Posted on 04/12/2024 9:38:47 PM PDT by Libloather
**SNIP**
A swarm of squatters have shacked up inside the celebrity chef’s $16.1 million pub — using Ramsay’s own kitchen appliances to barricade themselves inside, according to a report.
**SNIP**
One person was seen barefoot and sprawled across on a black leather sofa inside the restaurant, with their personal belongings and debris, including empty wine bottles, strewn across the floor.
**SNIP**
“The pub was temporarily closed while he was finalizing a new lease, and during this handover period, a gang of professional squatters somehow bypassed all the security and CCTV, and got themselves in.
“They’ve now boarded themselves in the building and are slowly taking over the place, leaving their crap everywhere and brazenly telling locals this is now their home.
“They’ve glued tight all the locks and are cooking up a storm in the kitchen, which is especially galling for Gordon.”
The insider said there are at least six “professional squatters” — five men and one woman — living inside the restaurant and its attached bedrooms.
“God knows the damage and filth,” said the source.
Ramsay has reportedly called police to obtain an eviction notice, “but it’s proving an absolute nightmare.”
The squatters themselves have threatened legal action against anyone that tries to force them out.
Calling themselves “The Occupiers,” the group slapped a notice on the front door claiming they are entitled to stay in the pub because it “is a non-residential building.”
“Take notice that we occupy this property and at all times there is at least one person in occupation,” the notice reads.
“That if you attempt to enter by violence or by threatening violence we will prosecute you … You may receive a sentence of up to six months imprisonment and/or a fine of up to £5,000 ($6,200)”
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
CHOOT ‘Em JACOB!!!!! CHOOT ‘EM!!!
“The American version of common law would almost certainly favor the homeowner.”
Guess again. There isn’t a state in the USA where killing a burglar with a booby trap wouldn’t get you charged with at the very minimum manslaughter and more likely murder.
Seal them in...airtight.
Or
Pump in skunk smell.
Or
Lots of loud rock music.
Or
Promise a big party...all free... if the pub ... somehow ... got back under control by a certain date.
Since squatters also often use various lies and tricks to delay court cases, the owner suffers expense and delay. Indeed, there are cases in which the squatters counter-sue and impose on the owners additional complications and the risk of a judgment against them. For owners unfamiliar with the legal system this tends to be frustrating and worrisome.
What the hell?
“He’s pretty liberal tho.”
There a good chance he won’t be a month from now.
I’d like to think that our local sheriff here in TN would take action against squatters. Guess we should give him a call and confirm it.
Not in GB...
Maybe a couple knives...
As for civil liability, although traps against trespassers are illegal, potentially injurious defenses like electrified fences and barbed wire are usually not. Moreover, even when there is a trap and it is found illegal, landowners in the US are generally not liable to those who trespass with criminal intent like a burglar.
In American law, the resolution of cases with conflict in principles usually require a close weighing of disputed facts. Since a defendant property owner would have a right to a jury trial as to disputed facts, a claim based on a burglar trap can be expected to go to a jury -- most of whom will be fellow property owners. There are few personal injury lawyers who would take on such a chancy case.
In Florida, local legislative delegations routinely hold hearings that offer an opportunity for the public to raise issues for potential legislative action. I know of numerous instances in which a well-stated presentation of an issue of public concern by a single person or small group of citizens has prompted legislative action.
In your favor would be that a remedy for the squatter problem would not require an appropriation or impinge on a powerful interest. Indeed, there are few legislators who would not want to protect property owners, so legislation against squatting would be favorable to a powerful interest group -- property owners -- with members that range from the wealthy to those of modest means.
“ intent by the landowner to kill or do great bodily harm.”
I’m fairly certain a prosecutor could show intent to kill or do great bodily harm by the very existence of a lethal mantrap. And your nonsequitor about fences is irrelevant. Barbed wire and electric fences are NOT lethal traps. You have a right to defend yourself with lethal force when you have a reasonable expectation that a forcible felony is gone to be committed against you or someone else. You don’t have the right to set lethal mantraps.
I sincerely you should be allowed to shoot and kill squatters along with looters and protestors blocking streets. Climate cultist should be high on the list as well.
For example, I am familiar with a criminal case in Miami in which the owner of a much-burglarized appliance store electrified a metal air vent and a metal grate that was inside the store below the vent. The air vent was the burglars' usual means of access.
One night a burglar died when he was trying to leave with a large TV set. He fumbled with the load and died when he fell against the electrified grate with the TV on top of him.
Since the appliance store owner was Cuban and the burglar was black, the local news media was all over the case. The State Attorney investigated and put the case before the grand jury. The appliance store owner was not indicted.
Why? The electric charge was potentially unpleasant but was not enough to deter the burglar from using his bare hands and a crow bar to pry off the metal air vent to enter the building. Nor did the electric charge keep the burglar from crawling bare handed onto the metal grate to complete his entry.
As a professor of electrical engineering testified, the circuit could not even deliver enough electric charge to injure or kill before the fuse burned out. And the medical examiner testified that while there were no electrical burns on the burglar's body, but he had a lethal combination of heart disease and cocaine in his system. The cause of death was a heart attack, not electrocution.
It is time to drag the damn politicians, DAs, and law enforcement from their chambers, offices, court rooms and homes for the old Tar and Feathering... and hanging on a lamp post in the public square as a reminder to all their own illegal activities cannot be covered up by misdirection.
who_would_fardels_bear wrote:
“The solution should be that if a property is not occupied by the owner, by a business paying rent, or by a tenant paying rent for a specified amount of time, then the property can be condemned and auctioned off.”
Well, that just seems silly. Who will determine how long it must be vacant? The government? And, what of basic property rights? We are already hammered by infringement that has creeped into our system over the last 150+ years; and, yet, you want more?
Nah, better that we UNDO laws that favor squatting and recognize it for what it is...stealing, theft. And, property owners should be granted wide latitude in removing the criminals.
Exactly.
*Squatting* is theft.
That said, now that it has happened to someone rich and famous, watch something be done about it.
And what arrogance on the part of the squatters. But it’s hardly unexpected when you coddle criminals.
There are lots of people who own season al use places. That would be a real infringement on their rights.
I guess you have something against private property use. Your restrictions are also too vague and broad and allow for illegal government seizure of property.
There are lots of people who own season al use places. That would be a real infringement on their rights.
I guess you have something against private property use. Your restrictions are also too vague and broad and allow for illegal government seizure of property.
Cute rationalization for outright THEFT!
The only time a topic is *controversial* is when the left opposes it.
Then they label it as such, even when it's not.
We need to stop accepting that label for hot button , common sense laws that everyone is behind except for the leftists who want to destroy our country.
People have the right to defend themselves and their property and do NOT have a *duty to retreat* in order to protect the criminal.
If anyone has a duty to retreat, it's the criminal who is breaking the law.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.