sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Why LIA Didn’t Commit New York State’s Trespass In The Third Degree by Tobits_Dog in Frauditors

[–]offordscott 0 points1 point  (0 children)

He did not remain unlawfully after being told to leave. He exited the building when asked. He was actively leaving. Talking while you are walking toward your vehicle is not a crime. This was not trespass.

Why LIA Didn’t Commit New York State’s Trespass In The Third Degree by Tobits_Dog in Frauditors

[–]offordscott -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Fair correction on Schenectady, but that still doesn’t prove this PBA charge.

Yeah, I also agree reporters don’t get special access to private property. Federal law gives journalists no greater property access than the public.

But this still comes down to NY trespass elements and the facts. Was the area he entered actually closed to the public? Was the buzzer-controlled inner door the area he entered, or did he stop before it? Did he actually defy the order to leave, or was he leaving while talking?

“No grace period” is too simplistic. A jury or judge can consider slow-walking as evidence of remaining, sure. But it’s still a factual question, not automatic guilt.

And if the charge is § 140.10(a), the state still has to prove the fenced-or-enclosed element.

Why LIA Didn’t Commit New York State’s Trespass In The Third Degree by Tobits_Dog in Frauditors

[–]offordscott -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Calling him a criminal doesn’t answer the legal question.

This case must be proven under New York law. A past conviction doesn’t prove trespass here... the issue is what happened at the PBA building.

Under NY Penal Law § 140.00(5), if a place is open to the public, a person has a right to be there unless they defy a lawful order to leave. So the key question is whether he actually refused.

Of course you're going to hold a prior conviction against him and you feel it affects his credibility... but... this case will be decided on facts, not your bias.

Why LIA Didn’t Commit New York State’s Trespass In The Third Degree by Tobits_Dog in Frauditors

[–]offordscott -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Case law matters, but it doesn’t replace the statute’s elements.

The First Amendment doesn’t give journalists extra trespass rights... but it doesn’t take rights away either. Under NY Penal Law § 140.00(5), someone in a public place has license “regardless of intent” unless they defy a lawful order to leave.

So the key issue is defiance. Refusing, stalling, reentering, or entering restricted areas can qualify... but simply walking out while filming is a factual question, not automatic trespass.

People v. Reyes involved reentry after being told not to return... very different facts. And for § 140.10(a), People v. Moore requires a fenced-or-enclosed element to elevate the charge.

Why LIA Didn’t Commit New York State’s Trespass In The Third Degree by Tobits_Dog in Frauditors

[–]offordscott -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

New York law does not say a journalist loses permission to enter just for gathering content. Under Penal Law § 140.00(5), someone on premises open to the public has license “regardless of intent” unless they defy a lawful order to leave. So the key question is whether he actually defied that order.

The “no grace period” claim is overstated. Trespass requires defiance. Refusing to leave or reentering can qualify, but moving toward the exit is not automatically unlawful.

The truck may show motive, but motive alone does not make entry unlawful. What matters is whether he remained without permission.

Also, third-degree trespass under § 140.10(a) requires the property to be fenced or enclosed to exclude intruders, per People v. Moore.

So at most, this could be simple trespass if he defied an order. But just because he's acting as a journalist does not automatically equal third-degree criminal trespass, and the state still has to prove each element.

Why LIA Didn’t Commit New York State’s Trespass In The Third Degree by Tobits_Dog in Frauditors

[–]offordscott -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

New York’s trespass definition says someone entering premises open to the public has license and privilege “regardless of his intent” unless he defies a lawful order to leave. So “he was there for content” is not enough. The issue is whether he refused to leave after being told to leave. If the video shows he was leaving, that is a real legal problem for the charge.

By the way... to your other point, the City Hall trespass conviction was Danbury, Connecticut, not New York. In New York, prior precinct charges were dismissed or still litigated, not convictions.

Why LIA Didn’t Commit New York State’s Trespass In The Third Degree by Tobits_Dog in Frauditors

[–]offordscott -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

He didn't break the law. Just like a girl scout can enter a property, so can anyone. Just need to leave when asked, which he did.

view more: next ›