Lancaster Independent Press
RSS icon Home icon

    Posted on April 8th, 2018 Becky 12 comments


         There has been a lot of talk recently about “No Trespassing” signs and their legal implications – and I’ll be coming to a local court case about alleged “trespassing” shortly. But as background, there is this in-depth look from the Washington Post on “No Trespassing” signs and law enforcement among other topics (click here):

    The court concludes that under this test, a “no trespassing” sign ordinarily doesn’t have much Fourth Amendment significance:

    In short, a homeowner who posts a “No Trespassing” sign is simply making explicit what the law already recognizes: that persons entering onto another person’s land must have a legitimate reason for doing so or risk being held civilly, or perhaps even criminally, liable for trespass. Consequently, as set forth above, a knock-and-talk conducted within constitutional parameters is a legitimate reason for police officers to enter the curtilage of a house via a driveway that is obstructed by nothing more than several “No Trespassing” signs. For this reason, we disagree with the dissent that “a ‘No Trespassing’ sign should be of particular significance to law enforcement officers in communicating that they may need to obtain a warrant before entering the property.” Officers engaging in legitimate police business will conclude, correctly, that they are not engaging in a “trespass” when they approach a front door to conduct a knock-and-talk. We also emphasize that the occupant of a residence is under no obligation to open a door when knocked upon by a police officer who holds no warrant.


    **   Speaking of politics, this has to be the “best” attack ad ever! Oh, my heavens! Whoever did this has a major movie career coming – or working for Trump! Amazing!


    From Michael Deibert’s twitter this morning. Click here for the Schmuck’s guest column in today’s LNP, “Constituent contact takes many forms,” (click here).
    *    Deibert beat me to it! Is it any wonder this man no longer works for LNP? Bravo!



         The simple explanation for President Trump’s inability to keep competent counsel is not a legal or ethical one — it is him. He is a problem client.
    From LNP’s guest column in today’s Sunday News, “The not-so-open-and-shut case of Trump’s quest for counsel,” (click here).
        What a hoot and a bunch of nonsense!
        Could LNP just let J. Richard Gray go away quietly? He is a problem attorney!    
        Hey, maybe he and Trump could (gasp!) hook-up?


    12 responses to “AFTERNOON UPDATE ** – * A PROBLEM ATTORNEY!”

    1. No shit Sherlock. Mayor Gray would do well also analyzing which Girl Scout cookie is a local favorite.

    2. 🙂 🙂

    3. Gray and the Schmuck both on the same page! It’s almost more than I can handle! 🙂

    4. The chairman of the Republican Party of Pennsylvania on Friday called on gubernatorial candidate Paul Mango to cancel an ad attacking Republican rival Scott Wagner, saying the attacks could hurt the party’s chances of defeating Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf in the fall.


      Pennsylvania GOP wants Paul Mango to nix ‘despicable’ Scott Wagner attack ad

    5. A “problem client” is one who might report his unethical lawyer to the bar. Meanwhile, what’s wrong with suborning perjury if that’s what it takes to win a case? Lancaster County District Attorney Craig Stedman does it all the time.

    6. LNP Sucks Too

      One look at former mayor Dick’s list of clients, and you have wonder why the local media gave him a pass and kissed his ass for twelve years. Problem client? How about problem attorney. Child molesters, outlaw bikers, drug dealers, puppy mill owners. Then he’s put in charge of a police department headed by a cop who was a wife beater. It explains why Lancaster became the crime ridden shit hole it’s become. From the looks of the job his clone is doing, we have same shit, different mayor.

    7. All other legitimate complaints aside, I don’t see anything of substance in complaining about a criminal defense attorney defending those accused of a crime. It defys logic to say there’s something wrong or unseemly about that. It’s the entire raison d’etre for the attorney. The clients you mention also have their cars repaired, plumbing fixed etc. Are those tradesman also wrong to do that work if they hear the customer may have been accused of a crime?

    8. As to private property, if you’re pretty sure you aren’t welcome and haven’t been invited, most civil people I know don’t try to force themselves onto someone else’s property. It’s extremely rude at the minimum.

    9. People around the world take their privacy and right to sanctuary when at their own home seriously. I remember a Sienfeld episode about how rude even the unannounced “drop in” visit was. And that’s just a visit by a friend who hadn’t called ahead asking permission. A person has to be completely void of societal expectations not to realize that. Or, their ego is so overinflated that others expectations mean nothing to them.

    10. Okay – but when does it become “criminal?”

    11. LNP Sucks Too

      WTF? When ex-mayor Dick’s clients were found guilty, he fought to get them the least amount of prison time possible and back into society. Like a whore, he’d do anything for the client .

    12. Becky, did you read the excellent comments below the Post article? You can tell they’re not from Lancaster.