began poking at this and that, messing with the canoe, etc. So I opened the window and said, "Why don't you leave that alone and keep moving?"
He was not just trespassing. When he touched the canoe and looking thru private possessions he is not just a trespasser. Now he's a prowler.
Do you have a basis for that assertion?
The police recently said so in our local paper. Prowling is a growing problem here.
How should a "prowler" be treated?
Like any thief.
From the description, the trespassers had not committed burglary.
Prowling, mischief, vandalism, what every you want to call it. He is not just walking through but physically handling, touching and examining property. He has no valid reason to be examining my private effects. He's is violating my property. I will stop him.
It may not match your ideas of taking the law into your own hands, but since no one was hurt and no one has yet been charged or sued, the outcome was a very good one indeed.
Unless the prowler pocketed his oar locks, damaged his property, leaves his used needles, got what he was after, or returns later that night, after scoping you out, while your asleep. The prowler contitued unmolested and got away without incident. Good outcome for him. Not for the victim.
I have yet to hear about a trespasser who would welcome the chance to go to court unless the case involved some sort of protest or civil disobedience.
The one in the op welcomed being shot. Homeless and druggies do it for housing and non-rational reasons.
He does not owe you such an explanation, but there are many plausible explanations that would suffice.
His failure to explain himself to me may get him maced, or worse. He will also need to explain his trespass later to the police and/or in court.
Let's get one thing straight: while remedy against trespass varies, in most jurisdictions it involves asking the trespasser to depart.
The OP did that. He refused.
Arrested for what? The very idea of detaining a trespasser goes against the principles of legal tradition---it prevents him from leaving, when the purpose of the law against trespass is to keep him away.
Trespass, theft, prowling, etc. If you tell him to leave, and he doesn't but continues going thru your things, now we have a problem that needs remedy, not just wait until he's finished.
Some centuries ago, the highest court of a state that was one of the original thirteen colonies heard an appellate case involving a landowner who had been convicted for threatening a trespasser with a firearm. The court held against the land owner. What I found interesting was the wording of the decision: in the decision, the court pointed out that, had the trespasser been threatened with death or serious bodily harm by the landowner, the trespasser would likely have been within his rights to defend himself with deadly force.
Again, not the issue here since the OP did peacefully order him off his property, and the criminal was doing more than just trespassing.
They also take people into custody, and would do so in the event that a property owner employed unlawful force against a trespasser.
Yup. We can argue that in court tomorrow, but today I will stop the PROWLER by any means necessary. I can tell the difference between a lady walking her dog thru my yard and a guy going thru my pile of stuff behind my shed. One gets yelled at, the other gets physically stopped.
