>I would say this situation is a lot more straightforward than
>your hypotheticals. The owner says they are trespassing.
>What is trespassing? Being on someone's property without
>permission.

It's not tresspassing if it's a public accommodation and the owner/manager/employee is kicking them out because they are black.




>It seems to me that whenever the owner makes the declaration
>that he doesn't want you there, you are trespassing if you
>don't leave immediately.


Not if they make the declaration because you are black.


Now of course it's more complicated because the owner/manager could come up with some other reason to hide their racism but if the owner doesn't bother or says it's because they aren't paying and all sorts of other people aren't pay, then they should use some judgement to find out what's really going on.


>
>The police then come to enforce the trespassing violation.
>There is no he said/she said or evidence to disentangle. The
>police are witnessing the violation when they arrive.
>
>I wouldn't say it is within the scope of the police's job to
>determine whether the removal of the two guys was a civil
>rights violation.
>But it is within his scope to determine if they are in the
>store against the owner's wishes.
>
>
>
>


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"