Replies

Again, if you have any authority to support your opinion, please show it to me.

Well, first off, we have an officer outside of his jurisdiction on personal business. Clearly there is no law-enforcement justification for his being inside the building.

We also have Mott's word that he simply walked into the building, and also that he was doing so as a private citizen.

The question then reduces to: does a private citizen have a right to enter a public school building outside of normal business hours without the consent of the school administration?

The answer to that appears to be NO.

For example, here is a link to how one Vermont school district defines trespass (under VSA 3705).

Their policy states that (f) Any individual on these properties after 8 o'clock at night, except at school sponsored activities or with previous permission, may be arrested for trespass. Any group or organization holding an unapproved meeting in or on school property will also be subject to prosecution for trespass. In either case, the responsible school authorities are to notify the police at once. Students holding unauthorized meetings in violation to this stated policy will be subject to suspension (and a hearing before the Board of Directors).

There now -- we have a cite to the relevant statute, as applied to a school in Vermont, saying that Mott would have been trespassing in that district.

I leave it to you to ferret through the Barre City School Policies to see if they have an all-hours open-door policy. Good luck.

We will have to disagree on this.

You think that he was acting "as a private citizen" while on duty and in uniform. I disagree with that conclusion. There are thousands of Section 1983 civil rights cases that support my opinion.

While his conduct was certainly motivated by a personal desire to find out what was in the classroom, the legal question is whether he was acting within the scope of his employment, which I believe is a debatable question. But the fact that he was in uniform and on the clock decides the issue for me: he was acting within the scope of his employment. If he had came across a burglar while on the school premises and acted to foil the burglary, he certainly would have been in the scope of his employment. Why should the fact that there wasn't a burglar compel any other conclusion?

"The question then reduces to: does a private citizen have a right to enter a public school building outside of normal business hours without the consent of the school administration?"

This isn't the right question. It's a question you've made to support the result you support.

1) Mott was not a private citizen. He was a uniformed, on-duty police officer. (See above.)

2) Even if he were a private citizen, the janitor's consent would probably be enough to authorize his presence on the premises. The janitor has both actual and apparent authority to permit entry onto the school premises, especially if he is the only school employee on site.

Lest you think I condone Mott's actions, please be assured that I do not. That being said, there is nothing ILLEGAL about what he did, in my opinion.

Personally, I'm surprised he wasn't at dunkin' donuts, like most Baltimore cops would be at that hour.

Trace