• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Black man taken to jail for sitting in public area

Page 8 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
SOFTengCOMPelec said:
If that guy is repeatedly entering the bank, and NOT carrying out bank transactions, that can appear suspicious to the security guards. They are probably looking out for possible bank robbers and so on.
Click to expand...

True. He might been in the area more than once. Since his kids attend school close by. Of course, the bank *invites* people to sit down and relax in the area. Just not if you're black, evidently.
 
stlc8tr said:
True. He might been in the area more than once. Since his kids attend school close by. Of course, the bank *invites* people to sit down and relax in the area. Just not if you're black, evidently.
Click to expand...

I have not seen any evidence of RACE, having anything to do with this. The ONLY mention of race in the presented evidence, was when the guy (who was arrested), shouted out that it was a RACE issue.

It's entirely possible that race (as well as sex (M/F), age, way a person acts and other factors), were taken into account by everyone involved.

But no evidence of race, seems to have been found.

Are you trying to say, that EVERYTHING that happens to that guy, since his birth, is due to his race ?

The race card seems to have been overplayed in this thread.
 
Last edited:
It's really quite sad to see the US turn into a police state because so many American's have enlarged amydalas and can't look at a black man without pissing in their pants.
 
Too bad people in the US assume that people who are security guards that call the police to report a person that refuses to leave an employee area is white and conservative. Guess minorities are not capable of being security guards.
 
Last edited:
Was he asked to leave this lounge area? I suspect tenants/employees wear ID badges to show they work in the building and are allowed to use the lounge

http://firstnationalbankbuilding.com/amenities

TENANT LOUNGE:
A relaxing retreat or informal meeting space. Tenants and guests enjoy comfortable, stylish furnishings, free wireless internet access and, of course, convenient proximity to coffee and snacks in the nearby skyway.
Click to expand...
 
Londo_Jowo said:
Was he asked to leave this lounge area? I suspect tenants/employees wear ID badges to show they work in the building and are allowed to use the lounge
Click to expand...
Dude did you even read the link I gave you--

Here is what was said by one witness-- Another woman who saw the arrest said that she works nearby and often sits near the First National Bank Building to eat lunch, but has never been arrested or bothered by security guards or police.
 
SOFTengCOMPelec said:
Explanation:
The security guard(s) don't have to approach/question/order-to-leave EVERYONE, only people who are apparently breaking the rules, appearing suspicious etc.

E.g. Security may have thought the women worked at the bank, or worked nearby (which they did, apparently), and the women may have been quiet/nice and NOT suspicious/annoying etc.

Security DON'T have to throw out everyone, who is breaking the slightest rule or being slightly suspicious, etc.
They decide who they are going to go for, and then politely ask them to leave, if necessary.

Without seeing the location in question, and how it is reached, from the public side of things, it is VERY difficult to conclude how "Public" or "Private" it was in practice.

i.e. There is a picture earlier in this thread, but I would need to see the surrounding areas and stuff, to get a feel for if it seems private or public.

Speculation: It looks private to me, because of all the neat tables and seating.
Click to expand...
Sorry that you refuse to believe eye witnesses who stated they ate there and have not been bothered.....the charges were dropped...the security guard and the Police has some explaining to do!!
 
JEDIYoda said:
Sorry that you refuse to believe eye witnesses who stated they ate there and have not been bothered.....the charges were dropped...the security guard and the Police has some explaining to do!!
Click to expand...

Some of the worst murderers in the world (or at least somewhat bad ones), such as serial murders, have been previously questioned by police and/or arrested and/or charged, and for whatever reason, were later released. It was only later, when they carried on with their killing spree, that they were finally brought to justice.

Being later released without charge, DOES NOT MEAN that a person was necessarily 100% innocent of the slightest thing.

The police need a degree of evidence, which if there is not enough and/or the evidence is NOT watertight enough, the police will have to release the person.

tl;dr
Released without charge NOT the same as definitely 100% of the time innocent.
 
Last edited:
Gerle said:
Shouldn't be called a boy.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree with you. But UK newspapers usually pride themselves, on getting the English right.
Example:

18-year-old boy wins £22million in lottery
Click to expand...

Source

I try to make what I write here, suitable for US and UK readers, but DON'T always get it right, because I'm NOT 100% familiar with everything US.

Strictly speaking, I agree, they are/were a man, but in the UK at least, they would still sometimes be referred to as a boy. Probably when they are no longer a teenager, they can rely on being called a man, more often.

We would say "teenage boy" NOT "teenage man", in typical usage, but I'm no expert on English, whether it's UK or US.

EDIT: But googling "teenage man" brings up many examples of that way of saying things. So I will have to say, take what I just said with a big dose of salt (i.e. it could easily be WRONG).
 
Last edited:
Thebobo said:
For the lazy -
1935411_165363885198_4360722_n.jpg
Click to expand...


Some good comments there
 
Black man makes it about race, pretty simple, other parties have to be racist for this shtick to work. The guy is after all black, it has to matter right?... right?

If you threaten or otherwise hold a mirror up to that type of thinking,... racist, have to be for this shtick to work.

Prejudicing everything based on race is indeed a form of racism, pretty perverted how the real racists are so emboldened to hurl the accusation of racism around like it has all the weight of confetti and do so whenever convenient for their agenda.
 
Last edited:
I wonder if the security happened to pass through and see the guy in the tenant (employee) lounge or did a tenant (employee) alert the security guard that an unauthorized person was in the lounge.
 
We went on a trip to Biloxi Mississippi once, was a Christmas party of my wife's when she was with a travel agency that did Casino trips there, and one of the girl she works with is Jewish and I hung out with her husband a lot on trip like this.

He plays classical guitar, he carries it around a lot on trips and is very good.

While the girls were shopping the two of us sat down in the main lounge about area on a bench and he pulls the guitar out.

I'm a predominantly White German lapsed Lutheran myself.

Not really relevant, but kind of amusing Carl and I hang out anyways on trips.

He starts playing guitar and a crowd gathers.

He doesn't have the case open like he's panhandling, he probably had at least 100 people standing there listening, I'm just sitting there grinning because a security guy cruised by at least 5 times trying to figure out wtf to do.

He sang a song or two in Hebrew after a bit, and it wasn't even loudly.

They finally had a real cop come over and ask him to stop playing, so he did, and the crowded booed the hell out of him.

Might not be completely in context, but they didn't even start really hassling him till that point.

*edit* funny side note, he's William Shatner's nephew, he usually doesn't even mention it usually.

We didn't even find out for years till they invited us over for dinner once and mentioned the wine glasses were a wedding present from him.

Even funnier note, his nephew even says Shatner is a bit of an asshole.

Every time the wife and I see him on TV the wife and I go "look it's uncle Bill."
 
Last edited:
JEDIYoda said:
Dude did you even read the link I gave you--

Here is what was said by one witness-- Another woman who saw the arrest said that she works nearby and often sits near the First National Bank Building to eat lunch, but has never been arrested or bothered by security guards or police.
Click to expand...

Yes, I read the link. The reason the police were called is a person (Lollie) was in the employee lounge and would not leave. Of course by the time the police arrived he was in the public area near the bank building.
 
Londo_Jowo said:
Yes, I read the link. The reason the police were called is a person (Lollie) was in the employee lounge and would not leave. Of course by the time the police arrived he was in the public area near the bank building.
Click to expand...

To be honest, I figured would be other things involved.
 
Ok, did he stay in the area that belong the the bank and not public such as a library or a park? If he did and he did not leave as the cops asked, then he was trespassing.

Also, why not provide ID to the cop and escalate the problem even higher?
 
http://www.myfoxtwincities.com/story/26398307/st-paul-police-statement-on-lollie-arrest

Below is the unedited statement from St. Paul Police Chief Tom Smith regarding the arrest of Christopher Lollie:

I would like to thank the community for the discussion regarding the video that was has recently been circulated from a January 31, 2014 arrest.

As is often the case, the video does not show the totality of the circumstances.

Our officers were called by private security guards on a man who was trespassing in a private area. The guards reported that the man had on repeated occasions refused to leave a private "employees only" area in the First National Bank Building.

With no information on who the man was, what he might be doing or why he refused to leave the area, responding Saint Paul police officers tried to talk to him, asking him who he was. He refused to tell them or cooperate.

Our officers are called upon and required to respond to calls for assistance and to investigate the calls. At one point, the officers believed he might either run or fight with them. It was then that officers took steps to take him into custody. He pulled away and resisted officers' lawful orders. They then used the force necessary to safely take him into custody.

The man was charged with trespassing, disorderly conduct and obstruction of the legal process. Those charges were dismissed in July.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top