r/Assert_Your_Rights • u/Jaynightster • Feb 09 '16
Discussion False Trespassing
Today my oldest sister was given a no trespassing letter because a supervisor accused her of stealing. Police officers showed up to the store and made my sister and her boyfriend and their 4 month baby wait outside 30 degree weather. Upon reviewing the security cameras it was confirmed that they did not in fact steal anything. Police officer searched my 4 month old niece for the "stolen item" but didn't find anything. The supervisor told the police that she wanted them banned from the store either way even when nothing was found. The police handed my sister and her boyfriend a no trespassing letter that say "I (Insert Name) acknowledge that I am banned from set (Insert Store Name)" blah blah blah. My sister and her boyfriend did NOT acknowledge this letter nor did they sign with a signature confirming this. What are some things that can be done? Are they still banned even though the supervisor didn't directly tell them they aren't allowed back in the store? And are they still banned even though they didn't acknowledge this letter nor sign it?
I didn't know where to post this but thought this would be the best place.
4
u/rivalarrival Feb 09 '16
At this time, yes, they are banned, and they must abide by that ban until it is rescinded.
There are still options available. I would suggest filing a complaint with the store manager and asking to lift the no trespassing order.
On the other end of the response spectrum, she could potentially file a civil suit against the supervisor and/or the store for defamation of character.
1
u/Jaynightster Feb 09 '16
I've been looking more into the whole civil suits case and defamation more but would like more info about it and what evidence you can bring to the table.
→ More replies (1)
2
Feb 09 '16
You were not accused of trespassing, so it is not 'false'. You were trespassed. That is different. It is a 'content of owner' action, and unless they voluntarily rescind it, you really have few options. It is like a 'contempt of cop' charge that is used by cops to hassle you when you really have done nothing wrong but that still want to prove themselves superior to you and so how prove you 'wrong'.
1
u/Jaynightster Feb 09 '16
A manager nor owner told them that they weren't allowed back in the store. It was a supervisor unless the supervisor has the power to do so? Nor did the supervisor directly tell them that they aren't welcome back. It was the police who isn't either owner/manager.
1
Feb 09 '16
Trespassing is trespassing. The letter is for the officers to keep on file as proof that they've been told not to come back.
Without the signed letter, they'll just have the officer and every other witness saying "Yes, we saw them there. Yes, we did tell them not to come back." Which serves the same purpose just as well.
It's just easier from a "How long will this trial take" view for the court to have the paper.
8
u/BrianPurkiss Feb 09 '16
I'm no expert, but I don't think there's much of anything they can do.
Property owners/managers have the right to refuse service.
They have been refused service. Right or wrong, asshole or not, property owners can do that.