Posted on 10/18/2010 5:06:06 AM PDT by thackney
Meaning?
Read my post #19 and 16
Joe Miller's Security Detail vs. The Alaska Dispatch
- JP
Thankss for the links.
I did. I understand. I do the same thing myself from time to time.
I’ve been replying to posts w/o reading the article for 11 years now! ;^)
Well, let the lawsuits fly.
I doubt either party will do so.
This was a left wing blogger trying to get his name out by creating a confrontation.
Local caller put a cork in it by citing AK law and drawing a good parallel using a local mall and trespassing issues as an example.
Joe rented the building. Regardless of “public meeting’ or not - when asked to leave, you must comply or you will be trespassing.
It's not just a good idea, it's the law. AS 11.46.350. Definition. (a) As used in AS 11.46.300 - 11.46.350, unless the context requires otherwise, "enter or remain unlawfully" means to (1) enter or remain in or upon premises or in a propelled vehicle when the premises or propelled vehicle, at the time of the entry or remaining, is not open to the public and when the defendant is not otherwise privileged to do so; (2) fail to leave premises or a propelled vehicle that is open to the public after being lawfully directed to do so personally by the person in charge; or (3) enter or remain upon premises or in a propelled vehicle in violation of a provision in an order issued or filed under AS 18.66.100 - 18.66.180 or issued under former AS 25.35.010 (b) or 25.35.020. (b) For purposes of this section, a person who, without intent to commit a crime on the land, enters or remains upon unimproved and apparently unused land, which is neither fenced nor otherwise enclosed in a manner designed to exclude intruders, is privileged to do so unless (1) notice against trespass is personally communicated to that person by the owner of the land or some other authorized person; or (2) notice against trespass is given by posting in a reasonably conspicuous manner under the circumstances.
This started to get a lot of airplay on KENI morning show.
Local caller put a cork in it by citing AK law and drawing a good parallel using a local mall and trespassing issues as an example.
Joe rented the building. Regardless of “public meeting’ or not - when asked to leave, you must comply or you will be trespassing.
It's not just a good idea, it's the law.
AS 11.46.350. Definition.
(a) As used in AS 11.46.300 - 11.46.350, unless the context requires otherwise, "enter or remain unlawfully" means to
(1) enter or remain in or upon premises or in a propelled vehicle when the premises or propelled vehicle, at the time of the entry or remaining, is not open to the public and when the defendant is not otherwise privileged to do so;
(2) fail to leave premises or a propelled vehicle that is open to the public after being lawfully directed to do so personally by the person in charge; or
(3) enter or remain upon premises or in a propelled vehicle in violation of a provision in an order issued or filed under AS 18.66.100 - 18.66.180 or issued under former AS 25.35.010 (b) or 25.35.020.
(b) For purposes of this section, a person who, without intent to commit a crime on the land, enters or remains upon unimproved and apparently unused land, which is neither fenced nor otherwise enclosed in a manner designed to exclude intruders, is privileged to do so unless
(1) notice against trespass is personally communicated to that person by the owner of the land or some other authorized person; or
(2) notice against trespass is given by posting in a reasonably conspicuous manner under the circumstances.
The definition is one thing, what someone can personally do about it is another. Can a person in that State make an arrest of the trespasser?
Bookmark.
Doesn't seem like it.
It was another Town Hall Meeting where professional disrupters were told they were not welcome and they "insisted."
Way overdue. The "freedom of Speech for me but not for thee" crowd. They all belong in cuffs.
Yes, yes they can.
But, and this is a big but
You have to be the property owner or their designated agent (like say, a Security guard)
You have to have ordered (not asked) the trespassing party to leave the property.
Saying “Will you please leave” is NOT the same as “You must leave now or you will be trespassing”.
You must notify the local heat - in this case - APD. You will need to fill out several forms - which go to the cops.
(My wife does this all the time - private persons arrest is not uncommon. My son works security at a local retail outfit - he makes arrests fairly often as well)
You must be prepared to go to court and justify/defend your actions to a real live judge and all.
If you fail in court, you should be prepared for the downside.
In this event (quite the drama, eh?)
“Lt. Dave Parker of Anchorage Police Dept said the department is investigating the incident and will turn over their findings to the local prosecutor.
Parker said private security guards in Alaska can make “private person arrests,” much like a citizen’s arrest.”
The meeting ceased to be ‘public’ once the meeting was over and Miller left the podium.
The building was rented from the local school district, Miller's organization was responsible for security until the area was cleared and secured. So, ya, they were acting within the law.
The weasel in this drama is well-known locally. Among other things, he was the source of the Palin had her daughter baby crap.
I'm sure the local media will recoil in horror at the ‘illegal arrest’ of this “news reporter”. Just for the record, local media biased, seemingly completely in the tank for Lisa and the Dems.
Well, seems like the weasel is road-kill. Unfortunately, because the local fuzz didn’t take him with them, it seems the DA will do nothing as the situation didn’t escalate.
The local media is just about pi$$ing down their legs o this one.
National blogs are all atwitter about Joe the Barbarian (BTW, Joe was gone with the weasel got plucked)
I could say - I'll be glad when the election is over - but if it is within 2 or 3%, count on a big money fueled fight over the results....
“, count on a big money fueled fight over the results....”
I am expecting the liberals to go nuts considering the losses they will most likely suffer.
I'm surprised more candidates don't adopt this approach:
"I'm running for office this year, right now and so I don't want to talk about what I did last year or the year before. My past is none of your business."
That could help knock down all the smears and ugly stuff in campaigns. Stick to the positive message about the future, not the past.
I don’t agree with these complaints against Miller,
but I believe past performance and actions needs to be understood and evaluated.
Would you really ignore last year’s freezer full of cash or corruption convictions?
Thanks for the detail.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.