Leaderboard 728 X 90

Thursday, February 2, 2017

State of Missouri claims my wife was trespassing on property we were legally renting, where a scheduled eviction had been stayed by our notice of appeal


Carol Tovich Shuler
The case against my wife, Carol, for trespass might be even weaker than the one for "assault on a law enforcement officer" -- and that is saying something.

To grasp the absurdity of this charge, we will examine the relevant Missouri law on the subject -- Trespass, First Degree ( Misdemeanor B RSMo: 569.140). Here's how the statute reads:

Trespass in the first degree--penalty

569.140. 1. A person commits the offense of trespass in the first degree if he or she knowingly enters unlawfully or knowingly remains unlawfully in a building or inhabitable structure or upon real property.

2. A person does not commit the offense of trespass in the first degree by entering or remaining upon real property unless the real property is fenced or otherwise enclosed in a manner designed to exclude intruders or as to which notice against trespass is given by:

(1) Actual communication to the actor; or

(2) Posting in a manner reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders.

3. The offense of trespass in the first degree is a class B misdemeanor.

What about item No. 1? We were scheduled for eviction when landlord Trent Cowherd tried to kick us out by violating the lease. A trial court ruled in Cowherd's favor, but we timely filed a notice of appeal, within the 10-day window allowed under Missouri tenant/landlord law. That puts an automatic stay on execution of the eviction. I'm not aware of anyone who has seriously tried to dispute that these are the facts and law of the situation.

Even Jim Arnott, sheriff of Greene County, did not dispute it when I tried to explain the law to him on the day of our unlawful eviction. Arnott repeatedly turned his palms upward and shrugged his shoulders as I talked. But he never said a word to dispute what I was saying.

This means Carol lawfully was on the property and lawfully remained on the property, until she was carted off to the Greene County Jail when a deputy shattered her arm, and Arnott falsely claimed she had assaulted said officer.

We also encounter the word "knowingly" here, which we addressed in yesterday's post about the assault charge. Did Carol know she unlawfully was entering, or remaining on, the property? Absolutely not. She knew we had timely filed a notice of appeal and paid the proper fees because she was with me. She knew how the law read about a stay of execution because I showed it to her.

Bottom line: The state has no case under prong No. 1 of the law.

What about prong No. 2. This doesn't apply for several reasons: (1) The property was not fenced or enclosed in any manner; (2) This section appears to apply to non-residents who, for whatever reason, accidentally wander onto a piece of land where they don't belong.

This was not about a "trespass" on land. Carol lived there, inside the building. Her rent had been paid until Cowherd's people essentially told me to stop paying it because we were being kicked out regardless. Carol had been a model tenant -- even Cowherd's representatives never stated otherwise -- and any planned eviction had been stayed, by law, with notice provided to all lawyers involved.

So, prong No. 2 is a complete washout for the state.

Back to the bottom line: The State of Missouri has not even a sniff of a case, for assault or trespass, against Carol Tovich Shuler. And yet, she is having to waste her time and energy going to court to defend against charges that, just on the surface, have no basis in fact or law.

In fact, the state had no grounds to arrest Carol for alleged "failure to appear" either, adding to the gross abuse that is present in this matter. We will address that in an upcoming post.

(To be continued)

26 comments:

Anonymous said...

I learn something new here every day, it seems. Now I know you can be charged with trespassing at an apartment you have lawfully been renting for months. Who knew?

Anonymous said...

It seems to me that someone was desperate about something. Sheriffs deal with evictions all the time, and they should know the law on filing a notice of appeal and creation of a stay. They should know that this can happen, and they should be prepared to cool their heels and let the legal process play out.

Anonymous said...

Very strange that the sheriff himself was present for an eviction.

legalschnauzer said...

@12:47 --

It is strange, but I think Arnott was there for a reason. I think the plan from the outset was to rough up one of us, and that probably was supposed to be me. They said I could enter the apartment to retrieve personal belongings once Carol was done. That would have put me out of sight inside with multiple cops, and I think they would have beaten me up and charged me with some loon-ass crime. They didn't count on this one nut-job going insane and assaulting Carol. But I think Arnott was there to be the "voice of God" who declared that I was beaten because I had resisted or asked a questions or some such nonsense. Unfortunately, it was Carol who wound up taking the damage. Arnott probably didn't want one of his deputies to be in the position of creating bogus crimes, but Arnott was more than willing to be the crook.

Anonymous said...

I don't understand why they didn't charge you with trespass. You were there, too, right?

Anonymous said...

Yes, I was there, and I don't understand either why I wasn't charged with trespass. Not that either one of us actually trespassed, but the powers that be can't even be consistent in screwing with people.

Anonymous said...

Did the cops know Carol's arm was broken?

legalschnauzer said...

@2:56 --

Oh yes, they know her arm was broken. Dep. Scott Harrison took Carol to jail, and when Carol mentioned her extreme pain to someone, Harrison drove her to a nearby hospital for X-rays, and he was right there when word came back that Carol's arm was broken. Harrison definitely knows, and assuming he communicated this to Arnott, the chieftains know.

legalschnauzer said...

Here is a new report about an FBI investigation on the infiltration of white supremacists in law enforcement. I've seen enough in Alabama and Missouri to believe this issue is very real.

https://theintercept.com/2017/01/31/the-fbi-has-quietly-investigated-white-supremacist-infiltration-of-law-enforcement/

Anonymous said...

It isn't up to the sheriff, or his deputy, to decide if an eviction, or any court order, was properly issued.

If the court issued an eviction order to the sheriff, then the sheriff has the obligation to execute the order unless he is issued a stay by the court. Arguing that a stay is automatic is a very different thing than a stay being issued.

Once the sheriff, or one of the deputies, has an eviction order, the eviction can take place. Once an eviction begins, tenants remaining on the property are trespassing. It does not matter if the court erred, or intentionally issued the order in violation of the law. That is not a matter to be argued or settle on the spot.



legalschnauzer said...

@8:0 --

I'm not really interested in your opinion of what Missouri law is. I know what it is, and you should to if you bothered to check the links in this post. We followed the law to a "T," and still got abused by cops. On top of that, evictions across the state are entrusted to sheriffs, so it only seems reasonable that Arnott and others have an obligation to know what the law is. We elect people with brains, not potted plants, to be sheriff. As for you, you are flat-out wrong, which tells me you intentionally are trying to muddy the water on an issue you know zip about.

Anonymous said...

I know you are wrong, too, @8:08. Missouri law says nothing can happen regarding an eviction within a 10-day window. As LS has reported, and records show, Arnott and his thugs arrived on the ninth day of a 10-day window. So regardless of the stay, the eviction was unlawfully conducted. A sheriff cannot violate a clearly established constitutional right, and I would argue Arnott should have known the Shulers have a right to due process of the law and equal protection. Your notion that a sheriff has to carry out anything a judge sticks in front of him is not supported by law. Plus, it's not clear a judge stuck anything in front of him. LS has reported that he asked to see an order, and Arnott said it was in his vehicle and never showed it.

legalschnauzer said...

As you state, @8:36, Arnott never showed us an order. We did receive a notice attached to the door several days earlier, and it was not signed by a judge. If that's what he had, he had no valid order. The only signature I recall on that notice was from Gerald Lowther, the landlord's lawyer. Again, all of that is beside the point, since they were inside the 10-day window and the case was stayed under our notice of appeal.

Anonymous said...

This is not going to end well or the way you think. Get a lawyer for Carol. Shut up about what she said or did, or what you said or did or observed anyone else doing. You are hurting someone you claim to love.

Anonymous said...

Roger we're trying to get through to you. You won't listen. We want to help. Please let us help.

legalschnauzer said...

@1:40 --

You are free to help me all you want. Contact me via email at rshuler3156@gmail.com. We can set up a time to talk.

legalschnauzer said...

10:54 --

See the response to @1:40 above. I'm easy to reach.

Anonymous said...

LS: Do I detect a link between this latest harassment of you and Carol by the authorities and the latest news on the Bentley-Becky saga?

https://www.facebook.com/donald.v.watkins?hc_ref=NEWSFEED&fref=nf

e.a.f. said...

These cops are all very weird. One does ask, what was in it to break a woman's arm, especially a middle aged, non aggressive one. Now either these cops have a record of doing this kind of damage, or if they don't and this is a relatively new activity, I'd suggest its reasonable to conclude they did this on some one's direction. Perhaps they FBI has more information on this particular police force or their might be records regarding violence and this police force.

Arresting Carol just seems a waste of time and tax payer's money. hey, they've pursued you and Carol more figerously that they do some murderers, bank robbers, drug dealers, etc. What gives? O.K. we have a fair idea of the answer.

legalschnauzer said...

@4:15 --

Yes, I think you do detect such a link, probably because it's there

legalschnauzer said...

e.a.f. --

Thanks for thoughtful comment. It's interesting to go to Web page for Greene County, MO Web site and their list of active warrants. They go on and on, must be several thousand. Out of all that, they seek to enforce a "warrant" against Carol, for an offense she did not commit, where there isn't even probable cause, and the warrant was unlawfully issued to a party who, the court admits, did not receive notice of a court date.

Anonymous said...

Roger, how is Sessions communicating with the cops that arrested you wife? Do these people have a secure communications method they use to plan their moves against you?

I'm wondering if there is some strategic hacking that can be done to rip the lid of this. There must be a trail!

legalschnauzer said...

@2:33 --

I don't know. That's the kind of thing they try to hide from me. I should say that I doubt it is Sessions personally communicating with Missouri cops, but he has plenty of surrogates who could act on his behalf. It might be as simple as a few phone calls or emails.

Anonymous said...

Who are these surrogates? Any idea of their names, positions, etc? I would expect a bunch of Sessions' people are getting shot up the food chain with rockets on their backs! iT's time they came crashing down to earth.

I think it would be very useful to start naming names. If we can determine who is likely talking to the cops, we can make a lot of progress in terms of finding out what they are saying and to whom. They think they have secure communications, but they don't.

legalschnauzer said...

For now, I can only guess at possible surrogates. Jessica Medeiros Garrison and Cliff Sims are two who come readily to mind. Does that mean they've actually taken underhanded actions on Sessions' and/or Pryor's behalf? Don't have an answer on that one yet.

Stephen Miller is another Sessions surrogate, but it sounds like he's been busy writing many of the ridiculous executive orders that Trump has issued.

Anonymous said...

Well I want to do some digging. This last attack on Carol is too much for me and I think many others here. We have come to see you and your wife as family. You're fighting to protect us... all of us. And people don't even know your names. It's terrible.

All that said, it's time we named the people who are coordinating these attacks against you. It must be people close to Sessions... those people cannot hide. Perhaps Sessions has a bagman of sorts... someone who does his dirty tricks. Probably a personal assistant and long-time VERY loyal staffer. Not prominent but consistent. We'll know which one of his toadies it is once we see his new staff list. At least ONE name will stand out. Folks, let's get on it!

I think we need to pull together and get this done. It's risky in a number of ways, but enough is enough. If they broke Carol's arm and are now attempting to imprison you both, we're in a whole new territory, aren't we? I don't want to think about what is next.