A resort maintained an outside bar adjacent to its pool. When the bar was closed, it was secured by a metal gate that reached up towards the roof of the bar, but which left about a three-foot gap between the top of the gate and the roof. The resort had installed motion detectors inside the bar linked to an alarm system because of several previous thefts of liquor by persons climbing over the gate. Late one night, an intoxicated guest of the resort who wanted to keep partying after hours began to climb over the gate to get into the bar through the gap at the top, intending to take some bottles of wine. The brackets attaching the gate to the walls, which had been gradually deteriorating and pulling away from the walls for some time, suddenly gave way as he reached the top. The gate collapsed, causing him to fall back onto the concrete patio. He sustained a severe concussion and other serious injuries. The resort is located in a jurisdiction that applies the traditional liability rules for landowners and possessors of land. If the guest sues the resort for his injuries, is he likely to prevail?A. No, because the guest did not have invitee status when he was climbing over the gate. B. No, because the guest intended to steal alcohol belonging to the resort. C. Yes, because the resort operators were aware that persons had climbed over the gate in the past. D. Yes, because the brackets attaching the gate to the walls were in the weakened condition that could have been detected by a routine inspection.