Re: What Did You Watch? 2024-05-02 (Thursday)

Arthur Lipscomb <arthur@alum.calberkeley.org> wrote:

On 5/3/2024 9:17 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Arthur Lipscomb <arthur@alum.calberkeley.org> wrote:
 

Law & Order - "Castle in the Sky" - A homeless man and his daughter are
squatting in a penthouse and when the real owner shows up one night he
winds up dead.

 
Everybody gets this wrong, including Steve Lehto in his videos. Living
in a unit not yet sold in a mostly finished building is not squatting.
It's trespass. Squatting has to do with a hostile encroachment upon
ABANDONED land after a number of years which varies by state. Getting
the semantics right makes a huge difference in these discussions and who
can be arrested for what.
 
The fact that this guy was HIRED as a security guard to PREVENT trespass
is evidence that the property wasn't abandoned and that he cannot
convert it for his personal use.
 

Fortunately for the man his daughter can alibi his self
defense claim.  Doesn't the defense have to reveal that defense ahead of
time?  Doesn't matter, this is Law & Order.

 
I don't know if notice is required to assert self defense at trial.
 

Unfortunately for the man
the writers are on the DA's side so they concoct a convoluted way for
the guy to be convicted anyway.  I was half rooting for the guy to not
be convicted.

 
Why? The victim did nothing wrong. The perpetrator was entirely in the
wrong.

>
>
We didn't see the actual crime.  So the self defense story the defendant
said was plausible.  Then his daughter backed him up.  So at that point
I'm thinking reasonable doubt.

If he didn't have a right to live there temporarily and the victim had
every right to be there, I don't see how he had a self defense claim
even if the story were true. I understand the gun was pointed at both
him and his daughter, but they're the trespassers.

Then the whole nonsense where the
daughter just happens to be at Ellenor Frutt's house when she
conveniently confesses she lied on the stand.  And the judge let her
testify, apparently without rebuttal.  The guy the girl was talking too
clearly disputed what was said otherwise he'd be the testifying instead
of her.