Advice for a practicioner of Parkour

Jpof

Dear legal experts,

Some of you may have heard of the discipline of parkour, also known as "the art of movement" or the closely-related art of free-running. Please see the wikipedia entry for a better description, or you can just watch this video.

Please skip to the questions at the bottom if you are not interested in the "background".

---

Anyway, I was practicing parkour tonight with a friend in a local college campus. We soon met a few security guards who asked us to get down from a high wall we were walking along.

My experience to date has been to be polite and accomodating when moved on, so I jumped down for a discussion. The guards were affable and simply asked us to move along.

Then their boss turned up. I told her we were about to leave the area, but she asked me for my name, address and phone number. As I walked away, she told one of the guards to stop me. He barred my way and not wishing to cause any violence I went back to speak with her.

She threw out words like "trespass", "private property" and "police". I gave her a fake name, address and phone number. She asked me to produce ID, which I refused to do. When I tried to walk away, another of the guards grabbed my shirt and threatened me with a choice of the police or handing over my wallet.

I must admit I was intimidated at the time, so I handed over a purse which contained bus tickets and money, but luckily no ID!

After a little more hassle, we were told to leave. One of the reasonable guards walked with us, and advised us "You are young and in good condition, so next time, no questions, you just RUN"... made my night, nice guy.

---

Questions:
1) Should I have remained silent? Not answered any of the security guard's questions?
2) Is a security guard allowed to search me or my wallet?
3) What "powers" does a security guard have? is that the right word?

On a broader scale...

4) Am I legally allowed train on campus, which is supposedly a private place?

I think that's all for now, thank you very much for your opinions. Please ask if further clarification is needed, I know I may not be making sense and my knowledge of legal terms is pretty shallow.

John

seamus

I'm going to leave this open as it would appear that you're looking for a legal perspective on this, and not looking for legal advice in regards to legal action you would like to take, or legal action that's pending. Please confirm this for me.

Jpof wrote:

Questions:
1) Should I have remained silent? Not answered any of the security guard's questions?

That's your choice. You are under no obligation to answer the security guard's questions.

2) Is a security guard allowed to search me or my wallet?

No, never. Not without your permission.

3) What "powers" does a security guard have? is that the right word?

A security guard is hired by the property owner to act as an agent on their behalf. The security guard has the same powers as the property owner, and that's about it. That is, they may ask you to leave, they may call the Gardai, and they may act to defend the property. They do not have the power to detain you on the property until the Gardai arrive.

4) Am I legally allowed train on campus, which is supposedly a private place?

Nope. Not really. What you are doing is basically trespass.

maidhc

seamus wrote:

A security guard is hired by the property owner to act as an agent on their behalf. The security guard has the same powers as the property owner, and that's about it. That is, they may ask you to leave, they may call the Gardai, and they may act to defend the property. They do not have the power to detain you on the property until the Gardai arrive.

They may use reasonable force to remove you from the property if you are committing a trespass. They cannot block your way, take your wallet, nor do you have to tell them who you are, nor can they detain you for any reason.

seamus wrote:

Nope. Not really. What you are doing is basically trespass.

Whether it is, or is not a trespass is not that obvious. A college campus is normally a place open to the public, and I know in UCC skateboarders and the like are tolerated in small doses before they are asked to move along. People with no connection walk through the place every day, and as such one must presume there is a general invitation to the public to enter.

As there is no evidence (up to now) that practitioners or parkour are excluded from entering the campus, it could hardly be trespass until they were asked to leave and refused.

Jpof

seamus wrote:

I'm going to leave this open as it would appear that you're looking for a legal perspective on this, and not looking for legal advice in regards to legal action you would like to take, or legal action that's pending. Please confirm this for me.

Confirmed. I am just interested in knowing my rights.

That is, they may ask you to leave, they may call the Gardai, and they may act to defend the property. They do not have the power to detain you on the property until the Gardai arrive.

So if a security guard were attempting to detain someone on a private property, is this false imprisonment? And therefore a matter for the police?

Am I legally entitled to use reasonable force if they attempt to detain me? Translation: am I allowed to push a guard blocking my way before I run?

maidhc wrote:

Whether it is, or is not a trespass is not that obvious. A college campus is normally a place open to the public, and I know in UCC skateboarders and the like are tolerated in small doses before they are asked to move along. People with no connection walk through the place every day, and as such one must presume there is a general invitation to the public to enter.

This is more or less the situation in the campus I was in. It's a BIG place. So is this a fairly grey legal area?
I don't really understand the concept of "trespassing"... is this when you enter a private property unwelcome? Without being invited? Perhaps with the intention of committing a crime?

Thank you for your answers, I'm already learning a lot.

John

seamus

maidhc wrote:

Whether it is, or is not a trespass is not that obvious. A college campus is normally a place open to the public, and I know in UCC skateboarders and the like are tolerated in small doses before they are asked to move along. People with no connection walk through the place every day, and as such one must presume there is a general invitation to the public to enter.

As there is no evidence (up to now) that practitioners or parkour are excluded from entering the campus, it could hardly be trespass until they were asked to leave and refused.

This is a good point. If it wasn't a college campus, it would be much clearer.

Trespass is always a legally iffy one. Trespass is essentially entering a private property without permission. However, in your run-of-the-mill house, walking up a person's driveway to knock on their door, isn't trespassing, until they ask you to leave and tell you not to enter their property again. The existence of the walkway to the door, essentially implies permission to enter and knock on the door.

So as maidhc says, entering the campus may not initially be trespass. Although it's private property, access to the general public is implied. So unless you're specifically asked to leave, you can argue that you're not trespassing. Once you are asked to leave once though, that doesn't mean you have to be asked every time

Tom Young

I have a question Jpof: Are you insured?

I am a triathlete [Marathon Runner etc.] and have specific insurance for myself in case of accidents, its more expensive than normal health insurance but provides me with international insurance also as I tend to travel etc.

My take is that Parkour is a fairly dangerous practice/sport if undertaken in an uncontrolled environment. I'd imagine that you'd fall outside the Occupiers Liability category of a Contractual Invitee in many cases (particularly where uses are concerned) and also not be insured under public indemnity given the activity you are undertaking.

Tom

PS: I have imagery of Jfop being a body double in Casino Royale (Crane scene) or indeed the recent BBC advert where a fella scales buildings to get home. Pity we aren't really equipped for this in Ireland. Imagine landing on the spire! My lord, I'd say the pathologist would have some job preparing the Coronors report. Might even need a proctologist. If you get my point. Some people must really enjoy working with a**holes all day long.

Jpof

Tom wrote:

Imagine landing on the spire! My lord, I'd say the pathologist would have some job preparing the Coronors report. Might even need a protologist. If you get my point. Some people must really enjoy working with a**holes all day long.

Tom, your post put a big smile on my face, after some brief wincing at the images. Ouch.

Both of those people, Seb Foucan and David Belle, are heroes of the parkour community. In fact, Dublin has some fantastic spots for this discipline. Especially in this certain college campus!

Back on topic... No, I am not insured, it's something I had never contemplated. I will now though.

My take is that Parkour is a fairly dangerous practice/sport if undertaken in an uncontrolled environment. I'd imagine that you'd fall outside the Occupiers Liability category of a Contractual Invitee in many cases (particularly where uses are concerned) and also not be insured under public indemnity given the activity you are undertaking.

So does that mean I'm being kicked out because I could sue them if I hurt myself?

Tom Young

Jpof wrote:

Seb Foucan and David Belle, are heroes of the parkour community.

Yes, I've heard of them. I hear one trained Daniel Craig for the Bond film, Seb I think. It's supposed to be very physically taxing.

In fact, Dublin has some fantastic spots for this discipline. Especially in this certain college campus!

Yes, I can imagine UCD, Trinity, Central Bank, Wood Quay would all be suitable.

Back on topic... No, I am not insured, it's something I had never contemplated. I will now though.

So does that mean I'm being kicked out because I could sue them if I hurt myself?

Yes, that's what I mean. It would be akin to base jumping or whatever. So you'd possibly loose if you sued.

There may also be Criminal Liability under ss. 2 & 3 of the Criminal Damage Act 1991.

2.—(1) A person who without lawful excuse damages any property belonging to another intending to damage any such property or being reckless as to whether any such property would be damaged shall be guilty of an offence.

(2) A person who without lawful excuse damages any property, whether belonging to himself or another—

( a ) intending to damage any property or being reckless as to whether any property would be damaged, and
( b ) intending by the damage to endanger the life of another or being reckless as to whether the life of another would be thereby endangered,
shall be guilty of an offence.

(3) A person who damages any property, whether belonging to himself or another, with intent to defraud shall be guilty of an offence.

(4) An offence committed under this section by damaging property by fire shall be charged as arson.

(5) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable—

( a ) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding £1,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or both, and
( b ) on conviction on indictment—
(i) in case the person is guilty of arson under subsection (1) or (3) or of an offence under subsection (2) (whether arson or not), to a fine or imprisonment for life or both, and
(ii) in case the person is guilty of any other offence under this section, to a fine not exceeding £10,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years or both.
(6) For the purposes of this section a person is reckless if he has foreseen that the particular kind of damage that in fact was done might be done and yet has gone on to take the risk of it.

3.—A person who without lawful excuse makes to another a threat, intending that that other would fear it would be carried out—

( a ) to damage any property belonging to that other or a third person, or
( b ) to damage his own property in a way which he knows is likely to endanger the life of that other or a third person
shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable—

(i) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding £1,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or both, and
(ii) on conviction on indictment, to a fine not exceeding £10,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years or both.

This is really just my take by the way.

Tom

johnnyskeleton

Tom Young wrote:

There may also be Criminal Liability under ss. 2 & 3 of the Criminal Damage Act 1991.

At the risk of taking your words askew, are you suggesting that a base jumper, after landing rather pointedly on the spire, will be arrested and charged with criminally damaging it?

Tom Young

I think it would be fair to comment that the jumper, in that instance, may have gotten the wrong end of the stick!

Victor

seamus wrote:

So as maidhc says, entering the campus may not initially be trespass. Although it's private property, access to the general public is implied. So unless you're specifically asked to leave, you can argue that you're not trespassing. Once you are asked to leave once though, that doesn't mean you have to be asked every time

There may well be rules of behavior for the campus, which excludes certain behaviour, thereby not making it necessary for there to be an instruction to leave for a trespass to occur.

Are colleges allowed make bye-laws?

Jpof

Victor wrote:

There may well be rules of behavior for the campus, which excludes certain behaviour, thereby not making it necessary for there to be an instruction to leave for a trespass to occur.

Are colleges allowed make bye-laws?

Even if there were, would non-students be obliged to obey those laws?

maidhc

Victor wrote:

There may well be rules of behavior for the campus, which excludes certain behaviour, thereby not making it necessary for there to be an instruction to leave for a trespass to occur.

Are colleges allowed make bye-laws?

No colleges are not allowed make bye-laws. They are private bodies.

They can however attach conditions to the licence they give people to enter their property. Obviously however it is necessary for the "trespasser" to be aware of these conditions.

Jpof

Could I get your input on these questions...

So if a security guard were attempting to detain someone on a private property, is this false imprisonment? And therefore a matter for the police?

Am I legally entitled to use reasonable force if they attempt to detain me? Translation: am I allowed to push a guard blocking my way before I run?

John

Gobán Saor

A couple of things:

Grabbing your shirt is assault and is a criminal offence. The security guard (and probably the manager) also committed the criminal offence of false imprisonment contrary to S.15 of the Non Fatal Offences Against the Person Act 1997.

15.—(1) A person shall be guilty of the offence of false imprisonment who intentionally or recklessly—

( a ) takes or detains, or

( b ) causes to be taken or detained, or

( c ) otherwise restricts the personal liberty of,

another without that other's consent.

(2) For the purposes of this section, a person acts without the consent of another if the person obtains the other's consent by force or threat of force, or by deception causing the other to believe that he or she is under legal compulsion to consent.

(3) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable—

( a ) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding £1,500 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to both, or

( b ) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for life.

You can report this at a Garda Station and the Gardai will investigate.

Secondly, the security guard has also committed the torts of false imprisonment and trespass to the person (aka assault) - you can take a civil case for compensation.

Finally, you are allowed use "reasonable force" to prevent yourself from being falsely imprisoned and assaulted. In the circumstances, a push or shove would probably be "reasonable;" a powerful punch to the head would probably not be "reasonable."

Jpof

I'd like to thank all of you for taking the time to answer my questions.

From what I have learned, I have adopted a set of principles to guide me. Please give your advice if I have gone "wrong":


1) If I choose to practice in this campus again, I will do so as discreetly as possible.

2) If addressed by a member of staff, I will politely explain why and what I am practicing. If asked to leave, I will do so.

3) If pressed for any personal details, I will politely refuse to provide these.

4) If I start to feel intimidated or "cornered" by the staff, then I see this as a clear sign to practice what I have been training and run like Forrest Gump.

5) If I am assaulted or forcibly detained by the staff, I will record their names and ID numbers, ask to speak to their supervisor and if I feel it is necessary, call the Gardai.

Jpof

Goban, thanks for your straight answer. Although I was resentful at the time of this whole incident, I've learned some valuable lessons thanks to it. This guard was just doing his job, perhaps a little too seriously.

Then again, maybe I am letting a little Hitler get away with tyranny... next time, I'll baffle them with a few well-placed quotes from this thread. My main mistake was that I was frightened by a crowd of dark blue and high-vis material, not just for myself but for a younger traceur that I had brought with me. Even though we are both legally adults.

Oh one more thing...

Would the situation change at all if the traceur (parkour practitioner) were a student of the college?

Would this give the security guards jurisdiction? Permission to search?

Turner

You can ask for the names of the security personnel but they do not have to give them to you.

seamus

Jpof wrote:

Would the situation change at all if the traceur (parkour practitioner) were a student of the college?

Would this give the security guards jurisdiction? Permission to search?

Legally it makes no difference, nor does it give them any extra rights to search or detain. Though it lends greater weight to the defence of not trespassing.
That said, it does leave you more open to disciplinary action from the college. That's not necessarily covered by legislation.

Jpof

Chief--- wrote:

You can ask for the names of the security personnel but they do not have to give them to you.

This conjures up a curious image in my head.

Myself and a security guard, hands on our chest and sulky faces, both refusing to give each other our names. Like bad-tempered children who don't want to join in the party.

Why, oh why can't we be friends?

Dave!

Interesting.

If a security guard isn't allowed to forcible detain you, then say for instance if you're in a shopping mall and you rob something from one of the shops -- they can't hold you until the Gardaí arrive? They can't prevent you from fleeing?

If they do, then would that in any way benefit your defence, should you be brought to court over it? Or would it just be a seperate case that you'd have to take against the security guard/their employer?

Note that I am not planning any heists!

Gobán Saor

DaveMcG wrote:

Interesting.

If a security guard isn't allowed to forcible detain you, then say for instance if you're in a shopping mall and you rob something from one of the shops -- they can't hold you until the Gardaí arrive? They can't prevent you from fleeing?

If they do, then would that in any way benefit your defence, should you be brought to court over it? Or would it just be a seperate case that you'd have to take against the security guard/their employer?

Note that I am not planning any heists!

A security guard has exactly the same powers of arrest as any ordinary citizen - no more and no less. Any citizen may arrest a person whom he reasonably suspects of commiting an arrestable offence AND if he reasonably believes that otherwise the person to be arrested will attempt to evade arrest by the Gardai. Any such arrest, and any reasonable force used to effect it will not be unlawful. This is so even if it turns out that arrested person has not committed an offence. However, in that case the arresting citizen may be sued in the civil courts for false imprisonment and possibly assault.

A Garda (or the State) cannot be sued in these circumstances simply because the reasonable suspicion turns out to be wrong.

Moral: Carry out a citizen's arrest at your peril!

(Note: an arrestable offence is one that carries a maximum penalty of 5 years imprisonment or more for a first offence)

Dave!

Ah, very interesting, thanks for that!