Trespassing, who has "credibility"?

[Logan 5]

If there is a criminal trespassing, who do you expect the cops to believe? The tenant or the trespasser?
Under what circumstances would an unwelcome trespasser have the right to trespass/enter a home, if the trespasser is not the tenant, nor the owner and has no consent from the tenant?

 

[davidmcbeth]

If there is a criminal trespassing, who do you expect the cops to believe? The tenant or the trespasser?
Under what circumstances would an unwelcome trespasser have the right to trespass/enter a home, if the trespasser is not the tenant, nor the owner and has no consent from the tenant?

What? How can a tenant trespass on his leased land/apt ?

 

[Firearms Iinstuctor]

Who do the LEOs belive, thats a hard one. I think most LEOs go into these things with a open mind unless they have been there before.

They listen to both sides trying to decide if any laws have been broken and who broke them. Or if it is a civil dispute then they tell them to file in the proper court or hire a lawyer.

Landlords and tentants each have rights differant in each state. If one or the other has paper work backing up their statements makes a huge differants too.

If one of the parties show a court order telling what should be done then the LEOs will most likley follow the courts order.

If one of the parties clearly broke the law action would most likely be taken against that person.

Clear as mud right.

Not all situations are black and white.

 

[Fallschirjmäger]

76-6-206. Criminal trespass.
(1) As used in this section, "enter" means intrusion of the entire body.

(2) A person is guilty of criminal trespass if, under circumstances not amounting to burglary as defined in Section 76-6-202, 76-6-203, or 76-6-204 or a violation of Section 76-10-2402 regarding commercial obstruction:
(a) the person enters or remains unlawfully on property and:
(i) intends to cause annoyance or injury to any person or damage to any property, including the use of graffiti as defined in Section 76-6-107;
(ii) intends to commit any crime, other than theft or a felony; or
(iii) is reckless as to whether his presence will cause fear for the safety of another;

(b) knowing the person's entry or presence is unlawful, the person enters or remains on property as to which notice against entering is given by:
(i) personal communication to the actor by the owner or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner;
(ii) fencing or other enclosure obviously designed to exclude intruders; or
(iii) posting of signs reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders; or
(c) the person enters a condominium unit in violation of Subsection 57-8-7(7).


(3) (a) A violation of Subsection (2)(a) or (b) is a class B misdemeanor unless it was committed in a dwelling, in which event it is a class A misdemeanor.
(b) A violation of Subsection (2)(c) is an infraction.
(4) It is a defense to prosecution under this section that:
(a) the property was open to the public when the actor entered or remained; and
(b) the actor's conduct did not substantially interfere with the owner's use of the property.

 

[Logan 5]

Landlords and tentants each have rights differant in each state. If one or the other has paper work backing up their statements makes a huge differants too.

Trespasser has no ownership rights to the property in question.

 

[Firearms Iinstuctor]

If the trespasser has no legal right to be there, wasn't invited ect ect.

Then one would hope the LEOs involved would take the proper legal action against the trespasser according to the law of the state they are in.

I also think we might not be getting the whole story here.

 

[okiebryan]

A tenant has "legal control" of any real estate that they lease. Tenants can most certainly trespass someone. If it's the owner, it could get a bit sticky.

 

[Logan 5]

Of course you're not getting the whole story. I'm just asking questions.

 

[Firearms Iinstuctor]

Of course you're not getting the whole story. I'm just asking questions.

To what end you must have a situation in mind.

 

[eye95]

A tenant has "legal control" of any real estate that they lease. Tenants can most certainly trespass someone. If it's the owner, it could get a bit sticky.

Leases should state clearly the rights of the owner to be on the leased property. Things like inspections and repairs, during reasonable times and with notice, should routinely be in the lease. If they aren't, the owner and the lessee are subject to the vagaries of State law which will vary from State to State.

If the owner is on the leased property in accordance with the lease, then the lessee should not be legally able to ask him to leave. If his presence goes against the lease, then it's off to the hoosegow if he refuses to leave when requested to do so.

 

[eye95]

To what end you must have a situation in mind.

I'll wager I know who the "trespassers" are. The OP is being unnecessarily cagey. Does he think it increases the drama, makes him more interesting?

Not to me.

The lessee has almost all the rights that the owner does. Almost. The law and the lease can specifically abridge those rights. Since I don't know that State's law in the matter, nor the content of the lease, I can't confidently comment on what powers the lease and the law limit.

I can comment that the specific intruders he wishes to repel can almost surely be repelled (or not repelled) just as if he owned the property. I am thinking "not repelled," much to the dismay of the OP.

 

[Logan 5]

I'll wager I know who the "trespassers" are. The OP is being unnecessarily cagey. Does he think it increases the drama, makes him more interesting?

Not to me.

I'm just asking questions. Maybe you know who the trespassers are. Care to name them?
I don't see this as being cagey, just not telling everyone everything because I don't think it's needed. I think the questions are simple and should be easy to answer.
And I'm not trying to do anything for drama.

The lessee has almost all the rights that the owner does. Almost. The law and the lease can specifically abridge those rights. Since I don't know that State's law in the matter, nor the content of the lease, I can't confidently comment on what powers the lease and the law limit.

I can comment that the specific intruders he wishes to repel can almost surely be repelled (or not repelled) just as if he owned the property. I am thinking "not repelled," much to the dismay of the OP.

Actually the answers so far have been a help. Long story for another time.