The stars were out at the Golden Globes the night of January 12, 2014. Celebrity award winners like Matthew McConaughey, Leonardo DiCaprio and Cate Blanchett were there to collect their prizes and laugh along with hosts Tina Fey and Amy Poehler. But one man was there for another reason. He was a paparazzi who gate-crashed so he could take pictures and sell them to the media.

Plaintiff Stephen Winick was an ice cream store owner and part-time photographer with a previous arrest for criminal trespass at the 2012 Golden Globes, as well as other events. He went to the Beverly Hills Hotel to shoot photos. But event security, provided by a company named Noble LA Events (Noble), knew him and his “reputation” and placed him on its “no-fly” list. When security guards found him in the press room with an unauthorized credential, they “physically removed him” and detained him for about 45 minutes. Parties differ on the amount of force that was used to remove him and take him to their “command room.” Eventually, police arrived and ushered him off the property.

Plaintiff Winick sued Noble, Dick Clark Productions, a security guard who detained him, and others for false imprisonment, assault and battery, negligence, and violation of his civil right under the Bane Act, a California law that forbids interference with a person’s constitutional rights by threat or violence.

The trial court denied all Winick’s claims after determining he would have a bench trial instead of a jury trial since he had failed to post jury fees on several occasions preceding the trial. Current jury fees are about $150 per trial, the amount jurors would be paid for their service.

In a January 19 unpublished opinion, Associate Justice John L Segal of Division Seven of the California Court of Appeal upheld the judgment of the Los Angeles Superior Court in favor of defendants. The trial court had ruled against Winick on all his causes of action and concluded that the security guards' actions were “reasonable because he (Winick) was a known crasher who posed a threat to the safety and integrity of the 2014 Golden Globes.”

The trial court also noted that Winick “failed to cooperate,” and that his detention was “no longer than was reasonable to investigate his presence.” The “citizen’s arrest” by security staff was permissible because of their “reasonable good faith belief that (Winick) was committing” a trespass.

During the trial, Noble’s contract with Dick Clark Productions was reviewed. It gave the event staff authority for "apprehending, detaining, investigating [and] ejecting an unauthorized person.” John McKillop, Noble’s owner, knew about Winick because he “repeatedly tried to attend celebrity events.” He told his staff that Winick was “a crasher” and said his unauthorized behavior “was an ongoing discussion.”

McKillop explained the “no-fly” list to the court and detailed the reasons for including Winick on it. He said that a different company, not Noble, was responsible for distributing credentials and during the trial, the judge learned that the other company “mistakenly gave Winick a credential.” This was never verified. Even with the credential, Noble security said they recognized Winick and, under their contract, they had the right to revoke his credentials because he was on the “no-fly” list.

Defendants testified that after Winick was removed to Noble’s command post, he “became irate and began shouting profanities.” He then refused to answer questions about how he got his unauthorized credential. Fearing that Winick had a weapon, one security guard called the Beverly Hills police who took his statement and ushered him off the property.

Winnick’s version of events was different. He claimed he was a credentialed photographer, working for AOL Media Fan, as he had done on previous occasions. McKillop said that he investigated and found there was no such company. Winick said that event security “came up to him without saying anything; lifted him out of his chair by his leg, buttocks, shoulder, and neck; and carried him out of the press room.” Another reporter testified that Winick was lifted from his chair in "not in a gentle manner" and that it was not a "friendly removal."

Winick also explained he had no weapon but had “tucked his credential in his shirt” to safeguard it. He said he had “black and blue marks,” anxiety, sleeplessness and loss of income” as a result of the altercation. He admitted that he never sought medical treatment.

The trial court also heard testimony from expert witnesses. One licensed private investigator who had frequently worked at award shows said Noble had “violated industry standards” in its treatment of Winick because all they were allowed to do was observe and report. Noble’s expert disagreed and said its staff “complied with security industry standards.”

After describing all the facts, Justice Segal first agreed that Winick had waived his right to a jury trial when he failed to pay the required jury fees. In addition, he failed to show how the lack of a jury would result in prejudice against him.

Winick argued that his “citizen’s arrest” by Noble was illegal. Segal disagreed because Winick was “engaged in a civil trespass,” which gave guards the right to “use reasonably necessary force” to remove him. The Justice did agree with Winick’s contention that there was no criminal trespass because he had not been asked to leave the property, which must be done for a valid arrest.

Segal then explained the applicable civil law. He said that under “time-worn tort law” a “person has a right to use all such force as is reasonably necessary to protect his person or property.” He said that Winick “may not have committed a criminal trespass, (but) there was substantial evidence he committed a civil trespass.”

Turning to the amount of force that could properly be used for Winick’s detention, Segal said that Winick’s failure to receive medical treatment “undermined his credibility.” He also noted that Winick was a well-known trespasser who repeatedly tried to enter award show premises. His behavior throughout the event convinced the judge, who was the correct trier of fact in the absence of a jury, that Winick “posed a safety threat.” When Winick tried to assert his Bane Act claim, he also failed because the security guards used only reasonable force.

Thus, it was decided that Leonardo, Kate, Matthew, Tina and Amy were properly cared for at the 2014 Golden Globes. From now on, perhaps it would be a good idea for Stephen Winick to stick to selling ice cream.