Can a cop just park on private property in a bar parking lot without owners consent?

[CdwJava]

When I asked about %'s I meant driving, should have been clearer.

Ah.

Probable cause can always be met. It is simply a statement by the officer.

It is much more than that. Reasonable suspicion is easy, and even THAT has to be supported by sufficient articulation that criminal activity may be "afoot." Probable cause requires that the officer be able to articulate that a crime has occurred and that the person arrested committed the crime. Not as easy as it might seem - certainly not likely solely on an eyeball evaluation of anyone..

What you may call a problem or even probable cause, others may see as their right.

Some people believe they have a right to possess rocket launchers, or have a right not to pay taxes. What they think they have a right to do may not be legally correct.

Carl, I think in general a lot of the confusion with present legal issues is that people are not aware of the laws and the system. Many laws are seen by many as a clear constitutional violation. The majority of people dealing for the 1st time with the sysem are amazed and at a clear disadvantage.

Many people do not understand that no right is absolute and unrestricted, and that statutes can be enacted without the specific mention of a Constitutional
link. I don't know that there is a LOT of confusion on many issues, but there are people who intentionally obfuscate issues for reasons of their own, or they have a true belief in the correctness of their position even if it is contrary to the standing of current law.

The process seems far more daunting than the law to me.

 

[justalayman]

I understand what you are saying, but think about... Terry frisk, inventory, plain sight, odor or whatever. All of those and a host of others qualify for p.c. and they all rely on the officers statement.

terry is not a matter of PC but an exception to requiring PC and allows the search based on RS.


Odor is PC in some states. It is not a judgment call or simply a suspicion of the cop. It is based on factual evidence.

Maybe some informal training on how to write this up or just common sense and experience. Whatever the case, the officer will make his "observations" meet the qualifications for p.c. or if new, learn a valuable police lesson and not make that same mistake.

You are confusing PC with RS

 

[Dillon]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Ga

We've expressly stated we don't want them just camping out in the parking lot but they said they have the right to inspection bc we serve alcohol. I believe that but I don't believe the right to inspection gives them the right to park all night does it?

a simple large notice posted at the entrance of the parking lot stating, "land use fee of $500 an hour if not a customer of this bar."

that should clear then out fast...

-------------

i mean its the OP's property, I'd charge for parking on it.

------------

 

[Zigner]

a simple large notice posted at the entrance of the parking lot stating, "land use fee of $500 an hour if not a customer of this bar."

that should clear then out fast...

-------------

i mean its your property, I'd charge for parking on it.

------------

If the police ignore the sign (as they can and would), how would you expect the proprietor to collect the money?

 

[Dillon]

If the police ignore the sign (as they can and would), how would you expect the proprietor to collect the money?

send the Police Dept. a certified bill with a notice of default by estoppel, etc...

if still ignored, there is always small claims court or just offer to settle out of court.

------------

its the OP's property,

thanks

 

[You Are Guilty]

send the Police Dept. a certified bill with a notice of default by estoppel, etc...

if still ignored, there is always small claims court or just offer to settle out of court.
------------
its the OP's property,

So if the owners of this website add a line in the TOS that says "Every time Dillon posts, he owes us $50", and they send you a "certified bill with a notice of default by estoppel" after your next post, then sue you in small claims, you would pay it (or settle our of court)? I mean, after all, this website is their property.

 

[Dillon]

so if the owners of this website add a line in the tos that says "every time dillon posts, he owes us $50", and they send you a "certified bill with a notice of default by estoppel" after your next post, then sue you in small claims, you would pay it (or settle our of court)? I mean, after all, this website is their property.

who is dillon ? lol

 

[Zigner]

send the Police Dept. a certified bill with a notice of default by estoppel, etc...

if still ignored, there is always small claims court or just offer to settle out of court.

So, it's ok to submit to the court's jurisdiction in THIS situation.

 

[HighwayMan]

Apparently the court has jurisdiction when it suits him.

 

[Dillon]

Apparently the court has jurisdiction when it suits him.

the gov, courts and police we have in the US are fine, thats not the problem.

its a contract rights matter and not an issue against the pollice.

________________

FYI: courts of limited jusisdiction get their jusdiction from the pleading of an injured man/woman with first hand knowledge of the facts.

------------------

 

[Dillon]

So, it's ok to submit to the court's jurisdiction in THIS situation.

actually courts of limited jurisdiction dont have any inherent authority in themselves, but the people give these courts their jurisdiction by their pleading, Go Figure

I mean this OP and the police by agreement can go to private arbitation, no court necessary.

I hope that helps

----------

 

[Zigner]

I mean this OP and the police by agreement can go to private arbitation, no court necessary.

But, what if the police don't agree to this? What recourse does the OP have then?

I hope that helps

It helps show they hypocrisy of your statements...yes.

 

[Dillon]

But, what if the police don't agree to this? What recourse does the OP have then?

i am sure going to court, will resolve the issue, what makes you think this OP would not prevail in his civil complaint ?

-------------

if the police dept. does'nt have a duty to protect this OP's property rights, does the OP really have a reciprocal obligation to obey their orders?

you tell me?

--------------

 

[Zigner]

Your question is moot, as it is based on a false premise.

My question, however, is valid.

 

[Dillon]

Your question is moot, as it is based on a false premise.

My question, however, is valid.

Zinger, what was i thinking?


thats right, police can stay on private property as long as the want !

LOL LOL LOL