General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: The Starbucks thing... [View all]Lee-Lee
(6,324 posts)The talk about policies, if it was fairly enforced, etc are all 100% irrelevant to a charge or trespassing or if the elements of the crime existed.
Now, I am not saying all that is totally irrelevant, its not. It will be 100% relevant in the civil trial and if/when civil rights cases come up against the company and the manager because the manager chose to enforce any of that in a racist manner.
But as to if they were trespassing, its easy. If you take the PA law for trespassing and break it down to the parts that pertain to this event there are two things that matter. Was the person 1- told to leave the property by the owner or their representative with power to do so and did they 2- remain on the property.
If they did, they the elements for the crime of trespassing are there.
It doesnt matter if other people were there and didnt get asked to leave. It doesnt matter if the person asking them to leave was a racist. It doesnt matter if the person had a totally bogus reason for wanting them to leave. It doesnt matter if they enforce the rules in that store in the most arbitrary and discriminatory manner posisble. All that matters later in the civil case, but not for the matter of trespassing.
So yes, when the cops asked them to leave that was a lawful request.
No, the cops didnt have a duty to go asking what the store policy was or make their own judgement calls on what the policy was and if it was broken. The law doesnt place any such test on the law for trespassing and its not the job of the cops to make up new parts of the law and add them to the law as they go. That kind of arbitrary enforcement would be a mess.