Homeless man charged with armed trespassing after multiple reports of a man walking around with a sword
Staff report
GAINESVILLE, Fla. – Williamson Dercelian Isaac, 23, was arrested yesterday at the Haile Market Square Publix after he allegedly refused to leave after being trespassed; when deputies recognized him as the man who had been seen walking around with a large sword, they searched him and reportedly found a sword in his pants.
At about 5:30 p.m. on May 16, an Alachua County Sheriff’s Deputy responded to Publix (2755 SW 91st St.), where a manager said Isaac had been using cart-cleaning wipes to clean his feet in the foyer of the store, and when he was asked to leave, he refused.
Deputies found Isaac walking in front of Publix and confirmed with the manager that he had been trespassed and had refused to leave; they also reocgnized him as the person who had been seen multiple times in the area, walking around with a large sword, resulting in “numerous” calls to the Combined Communications Center.
Isaac reportedly refused to identify himself, and when deputies asked if he was armed, he made vague statements implying that he might have a weapon. Deputies conducted a pat-down and reportedly found a long object on Isaac’s hip area that turned out to be a sword.
A search of Isaac’s belongings reportedly produced a SNAP card that showed his name, and his identity was confirmed using the photo in the driver’s license database.
After he was handcuffed, Isaac reportedly said, “I’m sorry for trespassing.”
Isaac has been charged with armed trespassing. He has no local criminal history, and he has been released from the Alachua County Jail.
Articles about arrests are based on reports from law enforcement agencies. The charges listed are taken from the arrest report and/or court records and are only accusations. All suspects are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law
Hey Harvey and the rest of your liberal sooth sayers, see any pattern here yet? Probably not….as you all might have to get your heads out of your a$$es to see the logical conclusion to your stupidity.
Good punishment would be making him use that sword to clean the roads, bike paths, and sidewalks of overgrowth. Nice time of year for it too.
They don’t want to work…they would rather sit in the hot sun with a cardboard sign panhandling in the median that says “ anything will help, god bless”… there’s plenty of work out there that pays well if you work hard..there have been lazy bums since the beginning of time..most panhandlers are A-holes like this guy…they should have put him on work release so he gets some structure and maybe get hired if he wants to be productive and not a bum…the court needs to encourage personal responsibility…if it doesn’t work, I’ll think it always should have…
Homeless has a snap card ( government handout) so we know damn well he was ROR since he’s already out of jail. This is kind of trash that the city of Gainesville and alachua County encourages to hang around. And they want to turn schools and homeless camps the voters of alachua County need to get your head out of your a&$ and see what’s going on and quit drinking that Democratic tea.
It is great to see law enforcement working hard in an attempt to keep the community safe from this whacko. It is not great to find the court system treats FELONY charges like a fart in the wind. San Francisco east is what this place has become.
👮♂️: is that a sword in your pants, or are you just happy to see me?
So he was using cart wipes to clean his feet, is that a violation of store policy or the law?
He should have been told to stop and if he refused then asked to leave.
Remember Walmart is a business and in order to be trespassed from a business you must violate store policy or the law.
The sword was not an issue when he was at the store, but seems to have been an issue before he arrived at the store, no where in the report does it say he had the sword out and visible in or at the store.
This is a potential lawsuit, homeless or not he still has the same rights as any other citizen.
Also was he given an opportunity to dispute the trespass, which is required by case law.
According to the sources, the manager had a **legal right** to ask Williamson Dercelian Isaac to leave based on his conduct inside the store.
Under Florida law, specifically **Florida Statute § 810.08(1)**, an individual who has been “authorized, licensed, or invited” to enter a structure can be legally trespassed if they are warned by the owner, lessee, or an authorized person to depart and they refuse to do so.
The legal basis for the manager’s right to ask him to leave includes the following:
Authority Over Quasi-Public Property: While businesses like supermarkets are considered “quasi-public” and extend an implied invitation to the public to conduct business, the owner or their agent retains the right to **restrict access** and exclude individuals.
Conduct Detrimental to Commercial Purpose: Case law and legislative analysis indicate that a business has the right to exclude persons who use private property for purposes **other than shopping** or for activities deemed detrimental to the commercial purpose of the property. In this instance, Isaac was observed using store-provided cart-cleaning wipes to **clean his feet in the foyer**, which is not an activity related to the commercial purpose of the store.
Right to Revoke Invitation: An owner or authorized person (such as a manager) can verbally communicate a notice to depart at any time. Once that warning is given—regardless of whether the person was initially invited—remaining on the premises constitutes the offense of **trespass in a structure**.
The sources confirm that the manager observed the behavior with the wipes, issued the request to leave, and Isaac **refused to comply**. It was this refusal to leave after being warned that established the legal grounds for his arrest, which was elevated to a felony charge of **armed trespassing** because he was found to be in possession of a “large sword” at the time of the refusal.
So basically this seems legal due to the Conduct Detrimental to Commercial Purpose paragraph.
He was at Publix Home 91st St.not Wallmart and a private business trespass you for most any reason they want to
No they can’t Howard.
You have to violate store policy or a law, look it up.
A business open to the public is different than a private residence.
City Hall trespassed me for going there and asking about my demand letters, and now they are in big trouble.
Howard think about it,
I could be the manager of a store and have an issue against white people.
Now every white person that doesn’t smile at me I could trespass them according to your logic and it would not be seen as discrimination.
This is why they have to violate store policy or the law, so that it can’t be argued that the exclusion is discriminatory in nature.
Conduct Detrimental to Commercial Purpose: Case law and legislative analysis indicate that a business has the right to exclude persons who use private property for purposes **other than shopping** or for activities deemed detrimental to the commercial purpose of the property. In this instance, Isaac was observed using store-provided cart-cleaning wipes to **clean his feet in the foyer**, which is not an activity related to the commercial purpose of the store.
So had he not been using the wipes for a purpose other than cleaning a cart, and since he was not in the store conducting business that would be deemed natural to the nature of the business, the store manager was justified in asking him to leave.
I stand corrected partially because the standard for a store is different from government property.
In public business the bar is as stated above “Conduct Detrimental to Commercial Purpose”
He was excluding the peace other legit customers expect at a Publix. That’s grounds for trespassing.
Common sense get your facts straight before you respond to me
in Florida, a private business can “trespass” you (legally ban you) for almost any reason, provided it is not based on discrimination against a protected class. Under Florida Statutes 810.08 and 810.09, a business only needs to communicate that you are no longer welcome for your presence to become illegal.
This post lacks “common sense”
His SNAP card no longer buys him the junk food that contributed to his addicted psychotic behavior. Boohoo.