Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:hmmmmm. I have access to inside info. Police were called because 30 people were trespassing....bit different from 6 little kids. Guests left before mgmt got there. So who knows if these pics even match what shes talking about. Its BS

Here is where it said there were actually 30 people at the party.

Because some random on the Internet said it?
You cannot be that stupid???

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone confirm if the poster acted within the condo policy?

No one seems to have the condo's bylaws. Not the caller, not the owners/hosts, no one.

I can confirm that this is not a police matter, this is a civil matter.

Trespassing is most definitely a police matter.

It's not trespassing.

Not a great grasp of law on this thread. Trespassing is using/ or being on someone else property with their permission. Having a pool party without permission is trespassing. What’s so hard to understand about this ?

In MD property owned by an HOA is required to have "no trespassing signs". Also, they can have the signs and a guest can invite you in, which negates the trespassing law.

If an owner invites a guest into a private area that they are not allowed to enter due to HOA bylaws, the guests are not at fault, the homeowner is in violation of HOA bylaws not Maryland trespassing laws.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone confirm if the poster acted within the condo policy?

No one seems to have the condo's bylaws. Not the caller, not the owners/hosts, no one.

I can confirm that this is not a police matter, this is a civil matter.

Trespassing is most definitely a police matter.

It's not trespassing.

Not a great grasp of law on this thread. Trespassing is using/ or being on someone else property with their permission. Having a pool party without permission is trespassing. What’s so hard to understand about this ?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We've lived in a condo, and the pool guest rules, while I don't recall them exactly, were extremely strict. There would have been no way to have over 10 guests over (how many people total??). This is not a minor matter - what if a kid drowns or gets hurt? We could reserve a room (not the pool) for a party, but the hourly rate was very high.

My condo doesn't have these rules. So, it really depends on the condo and I find the whole "well, these are the rules" defenses to be ridiculous.

It is very, very dangerous for police to be called on black people who are just going about their lives. I have yet to see any real confirmation about the rules, and I think it is telling and crazy and awful how much people will justify this terrible choice this woman made or in the alternative diminish, mock or ignore the valid, concerning fear these poor people were put in for just having a nice time at the pool.

But go on. This thread will probably have 100's of posts fighting and defending this woman before it dies a slow death and yet another racist story occurs. The racist will get busy defending that one then. Seen it for years on DCUM.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Imagine the gall it takes to think your $1000 or $1500 rent entitles you to throw huge rager parties at a condo pool used by hundreds of paying RESIDENTS. Low class trash. I don’t know and I don’t care what race is involved here. It’s trash behavior, period.

Rager parties? We're talking little kids eating hamburgers on a Thursday afternoon after a frolic in the pool after being invited by the OWNERS of the unit. Rub your hands on the front of your pants because you my dear need to get a grip.

1-2 owners of a condo don’t have the right to invite 30 non-residents to the pool. There is no reputable condo association around that would allow this.

My fancy condo in Arlington doesn't have these rules.

But please, continue on. It's amazing that racists won't give up and just go onto bash something else.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:hmmmmm. I have access to inside info. Police were called because 30 people were trespassing....bit different from 6 little kids. Guests left before mgmt got there. So who knows if these pics even match what shes talking about. Its BS

Here is where it said there were actually 30 people at the party.

Because some random on the Internet said it?
You cannot be that stupid???

Its more believable than a pack of sweet innocent kids (without any adults present) were doing absolutely nothing wrong! Notice how the photo she posted showed NO adults?

Obviously there were adults present. The owners were there. There were adults in the video. At birthday parties we often take groups pics of the children attending. That doesn’t mean there are no adults on site. Why are you being willfully obtuse?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:hmmmmm. I have access to inside info. Police were called because 30 people were trespassing....bit different from 6 little kids. Guests left before mgmt got there. So who knows if these pics even match what shes talking about. Its BS

Here is where it said there were actually 30 people at the party.

Because some random on the Internet said it?
You cannot be that stupid???

Its more believable than a pack of sweet innocent kids (without any adults present) were doing absolutely nothing wrong! Notice how the photo she posted showed NO adults?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone confirm if the poster acted within the condo policy?

No one seems to have the condo's bylaws. Not the caller, not the owners/hosts, no one.

I can confirm that this is not a police matter, this is a civil matter.

Trespassing is most definitely a police matter.

It's not trespassing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone confirm if the poster acted within the condo policy?

No one seems to have the condo's bylaws. Not the caller, not the owners/hosts, no one.

I can confirm that this is not a police matter, this is a civil matter.

Trespassing is most definitely a police matter.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:hmmmmm. I have access to inside info. Police were called because 30 people were trespassing....bit different from 6 little kids. Guests left before mgmt got there. So who knows if these pics even match what shes talking about. Its BS

Here is where it said there were actually 30 people at the party.

Because some random on the Internet said it?
You cannot be that stupid???

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:hmmmmm. I have access to inside info. Police were called because 30 people were trespassing....bit different from 6 little kids. Guests left before mgmt got there. So who knows if these pics even match what shes talking about. Its BS

Here is where it said there were actually 30 people at the party.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone confirm if the poster acted within the condo policy?

No one seems to have the condo's bylaws. Not the caller, not the owners/hosts, no one.

I can confirm that this is not a police matter, this is a civil matter.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone confirm if the poster acted within the condo policy?

No one seems to have the condo's bylaws. Not the caller, not the owners/hosts, no one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone confirm if the poster acted within the condo policy?

No one seems to have the condo's bylaws. Not the caller, not the owners/hosts, no one.

The realtors who are selling some units most likely have copies?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone confirm if the poster acted within the condo policy?

No one seems to have the condo's bylaws. Not the caller, not the owners/hosts, no one.