A little googling shows several cities in Texas that have their trespass procedures on record for public property and buildings, It looks like you can be removed and given a trespass notice if there some disruptive or criminal act on your part. It just can't be for one of the protected class reasons.

Sharpshooter said:

---

I can't believe this post has had such legs.

---

I can't believe you can't believe it.

Marlin39m said:

---

A little googling shows several cities in Texas that have their trespass procedures on record for public property and buildings, It looks like you can be removed and given a trespass notice if there some disruptive or criminal act on your part. It just can't be for one of the protected class reasons.

---

Exactly what I thought. It is NOT the same as private property.

The part where they screw up specific to the 1a auditors is the act of filming, by itself, cannot be considered disruptive. It is protected.

swampstander said:

---

Sharpshooter said:

---

I can't believe this post has had such legs.

---

I can't believe you can't believe it.

---

I've read both pages and still have no idea what the f is going on.

Never mind.

It is a question of behavior. Anyone that is disruptive can be asked to leave and local PD will issue a trespass warning.

If someone is filming in an unsecure area, there is no harm and most try to let them film in peace. Once you access a secure area, agency rules apply and no one is allowed to film.

Most of the auditors figure out the locations that know the policies and procedures and you don't see those streams on YouTube. Once they find a spot that overreacts, it becomes a feeding frenzy.

So I work for a local municipality and we have annual training on this topic. Our cities stance is that the "eyes" cannot trespass so anything within view in public areas is subject to recording. Our administrative staff is taught to turn over any documents or tilt their computer screens away from public view so that sensitive information cannot be recorded.

As far as having people removed from our facilities, We can call police and have them issue a criminal trespass warning if they are disrupting other patrons or doing something illegal. Usually, we ask them to leave first voluntarily, but if the behavior persists, we will call the police.

The only thing more lame than first amendment auditors is nerds that sit and watch their nonsense.

fredfredunderscorefred said:

---

agsalaska said:

---

well_endowed_ag said:

---

I'm not sure you know what "trespass" means. It doesn't mean "remove."

---

So I just read my entire OP and never used the word 'remove'

Do you have anything else to add? I tend to try to stick with the subject of OPs so if not that's cool.

---

Are you using trespass instead of remove? Or using trespass in the sense of "charge with trespassing"?

---

They are often given a criminal trespass warning preventing them from going to a public building such as a police station, library, or post office where they do these audits.

Jabin said:

---

What the heck is "a first amendment auditor"?

ETA second question: If you didn't mean "remove" when you typed "trespass", what did you mean? Trespass makes no sense as you used it.

---

Lots of videos on YouTube and 90% are turds. They will walk thru the parking lot at a police station and film inside cops cars personal cars u til they get a reaction to film or go into a post office and annoy the crap out of the staff and customers filming them until someone tries to kick them out.

lb3 said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

In Texas you just need to post a sign or paint a purple stripe on your trees and you are good. Just bc it is a public building does not mean the public shears has access to all parts of it (think of the capitol building).

---

You can't walk onto the floor of the legislature but you can walk around the lobby and other publicly accessible areas. As the auditors like to say, your eyes can't trespass so if you're in a public area, you can record anything your eyes can see. The auditors claim that no policy or written notice can supersede that right.

That doesn't mean you can bring a ladder into the lobby then climb to the top of a screen meant to obstruct the view of a protected area for example.

Long Island Audit got a retaliatory ticket for window tint recently and has been on an entertaining crusade against Suffolk County police ever since. He's documenting the personal vehicles of every police officer in the county that is also in violation of window tinting or have illegal license plate covers. Fun series of videos where he walks around putting violation notices under all their windshield wipers.

---

There are areas that are clearly public. Then there are areas in public buildings that are clearly not accessible to the public. It is a common sense deal.

The "auditors" are idiots who are trying to create conflict that they can record and then get clicks and money from.

We are talking about the places that are clearly pubic.

agsalaska said:

---

We are talking about the places that are clearly pubic.

---

Now I'm listening

agsalaska said:

---

We are talking about the places that are clearly pubic.

---

Then it is the fault of the public officials for not knowing the law that well. Although I've never followed them enough to see that they're going into post offices.

Guitarsoup said:

---

fredfredunderscorefred said:

---

agsalaska said:

---

well_endowed_ag said:

---

I'm not sure you know what "trespass" means. It doesn't mean "remove."

---

So I just read my entire OP and never used the word 'remove'

Do you have anything else to add? I tend to try to stick with the subject of OPs so if not that's cool.

---

Are you using trespass instead of remove? Or using trespass in the sense of "charge with trespassing"?

---

They are often given a criminal trespass warning preventing them from going to a public building such as a police station, library, or post office where they do these audits.

---

This was the original question. Is that legal. And the more I see on this thread and the more I read I am pretty sure that the auditors are right. More often than not those criminal trespass warnings are rights violations.

One way it plays out is some city employee will call the cops and get some dumb**** cop that doesn't know what he is doing which is shockingly easy to do. It is usually either a rookie cop or a 60 yo cop. Usually the cop will make one of two mistakes. He will either go along with the trespass or demand to see an ID, both of which are civil rights violations. Most of the time the auditors will tell them they are making a mistake and request a supervisor in order to strip the cop who is screwing up of his/her qualified immunity. And most often the sgt or LT shows up and does everything they can to get the other cops out of trouble. When the senior cops screw up too is when the auditors win and cops get fired/sued/etc.

To be clear, I am not defending or endorsing the practice. I do agree that 90% of them are just POS people. 10% of them do a great job. I only watch the 10%. It is really amazing to see how silly people react to a camera when they are already being filmed 100 times a day. Also silly to watch how determined some cops are to violate people rights, especially around IDs. The best auditors typically just sit back and let the action come to them. Again watch Jeff Gray at Honor Your Oath. He is the king.

Bocephus said:

---

agsalaska said:

---

We are talking about the places that are clearly pubic.

---

Then it is the fault of the public officials for not knowing the law that well. Although I've never followed them enough to see that they're going into post offices.

---

That's not entirely true. It is also the fault of the cops. If a cop enforces and illegal trespass after being told it was illegal they are in trouble too. Happens every day.

Generally they screw up by demanding IDs, but they also enforce illegal trespasses.


Again, not endorsing this practice. I am more curious about the laws.

You might need to look up the law on trespass before you "believe" the video guys.

https://codes.findlaw.com/tx/penal-code/penal-sect-30-05/

(a) A person commits an offense if the person enters or remains on or in property of another, including residential land, agricultural land, a recreational vehicle park, a building, or an aircraft or other vehicle, without effective consent and the person:

(1) had notice that the entry was forbidden; or
(2) received notice to depart but failed to do so.

Troy91 said:

---

You might need to look up the law on trespass before you "believe" the video guys.

https://codes.findlaw.com/tx/penal-code/penal-sect-30-05/

(a) A person commits an offense if the person enters or remains on or in property of another, including residential land, agricultural land, a recreational vehicle park, a building, or an aircraft or other vehicle, without effective consent and the person:

(1) had notice that the entry was forbidden; or
(2) received notice to depart but failed to do so.

---

That is private property, not public property.

Can you be banned from city hall if you do not break any laws there just because a worker there doesn't like you or you are annoying?

That's private property, not public property.

Guitarsoup said:

---

Troy91 said:

---

You might need to look up the law on trespass before you "believe" the video guys.

https://codes.findlaw.com/tx/penal-code/penal-sect-30-05/

(a) A person commits an offense if the person enters or remains on or in property of another, including residential land, agricultural land, a recreational vehicle park, a building, or an aircraft or other vehicle, without effective consent and the person:

(1) had notice that the entry was forbidden; or
(2) received notice to depart but failed to do so.

---

That is private property, not public property.

Can you be banned from city hall if you do not break any laws there just because a worker there doesn't like you or you are annoying?

---

Again, it is about behavior. If the person is disruptive, they can be cited for criminal trespass.

Troy91 said:

---

Guitarsoup said:

---

Troy91 said:

---

You might need to look up the law on trespass before you "believe" the video guys.

https://codes.findlaw.com/tx/penal-code/penal-sect-30-05/

(a) A person commits an offense if the person enters or remains on or in property of another, including residential land, agricultural land, a recreational vehicle park, a building, or an aircraft or other vehicle, without effective consent and the person:

(1) had notice that the entry was forbidden; or
(2) received notice to depart but failed to do so.

---

That is private property, not public property.

Can you be banned from city hall if you do not break any laws there just because a worker there doesn't like you or you are annoying?

---

Again, it is about behavior. If the person is disruptive, they can be cited for criminal trespass.

---

Right. Being disruptive is a crime. But filming by itself cannot be considered disruptive. The argument is that you cannot be trespassed from public property, again publicly accesseable property, without committing another crime. Where at say Hanks Cafe Hank can have you removed for any reason because it is his private property. Public employees, even say a Mayor or police chief, does not have that power.

agsalaska said:

---

Guitarsoup said:

---

fredfredunderscorefred said:

---

agsalaska said:

---

well_endowed_ag said:

---

I'm not sure you know what "trespass" means. It doesn't mean "remove."

---

So I just read my entire OP and never used the word 'remove'

Do you have anything else to add? I tend to try to stick with the subject of OPs so if not that's cool.

---

Are you using trespass instead of remove? Or using trespass in the sense of "charge with trespassing"?

---

They are often given a criminal trespass warning preventing them from going to a public building such as a police station, library, or post office where they do these audits.

---

This was the original question. Is that legal. And the more I see on this thread and the more I read I am pretty sure that the auditors are right. More often than not those criminal trespass warnings are rights violations.

One way it plays out is some city employee will call the cops and get some dumb**** cop that doesn't know what he is doing which is shockingly easy to do. It is usually either a rookie cop or a 60 yo cop. Usually the cop will make one of two mistakes. He will either go along with the trespass or demand to see an ID, both of which are civil rights violations. Most of the time the auditors will tell them they are making a mistake and request a supervisor in order to strip the cop who is screwing up of his/her qualified immunity. And most often the sgt or LT shows up and does everything they can to get the other cops out of trouble. When the senior cops screw up too is when the auditors win and cops get fired/sued/etc.

To be clear, I am not defending or endorsing the practice. I do agree that 90% of them are just POS people. 10% of them do a great job. I only watch the 10%. It is really amazing to see how silly people react to a camera when they are already being filmed 100 times a day. Also silly to watch how determined some cops are to violate people rights, especially around IDs. The best auditors typically just sit back and let the action come to them. Again watch Jeff Gray at Honor Your Oath. He is the king.

---

In Texas, the city employee can request that someone be trespassed from a city building and the officer can issue a trespass warning. If the person is asked to leave and refuses to, they can be arrested for criminal trespass. The person does not have to give their name for the criminal trespass warning and if they leave that is the end of it.

The officers should know the law.

Filming is not disruptive until it is.

When we have issued criminal trespass, it was for interactions with customers and not just filming the lobby.

B e h a v i o r.

We don't do anything for someone in the lobby just filming.

agsalaska said:

---

Troy91 said:

---

Guitarsoup said:

---

Troy91 said:

---

You might need to look up the law on trespass before you "believe" the video guys.

https://codes.findlaw.com/tx/penal-code/penal-sect-30-05/

(a) A person commits an offense if the person enters or remains on or in property of another, including residential land, agricultural land, a recreational vehicle park, a building, or an aircraft or other vehicle, without effective consent and the person:

(1) had notice that the entry was forbidden; or
(2) received notice to depart but failed to do so.

---

That is private property, not public property.

Can you be banned from city hall if you do not break any laws there just because a worker there doesn't like you or you are annoying?

---

Again, it is about behavior. If the person is disruptive, they can be cited for criminal trespass.

---

Right. Being disruptive is a crime. But filming by itself cannot be considered disruptive. The argument is that you cannot be trespassed from public property, again publicly accesseable property, without committing another crime. Where at say Hanks Cafe Hank can have you removed for any reason because it is his private property. Public employees, even say a Mayor or police chief, does not have that power.

---

Not entirely true. Creating a disturbance is not by itself a crime, but you can be criminally trespassed from public property for that. For instance, there was a guy who repeatedly came to the lobby of the police station who demanded to see a certain officer who shot his son. That by itself is not a crime. He was eventually warned not to return to the station.

Bocephus said:

---

agsalaska said:

---

Guitarsoup said:

---

fredfredunderscorefred said:

---

agsalaska said:

---

well_endowed_ag said:

---

I'm not sure you know what "trespass" means. It doesn't mean "remove."

---

So I just read my entire OP and never used the word 'remove'

Do you have anything else to add? I tend to try to stick with the subject of OPs so if not that's cool.

---

Are you using trespass instead of remove? Or using trespass in the sense of "charge with trespassing"?

---

They are often given a criminal trespass warning preventing them from going to a public building such as a police station, library, or post office where they do these audits.

---

This was the original question. Is that legal. And the more I see on this thread and the more I read I am pretty sure that the auditors are right. More often than not those criminal trespass warnings are rights violations.

One way it plays out is some city employee will call the cops and get some dumb**** cop that doesn't know what he is doing which is shockingly easy to do. It is usually either a rookie cop or a 60 yo cop. Usually the cop will make one of two mistakes. He will either go along with the trespass or demand to see an ID, both of which are civil rights violations. Most of the time the auditors will tell them they are making a mistake and request a supervisor in order to strip the cop who is screwing up of his/her qualified immunity. And most often the sgt or LT shows up and does everything they can to get the other cops out of trouble. When the senior cops screw up too is when the auditors win and cops get fired/sued/etc.

To be clear, I am not defending or endorsing the practice. I do agree that 90% of them are just POS people. 10% of them do a great job. I only watch the 10%. It is really amazing to see how silly people react to a camera when they are already being filmed 100 times a day. Also silly to watch how determined some cops are to violate people rights, especially around IDs. The best auditors typically just sit back and let the action come to them. Again watch Jeff Gray at Honor Your Oath. He is the king.

---

In Texas, the city employee can request that someone be trespassed from a city building and the officer can issue a trespass warning. If the person is asked to leave and refuses to, they can be arrested for criminal trespass. The person does not have to give their name for the criminal trespass warning and if they leave that is the end of it.

The officers should know the law.

---

This was the original question, and I am pretty sure this is incorrect, at least without a legitimate reason ie being disruptive, causing a disturbance. A city employee cannot request I be trespassed from, say, city hall, without a reason like Hanks Diner can.

Say a city employee hates A&M and I am there in at A&M hat and shirt. They cannot trespass me for that. Now Hank at Hanks Diner, he absolutely can.

Bocephus said:

---

agsalaska said:

---

Troy91 said:

---

Guitarsoup said:

---

Troy91 said:

---

You might need to look up the law on trespass before you "believe" the video guys.

https://codes.findlaw.com/tx/penal-code/penal-sect-30-05/

(a) A person commits an offense if the person enters or remains on or in property of another, including residential land, agricultural land, a recreational vehicle park, a building, or an aircraft or other vehicle, without effective consent and the person:

(1) had notice that the entry was forbidden; or
(2) received notice to depart but failed to do so.

---

That is private property, not public property.

Can you be banned from city hall if you do not break any laws there just because a worker there doesn't like you or you are annoying?

---

Again, it is about behavior. If the person is disruptive, they can be cited for criminal trespass.

---

Right. Being disruptive is a crime. But filming by itself cannot be considered disruptive. The argument is that you cannot be trespassed from public property, again publicly accesseable property, without committing another crime. Where at say Hanks Cafe Hank can have you removed for any reason because it is his private property. Public employees, even say a Mayor or police chief, does not have that power.

---

Not entirely true. Creating a disturbance is not by itself a crime, but you can be criminally trespassed from public property for that. For instance, there was a guy who repeatedly came to the lobby of the police station who demanded to see a certain officer who shot his son. That by itself is not a crime. He was eventually warned not to return to the station.

---

My guess is your city attorneys eventually qualified that as harassment, stalking, or threatening. And rightfully so it sounds like. Either that or the poilce took a chance by threatening him and it just worked.

Troy91 said:

---

Filming is not disruptive until it is.

When we have issued criminal trespass, it was for interactions with customers and not just filming the lobby.

B e h a v i o r.

We don't do anything for someone in the lobby just filming.

---

This I agree with. The behavior becomes a public disturbance. A crime.

That's my point I guess.


The filming by itself is never a crime. It cannot be. And public employees cannot tell you not to film them. If they try and the person refuses that by itself is NOT behavior warranting a trespass. They would have to go beyond that, like yelling, cursing, cutting in lines, etc.

You keep wanting to skip past the fact that trespassing is also a crime.

Staying past your welcome and after being asked to leave is criminal trespass. That is a crime. No other behavior is needed.

These people are the worst. They're basically the new Westboro Baptist Church holding up inflammatory signs. They're 100% there to illicit a reaction, nothing more. This is a prime example. There's zero reason to be filming a gate on a military installation. Only bad things will come of that being online. I love how homey is tough with all the junior ranks until the boss shows up. These guys are *****es.

agsalaska said:

---

Troy91 said:

---

Filming is not disruptive until it is.

When we have issued criminal trespass, it was for interactions with customers and not just filming the lobby.

B e h a v i o r.

We don't do anything for someone in the lobby just filming.

---

This I agree with. The behavior becomes a public disturbance. A crime.

That's my point I guess.


The filming by itself is never a crime. It cannot be. And public employees cannot tell you not to film them. If they try and the person refuses that by itself is NOT behavior warranting a trespass. They would have to go beyond that, like yelling, cursing, cutting in lines, etc.

---

One thing that they want to avoid completely is to share private information on-line. That is especially true if it is the police and the video inadvertently happened to blow an undercover officer's cover.

Troy91 said:

---

You keep wanting to skip past the fact that trespassing is also a crime.

Staying past your welcome and after being asked to leave is criminal trespass. That is a crime. No other behavior is needed.

---

Yea I am pretty sure that is completely wrong in publicly accessible areas of public buildings. Public employees do not get to choose when you have stayed past your welcome.

Again I go back to the A&M hat argument. Hanks Cafe doesn't like Aggies so he has me trespassed for wearing my A&M hat.

Sheila, a County clerk, doesnt like A&M so she has me removed from the county clerks office because of the hat.

Hank can do that. Sheila can not.

Yea man I don't think anyone here is defending the behavour of most of them. We are discussing the legalities around their arguments.

Troy91 said:

---

Guitarsoup said:

---

Troy91 said:

---

You might need to look up the law on trespass before you "believe" the video guys.

https://codes.findlaw.com/tx/penal-code/penal-sect-30-05/

(a) A person commits an offense if the person enters or remains on or in property of another, including residential land, agricultural land, a recreational vehicle park, a building, or an aircraft or other vehicle, without effective consent and the person:

(1) had notice that the entry was forbidden; or
(2) received notice to depart but failed to do so.

---

That is private property, not public property.

Can you be banned from city hall if you do not break any laws there just because a worker there doesn't like you or you are annoying?

---

Again, it is about behavior. If the person is disruptive, they can be cited for criminal trespass.

---

99% of the disruptions are the result of the staff or police actively engaging the auditor, not the other way around.

eric76 said:

---

agsalaska said:

---

Troy91 said:

---

Filming is not disruptive until it is.

When we have issued criminal trespass, it was for interactions with customers and not just filming the lobby.

B e h a v i o r.

We don't do anything for someone in the lobby just filming.

---

This I agree with. The behavior becomes a public disturbance. A crime.

That's my point I guess.


The filming by itself is never a crime. It cannot be. And public employees cannot tell you not to film them. If they try and the person refuses that by itself is NOT behavior warranting a trespass. They would have to go beyond that, like yelling, cursing, cutting in lines, etc.

---

One thing that they want to avoid completely is to share private information on-line. That is especially true if it is the police and the video inadvertently happened to blow an undercover officer's cover.

---

This is another argument that they make. It is not the public's job to protect other's privacy, whether that is information on a computer or the identity of an undercover cop. It is up to individuals to create their own privacy.

Someone said it earlier that you cannot trespass the eyes and there is no expectation of privacy in public. That is settled law.

lb3 said:

---

Troy91 said:

---

Guitarsoup said:

---

Troy91 said:

---

You might need to look up the law on trespass before you "believe" the video guys.

https://codes.findlaw.com/tx/penal-code/penal-sect-30-05/

(a) A person commits an offense if the person enters or remains on or in property of another, including residential land, agricultural land, a recreational vehicle park, a building, or an aircraft or other vehicle, without effective consent and the person:

(1) had notice that the entry was forbidden; or
(2) received notice to depart but failed to do so.

---

That is private property, not public property.

Can you be banned from city hall if you do not break any laws there just because a worker there doesn't like you or you are annoying?

---

Again, it is about behavior. If the person is disruptive, they can be cited for criminal trespass.

---

99% of the disruptions are the result of the staff or police actively engaging the auditor, not the other way around.

---

This is also true a lot of times.

someone will freak out because they do not want to be recorded and goes ape**** crazy on the guy with the camera. Then the cops try to say the auditor is the one that created the disruption. This is how they get beat in court.