Second Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UClTjur-9cx8Bb4MW8r0K6xw

Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/audittheaudit

Twitter: https://twitter.com/AuditTheAudit

Submit your videos here: auditheaudit@gmail.com

Sponsorship inquiries: audit@ellify.com

Welcome to Audit the Audit, where we sort out the who and what and the right and wrong of police interactions. Help us grow and educate more citizens and officers on the proper officer interaction conduct by liking this video and/or subscribing.

This video is for educational purposes and is in no way intended to provoke, incite, or shock the viewer. This video was created to educate citizens on constitutionally protected activities and emphasize the importance that legal action plays in constitutional activism.

Bear in mind that the facts presented in my videos are not indicative of my personal opinion, and I do not always agree with the outcome, people, or judgements of any interaction. My videos should not be construed as legal advice, they are merely a presentation of facts as I understand them.

FAIR USE
This video falls under fair use protection as it has been manipulated for educational purposes with the addition of commentary. This video is complementary to illustrate the educational value of the information being delivered through the commentary and has inherently changed the value, audience and intention of the original video.

Original video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVEOnSXj2SY

SideWalks22’s channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC63FxBY6beoMzUAuHILhwww

Sources:

The Ebell of Los Angeles- https://bit.ly/3cTQfma

Los Angeles Municipal Code § 41.20- https://bit.ly/3vwZ5g0

Street Closure Provisions and Application Procedures- https://bit.ly/3vx64Wm
Cal. Pen. Code § 602- https://bit.ly/3zs5Mkz

James v. City of Long Beach- https://bit.ly/3oMTyyo

Cal. Pen. Code § 242- https://bit.ly/3zOwsNS

People v. Rocha- https://bit.ly/3ORzu8g

Power to Arrest Training Manual- https://bit.ly/3Bx4cR8

CALCRIM No. 3475. Right to Eject Trespasser From Real Property- https://bit.ly/3BwS1Uw

source

By elboriyorker

HOSTING BY PHILLYFINESTSERVERSTAT | ANGELHOUSE © 2009 - 2024 | ALL YOUTUBE VIDEOS IS A REGISTERED TRADEMARK OF GOOGLE INC. THE YOUTUBE CHANNELS AND BLOG FEEDS IS MANAGED BY THERE RIGHTFUL OWNERS. POST QUESTION OR INQUIRIES SEND ME AN EMAIL TO elboriyorkeratgmailcom (www.phillyfinest369.com)

36 thoughts on “Security Guard Thinks He OWNS The Sidewalk”
  1. You gave a "C-" to a person who committed battery?! And a "B+" to the victim who asserted his rights? This is a terrible grade. Are you even trying to be impartial?

  2. Ok but why are you trolling security guards? This is why you came to America, to fuck with people at work? Wonder what would happen to him where he's from.

  3. This security guard is totally in the wrong. They have a certain Area they cannot close off the whole entire sidewalk. Curity guards cannot in public on a public sidewalk, touch, push punch, kick or assault anybody nor can I tell them them where they can, and cannot stand this photographer right now, has full rights to defend himself using whatever force is necessary. OK so the narrator is completely and totally wrong. If there is a privately owned property, they can be trespassed from the property. That is a public sidewalk they cannot, legally trespass you from a public sidewalk. If this generator wants to quotelaws, they need to stop nitpicking certain areas and miss quoting the law. Once, again, that security guard was in the wrong that cameraman was not on the property. He was on a public sidewalk for the public. They cannot shut down a tire sidewalk just because. Once again, the narrator is picking and choosing what he wants to read and see. At no time was that cameraman on private property he was on a public sidewalk the security guard, cannot force him off of the
    Public sidewalk, and he cannot use any force. That is called assault and battery, but the narrator of this channel will not tell you that. I give the security supervisor F- for his actions, I give the cameraman A+ well, the way he handled this situation. I gave the narrator of this channel a C – for the way you missed informed the public on laws .

  4. The sidewalk is "closed" to the public where the sign says it's closed. You can't trespass someone from a location because there's a trespass sign 100' further down. This isn't complicated. Clear F.

  5. If the entire sidewalk is restricted for one person you should make it fair and have the same conditions for others in that area. Also, anyone in that situation would believe there should be a restricted gate around the area not just a small section.

  6. I'm sorry but the guy filming is a jackass, people with nothing better to do that just want to cause trouble and get publicity. Is sidewalk is closed, the guy is telling you to leave, you're sitting there telling him he has bad breath? These are the same people that walk around looking to cause problems and get a reaction and then get a lawsuit and get paid. This whole country is going down the toilet!

  7. Why didn't he ask why the barrier was not extended to the end of the sidewalk? Common sense (yeah) would indicate the sidewalk was closed at the point the barrier began, not the point leading up to the barrier.

  8. There is no provision in California Law for a plainclothes security officer to wear or display a badge. This guy is a police impersonator.

  9. The security supervisor had a “ cop attitude “ if the side was officially closed at a defined point ( as with the signage ) then ALL persons should have been asked to leave not just the man with the camera . If the defined point WAS the fire hydrant then why weren’t the signs at that point ?

Comments are closed.