual communication to the actor;

(ii)  posting in a manner prescribed by law or reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders;

(iii)  fencing or other enclosure manifestly designed to exclude intruders;

(iv)  notices posted in a manner prescribed by law or reasonably likely to come to the person’s attention at each entrance of school grounds that visitors are prohibited without authorization from a designated school, center or program official; or

(v)  an actual communication to the actor to leave school grounds as communicated by a school, center or program official, employee or agent or a law enforcement officer.

(2)  Except as provided in paragraph (1)(v), an offence under this subsection constitutes a misdemeanor of the third degree if the offender defies an order to leave personally communicated to him by the owner of the premises or other authorized person. An offence under paragraph (1)(v) constitutes a misdemeanour of the first degree. Otherwise, it is a summary offence.

Show me the part that says the person giving the order shall not discriminate. How about the reason for eviction must be reasonable? Surely the statute calls for the police to approve of the rationale. None of these provisions is required under the statute.

Okay, how about, in order to keep the peace, the cops just escort the offenders outside the premises. Cops do this all the time, I would guarantee you on the same day that these two were arrested, 100 other people in the Philidelphia area were put out of an establishment and not arrested. What is the difference? Go back to the statute.

If neither party is willing to concede or compromise there is only one solution available to the cops; arrest the offenders. In the Starbucks inicident, there was no room for negotiation and the law ran its course. In most incidents, both parties are searching for a way out of the dilemma that they have created for themselves. The unruly drunk doesn’t want to be banned from his favourite watering hole. The bartender wants him gone tonight, but wants the drunk’s money tomorrow night. A girlfriend, brother, cousin or best friend standing by promising to take the drunk home allows for a negotiated settlement.

There is one final point to the Pennsylvania Statute on Trespass. There is a defence to prosecution offered. A defence to prosecution may not prevent an arrest but may forestall a conviction.

(c)  Defenses.–It is a defence to prosecution under this section that:

(2)  the premises were at the time open to members of the public and the actor complied with all lawful conditions imposed on access to or remaining in the premises; or

(3)  the actor reasonably believed that the owner of the premises, or other person empowered to license access thereto, would have licensed him to enter or remain.

Much of what law enforcement does via enforcement of state statute and city ordinances are applying band-aid fixes. The fix is designed to address a particular problem right now and hopefully the immediate (next couple of hours) future. There is no ultimate goal to change society or modify an individual’s behaviour. The arrest usually does not impose a lengthy incarceration or any type of moral shortcoming.

What happened in the Philidelphia Starbucks is not a call to arms. It is not a symptom of the degeneration of society. From this old harness bull’s perspective, two groups of assholes had a confrontation and one group went to jail.