• 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 10 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Again neither of those photo are off the employee lounge that is close proximity to those photos. Nor do they look anything like the employee lounge shown in the scrolling photos.

http://firstnationalbankbuilding.com/amenities

You keep linking the employee lounged, however, there has been no indication that's where he was. The only information that we have is that he was supposedly in an "employees-only" area. It could very well be the employee lounge or it could also be the skyway shown in the pictures above.

The bank's lounge also seems to be a separate room within the bank itself and if the bank is anything like any other office building, it's most likely not accessible by the general public unless someone let him into the back area. Whatever the case, we don't really know why the police were called and we probably never will unless First National Bank comes out with a statement.
 
You keep linking the employee lounged, however, there has been no indication that's where he was. The only information that we have is that he was supposedly in an "employees-only" area. It could very well be the employee lounge or it could also be the skyway shown in the pictures above.

The bank's lounge also seems to be a separate room within the bank itself and if the bank is anything like any other office building, it's most likely not accessible by the general public unless someone let him into the back area. Whatever the case, we don't really know why the police were called and we probably never will unless First National Bank comes out with a statement.


Let me post this yet one more time. Please note the bolded as it explains why the police were called to the building.

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.
 
You keep linking the employee lounged, however, there has been no indication that's where he was. The only information that we have is that he was supposedly in an "employees-only" area. It could very well be the employee lounge or it could also be the skyway shown in the pictures above.

The bank's lounge also seems to be a separate room within the bank itself and if the bank is anything like any other office building, it's most likely not accessible by the general public unless someone let him into the back area.

My Google-fu fails me as I can't find anything regarding the location of the "tenant lounge" relative to the skyway.

Whatever the case, we don't really know why the police were called and we probably never will unless First National Bank comes out with a statement.

The only article I could find with the most information.

http://www.twincities.com/crime/ci_26426299/st-paul-police-defend-skyway-arrest-charges-dismissed

The encounter with police occurred after Lollie got off from working an overnight shift. He had been employed by a temp agency at the time and was cleaning at Cossetta's Italian Market and Pizzeria.

Lollie walked into downtown St. Paul to pick up two of his children. He couldn't reach their mother to find out if she'd brought them to day care yet, and he went to the center to see if they were there; they were not. Knowing they would arrive shortly, Lollie said, he was waiting for a bus to deliver them with their mother.

Lollie said he sat in a chair in the skyway. No signs said it was a private area, Lollie said. After a guard asked him to leave, he said he remained seated and continued to look at his cellphone.

First National Bank security guards had reported to police that Lollie was sitting "for some time" in a skyway-level lounge area designated for building employees, a police report said. A security guard had asked if he had business in the building and Lollie "refused to answer," the report said. He was told he needed to leave because the area was for employees, but he didn't, the report said.

When police responded, Lollie was "uncooperative and refused to stop," a police report said. Lollie told officers who were taking him to jail that he had recorded the entire incident, he would be suing and they would be fired, another report said.

According to the article, Lollie says his lawyer went to court with the surveillance footage and witness statements and the charges were dropped. But it doesn't expound on what exactly the footage shows.

I tried looking up the docket for the court case (by defendant name, attorney name, calander date), but I couldn't find it. I did find these cases with a defendant of the same last name and possibly first name, i.e., I'm not sure if its the same person.

http://pa.courts.state.mn.us/CaseDetail.aspx?CaseID=1613761843
http://pa.courts.state.mn.us/CaseDetail.aspx?CaseID=1615671332
http://pa.courts.state.mn.us/CaseDetail.aspx?CaseID=1614287915
http://pa.courts.state.mn.us/CaseDetail.aspx?CaseID=648268357

EDIT: Apparently the links are auto-gen'd.

The court case numbers are (respectivley):

State of Minnesota vs CHRISTOPHER VAUGHN LOLLIE
Case No. 62-CR-10-5198

Ramsey County Child Support, Le'Toi J. Tatum vs Christopher V. Lollie
Case No. 62-FA-12-2971

Letoi J. Tatum, Ramsey County Child Support vs CHRISTOPHER V LOLLIE
Case No. 62-FA-11-406

CIERA B MOORE & GAL ANTHONY MOORE & RAMSEY COUNTY VS CHRISTOPHER LOLLIE
Case No. 62-F0-04-050468

Search them here:
http://www.mncourts.gov/caserecords
 
Last edited:
Couple months ago I was walking downtown Chicago, saw what looked like either a farmer's market or one of the city's many "taste of" things, and I walked over to check it out. Private security guard stopped me as I approached, told me this was a private employee-only event.

What did I do in response? I shouted to the guy "Fuck you, you're turning me away because I'm white! You're just a shitbag loser wannabe-cop!"

Actually, I just said "Okay", and turned in the direction I previously was headed towards and went about my day.


The officers may have used excessive force in this thread's incident.

But that doesn't excuse this guy for being a pissed off asshole towards others everyone prior.

Guy is getting his moment in the media spotlight. He'll be forgotten about next week.
 
Last edited:
What did I do in response? I shouted to the guy "Fuck you, you're turning me away because I'm white! You're just a shitbag loser wannabe-cop!"

Actually, I just said "Okay", and turned in the direction I previously was headed towards and went about my day.

Dammit cubby, where's the fun in not demanding everyone take your race so over-seriously that your rights trump everyone else's? "Employee-only!!?" Clearly that's just racist code for "Anyone whose race we refuse to recognize as a trump-card outweighing everyone else, not allowed!" You should sue!
 
One more article that clearly states he was in the employee lounge.

http://www.kare11.com/story/news/lo...federation-responds-to-arrest-video/14881729/

Your first response above was literally just a repost of the exact issue I was addressing with my post, which was that the linked articles never mentioned that he was in an employee lounge, but merely an "employee-only" private area.

At least with your quoted response you've found an article that actually states that the security guards called because he was in the lounge. Of course, this only presents one side of the story as we don't know what Lollie's lawyer presented to the court to get the charges dropped.
 
Your first response above was literally just a repost of the exact issue I was addressing with my post, which was that the linked articles never mentioned that he was in an employee lounge, but merely an "employee-only" private area.

At least with your quoted response you've found an article that actually states that the security guards called because he was in the lounge. Of course, this only presents one side of the story as we don't know what Lollie's lawyer presented to the court to get the charges dropped.

There's only one private employee lounge/area shown in the building amenities. How difficult is it to understand that Mr Lollie was in that lounge and asked to leave? I seriously doubt the security guard would call the police if Mr Lollie was in a public area. Charges being dropped have nothing to do with the fact on why the police were called.
 
The incident happened in January when 28-year-old Chris Lollie says he was in the skyway waiting to pick up his children. Bank security guards called police to report Lollie had been sitting in a lounge designated for building employees. The St. Paul Pioneer Press reports police arrived and the situation escalated.

"The three very experienced and decorated officers responding to this call repeatedly attempted to determine the level of threat presented by Mr. Lollie and to deescalate the situation. The outcome of this arrest was determined my Mr. Lollie himself," said St. Paul Police Federation President Dave Titus in a statement.

Mayor Chris Coleman said that the city's Police-Civilian Internal Affairs Review Commission should investigate the incident.<<-- that has proven to be a crock of shit...charges dropped..lololol
 
The charges were dropped due to the fact he was already in a public area when he was taken into custody.
No!! that is wrong! The charges were dropped because he was innocent to begin with......
Just because you leave the scene of a crime before the cops catch up to you, does not mean that you were not there.....just admit you were wrong and move on....
 
Keep on believing that the security guard didn't know the difference between the private employee lounge (which I'm sure he utilized on a daily basis) and the public area. The police were dispatched due to the security guards saying they had an individual in the private lounge that refused to leave. By the time the police arrived Mr Lollie had moved into a public area and was no longer trespassing, he should have not been taken in custody due to that fact. Now had the building chose to press charges it would be another story.

Mr Lollie acted just like a small child when they're caught doing something wrong. You're doing this because you don't love me or you love another sibling more. He just used the you're doing this because I black tact.
 
Keep on believing that the security guard didn't know the difference between the private employee lounge (which I'm sure he utilized on a daily basis) and the public area. The police were dispatched due to the security guards saying they had an individual in the private lounge that refused to leave. By the time the police arrived Mr Lollie had moved into a public area and was no longer trespassing, he should have not been taken in custody due to that fact. Now had the building chose to press charges it would be another story.

Mr Lollie acted just like a small child when they're caught doing something wrong. You're doing this because you don't love me or you love another sibling more. He just used the you're doing this because I black tact.
You are never going to give up...the charges were dropped because the man did nothing wrong......
 
You're right, the charges were dropped due to the fact he was in the public area when the police arrived, had he still been in the private lounge when they arrived it would be a different story.
 
Those pictures show the tenant's lounge *not* an employee lounge.

Tenants employ employees and being an employee of a tenant grants you access to the employee lounge (aka tenant lounge) would be my guess.

I don't see why any of you are arguing with Londo. He is quite obviously correct here.

I know some people are absolutely passionate and desperate to find examples of racism. I'm not sure why, but I understand it is very important to them.

This, however, appears to be a simple case of a guy being a douche and refusing to leave an area he wasn't allowed in when asked to by security, and then continuing to be a douche when cops showed up by deciding he was going to make a big spectacle of himself and try to make the people around the area think he was being horribly oppressed by brutal jackbooted thug cops for no reason other than his race.

When the reality is, he created the situation and had multiple opportunities to defuse it in a completely calm way (get up and leave when asked by security, explain the situation to cops - who wouldn't have even been called had he done the first option... calmly and while providing his name, aka cooperating, etc.)

He wanted to be the victim, and he was playing to his own camera.
 
You are never going to give up...the charges were dropped because the man did nothing wrong......


Not necessarily. In this case, the basis for the arrest could very well be that he was trespassing. However, when it goes to court you would need the security guard and/or a representative from the building for the charges to go forward. If they don't show up, the trespassing case would be dropped. Without the trespassing case, the other charges are hard to make. I've seen that happen many, many times. It doesn't necessarily mean that the person is innocent.

You're right, the charges were dropped due to the fact he was in the public area when the police arrived, had he still been in the private lounge when they arrived it would be a different story.


He could still be arrested even if he was in a public area when the police arrived and had been trespassing in a private area prior to the police arrival. As long as the police had probable cause (basically, is it probable that the person committed the crime) to believe that he had been in the private lounge and had refused to leave when initially told to do so, he could be arrested for trespassing.

As for the initial stop, the officer had every right to detain the subject. All she needs is reasonable suspicion (basically, is it reasonable to believe) that a crime was being committed, had been committed, or was about to be committed. In this case, receiving information from a security guard at the building would be enough as the guard is a known person who works for the building. At that point in time, there would be no basis to not believe the information they provided compared to a completely anonymous caller.`

- Merg

(BTW Jedi, love the avatar.)
 
Tenants employ employees and being an employee of a tenant grants you access to the employee lounge (aka tenant lounge) would be my guess.

I don't see why any of you are arguing with Londo. He is quite obviously correct here.

I know some people are absolutely passionate and desperate to find examples of racism. I'm not sure why, but I understand it is very important to them.

This, however, appears to be a simple case of a guy being a douche and refusing to leave an area he wasn't allowed in when asked to by security, and then continuing to be a douche when cops showed up by deciding he was going to make a big spectacle of himself and try to make the people around the area think he was being horribly oppressed by brutal jackbooted thug cops for no reason other than his race.

When the reality is, he created the situation and had multiple opportunities to defuse it in a completely calm way (get up and leave when asked by security, explain the situation to cops - who wouldn't have even been called had he done the first option... calmly and while providing his name, aka cooperating, etc.)

He wanted to be the victim, and he was playing to his own camera.

No complex or building I've ever run across has building/complex tenants sharing the same lounge with building employees.

Other than that, you just keep on apologizing for the police.
 
There's only one private employee lounge/area shown in the building amenities. How difficult is it to understand that Mr Lollie was in that lounge and asked to leave? I seriously doubt the security guard would call the police if Mr Lollie was in a public area. Charges being dropped have nothing to do with the fact on why the police were called.

Prior to your second article, an employee-only area could mean anything. It's an absurdly broad term for anyone to jump to the conclusion that it was an employee lounge. Also, it doesn't really matter what you assume to have happened, we're only interested in what actually happened. That is the difference between proving or disproving a legal issue and supposition. It's all very easy to form your own narrative of what happened, but that narrative is often wrong, especially when all the facts aren't out. One only needs to go to the Ferguson thread or the TM thread to see assumptions in their full glory.

Also, charges being dropped often occurs when there is no evidence of a crime being committed. For all we know, and this is merely a hypothetical, the video could have shown that Lollie was only in the skyway the entire time and the security guards truly did try to remove him because of the way he looks (whether it be race or socio-economic or anything else). So yes, charges being dropped can give a hint to motive for the call by the security guards.

I should add that Lollie could have deescalated the entire situation with the first officer, who was being quite cordial, but instead decided to make a huge scene to people who have no control over what building security does.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top