• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

What the hell, Fayetteville? Arnold Palmer drinker arrested.

Here's a surprisingly informative comment from Reddit user Equinsu0cha

North Carolina Law 14-159.13. Second degree trespass.
Offense—A person commits the offense of second degree trespass if, without authorization, he enters or remains on premises of another:
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
That are posted, in a manner reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders, with notice not to enter the premises.
(Effective January 1, 1995) Classification—Second degree trespass is a Class 3 misdemeanor.


​
North Carolina has two classifications of "land users"

  • Tresspassers
  • Invitees
As the liquor store is a place of business - all land users are considered "invitees." The "officer" (never properly identified), did not have authorization to speak on behalf of the property owner, and if there had been a formal complaint for trespassing, would be within his duties to escort or remove the individuals from the property. The reason why the idenitification is so important, is that in North Carolina, police officers out of their jurisdiction are NOT permitted to arrest someone, only detain them.
However, from the video, it appears that there was no complaint, there was no crime in progress, and the "officer" attempted to conduct an illegal search in the process.

You are legally permitted to refuse / resist an unlawful detention and arrest, according to the laws of North Carolina:
"An illegal arrest is an assault and battery. The person so attempted to be restrained of his liberty has the same right to use force in defending himself as he would in repelling any other assault and battery.” (State v. Robinson, 145 ME. 77, 72 ATL. 260).

“Each person has the right to resist an unlawful arrest. In such a case, the person attempting the arrest stands in the position of a wrongdoer and may be resisted by the use of force, as in self- defense.” (State v. Mobley, 240 N.C. 476, 83 S.E. 2d 100).

​
Additionally, the guy filming the video, was within his rights to assist in the resist of the illegal search / detention:
“One may come to the aid of another being unlawfully arrested, just as he may where one is being assaulted, molested, raped or kidnapped. Thus it is not an offense to liberate one from the unlawful custody of an officer, even though he may have submitted to such custody, without resistance.” (Adams v. State, 121 Ga. 16, 48 S.E. 910).

​
Click to expand...
 
I love the guy filming the incident calling the cop a motherfucker.
 
tumblr_lsuvvlgHQ61r2cef6o1_500.gif
 
Between Trayvon Martin and this, if I were a black dude, there ain't no way you'd catch me drinking Arizona Tea in the dark.
 
When I see these kinds of videos I always want to hear the follow up.. What happened afterward? Did the guy sue the cops/city? Did the cop lose his job? Etc. If this one just happened I understand we may not know yet - but I never get the follow-on story on these kinds of things. This one is really ridiculous. I really wonder what these cops are thinking sometimes.
 
X needs to get a fucking lawyer and sue everyone in sight.
 
Did that plain clothes officer even show a badge or tell a badge # during that entire encounter?
 
vtwhat etc said:
Here's a surprisingly informative comment from Reddit user Equinsu0cha
Click to expand...
The one thing that the post fails to point out is that the cop might have been working as a security guard for the store/shopping center. If so, he would have had the authority to tell the person to leave and issue the trespass warning.

Pretty dumb actions by both parties as the cop definitely could have handled it better but the ice tea guy could have acted better and also left when told to leave (even if he was doing nothing wrong). If the trespass notice was valid, management would have had the right to remove anyone from their property as long as not discriminatory. Both parties made the interaction much worse than it should have been. Cop went about seeing what the guy was drinking in a pretty dumb way but the guys loitering outside a liquor store filming/drinking (tea) is prone to heightened suspicion in addition to multiple other guys that are wandering around outside.
 
IslandDeac said:
The one thing that the post fails to point out is that the cop might have been working as a security guard for the store/shopping center. If so, he would have had the authority to tell the person to leave and issue the trespass warning.

Pretty dumb actions by both parties as the cop definitely could have handled it better but the ice tea guy could have acted better and also left when told to leave (even if he was doing nothing wrong). If the trespass notice was valid, management would have had the right to remove anyone from their property as long as not discriminatory. Both parties made the interaction much worse than it should have been. Cop went about seeing what the guy was drinking in a pretty dumb way but the guys loitering outside a liquor store filming/drinking (tea) is prone to heightened suspicion in addition to multiple other guys that are wandering around outside.
Click to expand...

There's no way to spin this- ESPECIALLY if Mr. X bought the can in the same store. He's a customer. Mr. Hotshit Undercover should have PROPERLY identified himself with a badge. Besides, how effective is a plain-clothes security guard? Half the idea is to prevent crime by showing someone in uniform on the premises.
 
IslandDeac said:
The one thing that the post fails to point out is that the cop might have been working as a security guard for the store/shopping center. If so, he would have had the authority to tell the person to leave and issue the trespass warning.

Pretty dumb actions by both parties as the cop definitely could have handled it better but the ice tea guy could have acted better and also left when told to leave (even if he was doing nothing wrong). If the trespass notice was valid, management would have had the right to remove anyone from their property as long as not discriminatory. Both parties made the interaction much worse than it should have been. Cop went about seeing what the guy was drinking in a pretty dumb way but the guys loitering outside a liquor store filming/drinking (tea) is prone to heightened suspicion in addition to multiple other guys that are wandering around outside.
Click to expand...

Unless, you know, they were a couple of white guys in pastel polos and golf slacks. No way that fucking pig would have run them off. I think that's the point here
 
I am pretty sure they were in front of an ABC store. That means it is city property, since ABC is a government agency. Not sure that makes a difference, but perhaps a cop gets to determine who is trespassing on city/ABC property without a complaint from the "proprietor", which in this case would be an employee of the city anyway. Maybe somebody else on the boards with more criminal law experience can expound on this.

Secondly, why is an undercover cop in the parking lot of an ABC? It's almost like he was just there to buy some liquor and then unilaterally decided to hassle this dude over his tea just because he likes hassling people.
 
Deacon923 said:
I am pretty sure they were in front of an ABC store. That means it is city property, since ABC is a government agency. Not sure that makes a difference, but perhaps a cop gets to determine who is trespassing on city/ABC property without a complaint from the "proprietor", which in this case would be an employee of the city anyway. Maybe somebody else on the boards with more criminal law experience can expound on this.

Secondly, why is an undercover cop in the parking lot of an ABC? It's almost like he was just there to buy some liquor and then unilaterally decided to hassle this dude over his tea just because he likes hassling people.
Click to expand...

It's interesting because surely the ABC is just leasing that storefront. Not sure that they (and by extension the cops) would have the right to tell someone to leave the parking lot which is likely under full control of the land owner.

Not that it matters as that cop is pretty much a piece of shit who handled the situation about as poorly as can be imagined.
 
not to get off the subject of the cop, who is a POS, but why exactly was the filmer randomly filming his pal drinking tea in a parking lot before the cop got there? Is that what all the kids do these days?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top