Native squatter refuses to cooperate in court after mansion eviction
squ@tter | 11.03.2013 22:57 | Free Spaces | Repression | Social Struggles | World
Abka Re Bey (aka Tabith Gentry) was arrested early Friday morning (8th March) outside of 600 S. Shady Grove Road in East Memphis, an empty mansion worth more than $3 million that sits on nearly four acres, that she and her family had squatted. She faces charges of aggravated burglary, criminal trespass and theft of property $6,000 or more and was in court Monday morning. Her bond was set at $2 million.
Abka Re Bey (aka Tabith Gentry) was arrested early Friday morning (8th March) outside of 600 S. Shady Grove Road in East Memphis, an empty mansion worth more than $3 million that sits on nearly four acres, that she and her family had squatted. She faces charges of aggravated burglary, criminal trespass and theft of property $6,000 or more and was in court Monday morning. Her bond was set at $2 million.
She took the building last week and drew a red flag with green star in the middle on a poster board, while erecting another sign claiming Moorish American National Republic rights and included statements “pertaining to sovereign citizen rhetoric and beliefs,” according to a police report. Moorish American’s are descendants of ancient Moabites in Africa and are the original inhabitants of North America who were enslaved by European colonists.
The bank that foreclosed on the property two years ago, Renasant, found a thick chain and padlock on the gate earlier last week with five signs declaring “Private Property/Keep Out.” Police were initially not sure who the squatters were, but Abka Re Bey filed “transfer of inheritance” papers with the County Register’s Office in January, “giving Notice of my rightful ‘Claim’ to my property” on Shady Grove.
During the hearing on Monday 11th, Abka Re refused to cooperate at all and at least one person there agreed with her opposition, “She’s not supposed to go to the system, she’s Moorish American. She’s supposed to go through civil court, not general sessions.” She twice yelled “objection” at the judge Monday before declaring her membership in the Moorish American National Republic. The group does not recognize federal or state laws.
She took the building last week and drew a red flag with green star in the middle on a poster board, while erecting another sign claiming Moorish American National Republic rights and included statements “pertaining to sovereign citizen rhetoric and beliefs,” according to a police report. Moorish American’s are descendants of ancient Moabites in Africa and are the original inhabitants of North America who were enslaved by European colonists.
The bank that foreclosed on the property two years ago, Renasant, found a thick chain and padlock on the gate earlier last week with five signs declaring “Private Property/Keep Out.” Police were initially not sure who the squatters were, but Abka Re Bey filed “transfer of inheritance” papers with the County Register’s Office in January, “giving Notice of my rightful ‘Claim’ to my property” on Shady Grove.
During the hearing on Monday 11th, Abka Re refused to cooperate at all and at least one person there agreed with her opposition, “She’s not supposed to go to the system, she’s Moorish American. She’s supposed to go through civil court, not general sessions.” She twice yelled “objection” at the judge Monday before declaring her membership in the Moorish American National Republic. The group does not recognize federal or state laws.
squ@tter
Homepage:
squat.net
Comments
Hide the following 5 comments
Nutter Alert: Code Red
12.03.2013 06:00
Asiatics Watch
just a FYI
12.03.2013 13:31
The "open and notorious" means that the property owners have to know that their property is being squatted, secret squatting gains no rights. And the time period can be quite a few years (I don't know if anywhere more than seven years, but that gives you an idea).
REAL cases of this sort usually focus on things like:
1) Open and notorious enough? Most real cases involve isolated rural property and the owner contesting the "adverse possession" might be claiming "did not know about it" while the claimants arguing "open enough that should have known" (everybody in town did, etc.)
2) Adverse? You can't be living there with permission of the owner and gain "squatters rights". But evidence in writing may be scanty.
MDN
Moorish Science, the Nation of Islam & the KKK
13.03.2013 00:40
Shades
I was trying to explain a major difference
13.03.2013 12:36
We are different cultures. When I was describing that difference I perhaps should have added that this difference is pretty well accepted across the political spectrum. You have a tradition that property left unoccupied can be "claimed" by squatting simply because of the unoccupancy; we do not.
That is not to say that there isn't sometimes what is felt to be "squatting by right" but that's almost always the special situation where the property was previously owned by those now squatting it but ownership taken away by some legal proceeding. For example in my own area, a number of years ago, war tax resisters had their house seized and sold at auction by the Feds for non payment of income tax. They refused to simply leave and they did have some community support. Currently there might be cases involving foreclosure.
MDN
@MDN, Squatting residential property has been criminalised in the UK..
13.03.2013 13:11
Barry Cade