Visual Art
Dec 24, 2011 at 2:25 pm
Comments
Please wait...
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
More In Visual Art
Popular Articles
is a proud member of the
media network
media network
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
They were given a key and an address by an anonymous benefactor, and they somehow think that entitles them to enter and deface the property?
Our Occupy "movement" is a fucking joke!
-a guy who knows an elf
Only 0.1% of America supports you. The rest of the 99% tells you to fuck off.
Btw did the little elf look like Jennifer Fox's mystery fetus?
Regardless of ownership. If people were residing in the house and there was not probable cause, such as immediate evidence of breaking and entering or another crime, the police would need a warrant to enter.
In order to evict the occupants of a structure the owner would need to go through the formal eviction process, like what is happening at the Immortal Jellyfish house on 23rd and Alder.
However a few steps must be taken to establish residence, like mail being sent in your name, utility bills, coming and going through the front door (however while it is illegal to break in, it is not illegal to enter through previous vandalism, basically act like anyone else who lives in a house etc.
This seems like a very heavy handed police response, especially with some of the other crap that happens in the neighborhood. In fact there is a crack house by my workplace that the cops would not enter because they said they needed the permission of the owner.
Squatters or not like all Americans they are entitled to equal protection under the law, which includes not having AR15 wielding police kick in you door in the middle of the night without a warrant.
Do your research kids.
Don't flatter yourself.
Try and pick up the pieces with Fiona and Sam.
As always, too much bullshit on the internet. If people occupy my house--or any privately held house--and don't have a legal right to be there (tenant contract)--you don't need any eviction process. If some guy takes up residence in my yard, shed or garage? Please, I call the cops and they bust him out on trespassing on the spot if he doesn't leave. There is no right to squat or trespass. If you have permission, and are a tenant--yes, eviction process.
The only questions here are:
1. Did the person who owns the house or has the legal right to allow someone to live there allow the Occupiers in as a guest?
If "yes", they have every right to be there UNTIL that person asks them to leave, or per the terms of their contract, if there is one.
If "no", whomever gave them the keys fucked up, and they were straight up trespassing and could be arrested on the spot.
2. Did that person ask the police to kick them out?
If "yes", SPD are legally fine.
If "no", Seattle Police really fucked up and violated people's Constitutional rights. Only the owner/person with those rights can do this.
That's what matters.
I'm all for the Occupy movement, but squatting in private homes is a different can of worms. Lots of these houses in various stages of un-occupied ownership are in various phases of sales. There's one in the city, for example, that my family is in the process of buying to live in. It looks vacant. If the Occupiers went in there and fucked up the house or even modified anything, I'd be furious and demanding that the realtors call SPD to kick them out. Your good natured help might be costing some poor incoming future homeowner thousands of dollars in clean up, flooring, painting, whatever else.
Private houses are a whole other can of worms from public spaces.
307 23rd avenue, seattle, WA 98122
Here is the King County records page: http://info.kingcounty.gov/Assessor/eRea…
More records: http://info.kingcounty.gov/Assessor/eRea…
Walter Lewis (whomever that is) or Chase Bank (yes, I know, fuck them) are the only ones who can give permission to move in there.
What part of the site says it's been vacant since 2008?
My point stands, though -- just because something is bank owned doesn't mean it's a candidate for Occupation, because you could be just fucking a little guy in the process. My hopefully future house is unoccupied and has been since summer, but if Occupy Seattle found it, they may think, "Hey this would be a great base for people to stay between protests," and they may modify it. Well, sucks for me, deep in the 99% then. The damn thing aside from a changed kitchen floor was move in ready. Now I get to undo anything the Occupiers did!
Do we know Walter Lewis is taking a bath on this house? Does he stand to lose nothing, or to lose something from this? Is he OK with it? The point is that even if it's occupied, it's not like it's hard to track down the actual former/current owner to see if they may be screwed somehow by the occupation. Some people may not be totally foreclosed or underwater, but the possible damage/modifications by occupation could still cost them.
Regardless of ownership. If people were residing in the house and there was not probable cause, such as immediate evidence of breaking and entering or another crime, the police would need a warrant to enter.
In order to evict the occupants of a structure the owner would need to go through the formal eviction process, like what is happening at the Immortal Jellyfish house on 23rd and Alder.
However a few steps must be taken to establish residence, like mail being sent in your name, utility bills, coming and going through the front door (however while it is illegal to break in, it is not illegal to enter through previous vandalism, basically act like anyone else who lives in a house etc.
This seems like a very heavy handed police response, especially with some of the other crap that happens in the neighborhood. In fact there is a crack house by my workplace that the cops would not enter because they said they needed the permission of the owner.
Squatters or not like all Americans they are entitled to equal protection under the law, which includes not having AR15 wielding police kick in you door in the middle of the night without a warrant.
They "planned a waterfall down the staircase" - man, grow up. I haven't visited the place at 23rd and Alder in a while but, damn, talk about an eyesore. And the name "Immortal Jellyfish" - yeah, you dolts really seem like a lot who should be taken seriously.
I really like what the other poster said about the "art" you've decided to provide the neighborhood. Did you take a poll to see how the surrounding blocks feel about it? Also, sorry to burst your bubble but it's not very good.
http://info.kingcounty.gov/Assessor/eRea…
And thanks for referring us to look on Publicola, Phil. Jonah's story does have some other detail, doesn't it? I look forward to learning whether it turns out to be as inaccurate as you say. Pretty scandalous if so, it's very inflammatory:http://publicola.com/2011/12/24/police-a…
Fucking baffling. Journalism 101.
@18 If people occupy my house--or any privately held house--and don't have a legal right to be there (tenant contract)--you don't need any eviction process.
Yes if you are occupying the residence, someone ca nnot live in your shed, also if you were the owner you could hire private security to evict the tenants or have the police kick people out if they had not established residency.
Squatting is leagal, the legal term is adverse posession and it applies in WA state as follows:
In Washington State, the elements that must be met to have a claim of adverse possession are as followes:
The possession must be..........
1. Exclusive. Only you, or people authorized by you, can have possession of the land in question for the required period of possession (which is 10 years). Courts have ruled that the possession does not have to be absolutely exclusive, so you will want to discuss your particular situation with an attorney (see below).
2. Actual and uninterrupted. That means that you actually have possession and control over the land in question, and that possession is not interrupted by an adversary.
3. Open and notorious. An adversary must be aware that his land is being taken. But you don't have to write the landowner, or anything like that. Your possession must be in a manner that is overt, not covert.
4. Hostile. That means that you treat the land in question as your own, and defend it against the world. Adverse possession is not created when you have the permission of the landowner to use his land (so a long-term tenant cannot claim adverse possession).
Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_la…
Regardless of permission of the owner The police would need a warrant to enter as rights to entry are held by the occupant not the owner rental contract or not. Like how a landlord can not enter your apartment without permission. Shit even crack houses tend to have a warrant issued before they are raided.
If SPD did not seek a warrant before this raid the occupants rights were violated.
http://www.centraldistrictnews.com/2011/…
Wrong. All it takes is a realtor or annoyed neighbor calling in. Bang, there's your probable cause. And there is no "regardless of ownership". Property law is extremely potent. If some guy camps or occupies my or your yard, they have zero claim or right to it.
This is pure bullshit. Go camp someone's detached garage without their permission. Let us know how long it takes the cuffs to come on when you don't leave and they call the cops to report an intruder.
Gee, I can't imagine where the DOJ got the idea that Seattle police use excessive force.
Crack houses get warrants as a legal CYA and because ownership is often muddled; they're derelict houses most often.
Seriously, go break into someone's fucking garage and camp out while they're on vacation, or have moved into another house or something. When they return and find you and call 911, I can guarantee you 101% that SPD will arrest you, cuff you, book you on trespassing if the homeowners say you're trespassing, and haul you and your shit out of that garage, and you'll have 0.00% legal recourse in the matter.
Yes, it IS SHOCKING....and the banks do it every Friday on the courthouse steps. They have NO AUTHORITY ON TITLE and they are literally stealing homes from homeowners without recourse.
You people are shocked by Occupiers doing the same thing? Pull your heads out.
Why do you refuse to abide the laws outlined both by the RCW and the Constitution of the United states
As I already stated breaking into the garage of an occupied residence is not the same and taking up residence in a VACANT house. Also a neighbor cannot institute a police raid based on being annoyed, they could have the police drive by and knock on the door, like for a noise complaint, but the police cannot enter the residence. The people residing there must be formally evicted just like if they were tenants who quit paying rent.
http://www.ehow.com/how_8478926_evict-sq…
Even with the garage example there could still be some issues evicting the residents as the linked article explains
http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2009/ap…
You people are stupid beyond belief.
These are the same morons who walk down Pike St yelling "everything for everyone". Paying 'rent' is for squares.
As usual, things are never so clear cut. I'm as fucking liberal as people can be 99% of the time, but my point stands: go break into someone's garage as a stranger, with no permission implied or otherwise, when they're on vacation. If the neighbors call it in as a break in, it's a break in. If I call it in when I come home and find your camping gear in my garage, it's a break in and jail. If I or someone in my family gives implied permission? Whole can of worms open and it's a civil matter then.
As a patriotic, gun toting American who supports capitalism, I am opposed to most of what occupy believes in, however they still have rights.
You can't burglarize a vacant empty house and the definition for burglary entails intent to commit a crime against the persons or property that reside there. You cannot charge someone for trespassing without first contacting the owner to see if the person is not supposed to be there. Typical dipshit liberal.
BTW how do we 'decolonize' Seattle? Do I have to give my house keys to the next drunk Indian I see and catch a flight back to Dublin?
Can someone explain?
I'm sorry your having to deal with this on Christmas Eve.
Solidarity from Oakland and Merry Christmas XoXo
You think property is more important than human life, point blank. You are sick.
You think property is more important than human life, point blank. You are sick.
I might be reading the wrong news reports, but my impression is that our modern radicals aren't entirely agreed on this strategy of meekly surrendering en masse whenever two beat cops and a meter maid show up and politely ask everyone to vacate an Occupied space.
Since #os has decided they reserve the right to use violence to further their ends, I understand the PD sending in whatever forces they feel necessary to ensure their own safety.
from the WA state code please? A link in the RCW? They must be in our code somewhere since you capitalized them!
By whom? An elf? Jennifer Fox's imaginary fetus friend? Santa Claus?
Add me to the list of people interested in knowing which laws you've got in mind that would compel a judge to throw out trespassing charges against squatters.
I'm guessing this "Squatters Rights Law" is a bit of an intellectual figment cobbled together from obsolete homesteading laws from the 1800s plus unusual interpretations of the constitution.
We saw this sort of legal "expertise" in the claims of some Occupiers that permanent camping on public land is "constitutionally protected speech," or that clearing an ad-hoc, non-permitted crowd out of an intersection is a violation of the right to peaceably assemble.
There's a long history of Anarchists pursuing both squatting and squatters' rights. I'm sure there are well-established law-flavored arguments within that movement, but I think we'll find they don't square too well with current statute, or court precedent, at least in the US.
Shame this isn't one of those cases eh? What does a middle class college kid have to do to get 'oppressed' in Seattle? Ride a bike? Be an anarchist? Act like a wigga?
You've almost got it-- an anonymous "elf" gave them a key, which they then used to break in and take over the house.
I think some people are terribly confused by the fact that entry was gained with a magical christmas key, instead of a sledgehammer. A copy of an emergency key held by a friend or neighbor of a former occupant is a quite a bit less than a document that allows you to lawfully move into an empty home.
But you're artists, you're special. Hell, it almost makes you black and oppressed!
This could have been staged to create a precedent-setting court case.
The cops may have been a little heavy-handed, but the moral of the story is don't just take a key anonymously donated to you as an indication that the owner has given permission to enter their house. If you're occupying as some sort of protest, or guerilla art project, then be ready for the legal repercussions.
http://info.kingcounty.gov/Assessor/eRea…
https://payments.kingcounty.gov/metrokc.…
As for its status as abandoned vs. "under remodeling" or whatnot, the DPD website shows no permits for any remodeling for that address. In fact, the most recent entry DPD has for that address is a 2009 resolved complaint about a couple doors being "open to entry" at what is described as this "vacant building".
http://web1.seattle.gov/DPD/permitstatus…
Best I can tell, it's a long-vacant property an old couple in Renton have owned free and clear for a long, long time. It's possible they are Occupy-supporting oldsters like Dorli Rainey, and one of them slipped the key to an Occupier. But it seems pretty likely one of their kids (or even grandkids) had an extra key made for a lark, and when a neighbor called to say there were squatters the owners called the cops and then gave their kid a Christmas yelling.
I don't think you get it at all. You definitely don't understand keys-- they don't mystically confer the right to enter a building. And:
Teabaggers are property rights fetishists. They'd never squat an empty home as a protest. But if they did, you can bet your boots the cops would raid it, no matter how many rifles they had in there with them.
In fact, if you had any interest in events outside your information containment sphere, you'd know that there's no shortage of examples in recent history of feds and cops raiding heavily-armed right-wing nutjobs.
"Rise Up and Take Back What They Stole From You"
at Spruce Park on 20th and Spruce? I mean, we're entering the Fox News Israeli fetish zone in the protection of historically Jewish property. Where do you want the African Americans, non-Jewish whites, Latinos, Ethiopians, Buddhists etc to go? Kent? Don't you want to try to get to know me and my family first? Does it make your life easier to view the world in black and white (or Jewish and non-Jewish)?
We're not rich. We barely get by. We give our time and money to our community. We've known our neighbors for decades. Why do you hate us?
So tell me again, how is this moron being 'oppressed'?
Don't you understand she's fighting for YOU? Being 24, she TOTALLY understands the complicated geopolitical and economic nuances of a multicultural global economy now because her community college teacher explained it to her. You just don't 'get' it.
SHE is stepping up to take direct action in your name. You are just ungrateful because you can't see that she's effecting WORLDWIDE CHANGE with poster paint murals and ALMOST coming close to being totes arrested that one time before she left to make sure the camp was okay.
Her boyfriend John aka 'whiteleaf' agrees that they have 'won a victory' because people are TALKING ABOUT IT NOW. Despite the fact we have all been talking about it for the last year...NOW we are TALKING ABOUT IT, man. Don't you get it? Can't you see how important token rebellious action completely peripheral to the real current of social and economic change in this country is? Come on man go outside and do something USELESS!
so looking at the washington law on how to get people out a place.. 72 hour evictoin no matter what. this is your taxpayers money well spent right...???so as a person i know this really i know don't talk to police.. they will lie to get something on you!!! uncle of waterhouse on 1909.. thank you for reading this..;-)