Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Good-Expression-4433 t1_j6x231w wrote

Reply to comment by [deleted] in Man claims self-defense in Providence landlord homicide by Rogue-Island-Pirate

Which has nothing to do with legality of the situation. Even if he wasn't the one being rented to, hea may have established squatters rights which meant she was required to evict him. Call the police, report a squatter, they get the information, you file for eviction. The fact that the dude was waiting for her with a rifle definitely implies there was a history of threats, even if just preceding the break in. She had knowledge that he was living there for her to evict him so he wasn't just an immediate trespasser, and even if he was, she still had the responsibility to call the police and not what she did.

If she survived, the dude was going to be able to sue the fuck out of her.

3

[deleted] t1_j6x2t51 wrote

[deleted]

2

Good-Expression-4433 t1_j6x3egb wrote

You're right. But even if he didn't have them, he was still staying there as a guest of the legal tenant. The story doesn't say there's no lease or that an eviction had already occurred. His cousin had a lease but no longer lived there who was there as a guest of the leaseholder/unauthorized sublease and they were going to evict the guy still living there. There's still a requirement to go through eviction proceedings in order to legally terminate the lease and classify the guy living there as a trespasser. And even that doesn't warrant going in with friends to shoot him or threaten him at gunpoint. It just means the police can remove him.

In short, the situation was pretty ironclad grounds to terminate the lease through eviction proceedings but he was not a legal trespasser at that point nor was the landlord justified in an armed breaking and entering.

4

ProvBroker t1_j6xg7jf wrote

Adverse possession is completely different matter than establishing tenancy…

2