James Holmes Massacre First Lawsuit

[steve2470]

http://www.tmz.com/2012/07/24/james-holmes-lawsuit-shooting/

(forgive the source)

One of the victims in the James Holmes mass murder spree has lawyered up and plans to file a lawsuit ... because he feels the theater dropped the ball in a very fatal way.

Torrence Brown, Jr. was in Century 16 Theater when Holmes let loose. One of Brown's best friends, A.J. Boik, was shot in the chest and died. Brown, who was not physically injured, claims to now suffer from extreme trauma.

Brown has hired attorney Donald Karpel to rep him. Karpel tells TMZ ... he is targeting 3 defendants.

1. The theater. Karpel claims it was negligent for the theater to have an emergency door in the front that was not alarmed or guarded. It's widely believed Holmes entered the theater with a ticket, propped the emergency door open from inside, went to his car and returned with guns.

*more at link above*

[ananda]

1. Interesting.

I'm afraid it won't solve the problem of gun violence though.

[Confusious]

2. I give him a good chance

on the first one, against century theatres.

The other two, not really.

[Blue_Roses]

6. I agree

and what I don't get is why the alarm on the exit door didn't go off. If it was a fire exit I thought those had an alarm.

[backscatter712]

26. My understanding is that those doors are also regular exits after the movie's over.

That is, when the movie's done, customers are allowed to leave the theater through those doors, so as to reduce traffic inside the theater corridors.

[joeybee12]

37. Did it?

I'm unclear of the time line...however, someone below makes a good point...the point of an emergency exit is to get out...that's its intended purpose...I'm actually kind of disgusted by this guy trying to cash in.

[Confusious]

41. I used to work in a movie theater

Albeit a crappy dump, but they all work pretty much the same way.

There's no alarm on any door, except for the one with the money.

[JDPriestly]

58. That may depend on local fire ordinances.

[Larkspur]

3. Why doesn't he sue the NRA?

For lying to the American people about gun control and like a crime syndicate, using threats to silence those that can change gun policy.

I would.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

12. He has retained a lawyer...

...and, evidently, the lawyer isn't stupid.

[arthritisR_US]

19. I agree with the poster you responded to. I think

it would be wonderful if the victims from all of these mass shootings filed a class action law suit against the NRA and throw in the spineless politicians too!

[joeybee12]

25. Great idea...

Don't know if it would go anywhere since the SCOTUS has been bought and paid for by the NRA...

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

39. Good luck

Knock yourself out.

[dixiegrrrrl]

49. There have been suits filed against gun makers and ammo makers

after deadly shootings.

but I cannot recall of the top of my head the outcomes.

[muriel_volestrangler]

42. It says they're going after Warner Bros. too, and I'd say that's stupid

3. Warner Bros. Karpel says "Dark Knight Rises" was particularly violent and Holmes mimicked some of the action. The attorney says theater goers were helpless because they thought the shooter was part of the movie. Karpel tells TMZ, "Somebody has to be responsible for the rampant violence that is shown today."

That's a pretty dumb thing to say. His client paid to see that 'rampant violence'. That looks frivolous; would it affect how a court views the other parts? And if you meant "the NRA is too big and powerful to sue - he's not stupid", I'd say Warner Bros. has a lot of clout too.

[Larkspur]

45. Warner Bros. would win on First Amendment rights

and the fact that the victim voluntarily purchased a ticket to see the movie.

I wonder, is the victim an NRA supporter?

[Jennicut]

46. People who go after music or movies when someone commits a violent act

are always idiots. Why did this guy go to see the movie to begin with if it was so violent? I get the anger over the incident but one person is to blame. No one movie set him off, he was bound to go off eventually regardless.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

53. Sorry for the delay...

...I'm working.


However:
The NRA:
- didn't produce the movie
- didn't own the venue
- wasn't involved in providing security
- has no ties to Holmes, the theater or the movie
- didn't sell Holmes any guns

NRA HQ is in Virginia. The expense of suing them considering the likelihood of a very protracted (and I would expect many years) legal battle would make most attorneys refuse to accept the case on a contingency basis.

Suing Warner is going nowhere IMHO, since the movie is not 3D and Holmes wasn't 'on the screen'. A reasonable person wouldn't believe that he was. Not that the event wasn't confusing and full of panic but that thought can't be a basis for a law suit.

The theater may have some exposure to liability.

[samsingh]

51. the nra is the appropriate target

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

4. Price of a movie ticket just went to twenty bucks (nt)

[sadbear]

5. I'm sure the lawyers are drooling right now.

[HopeHoops]

7. Sorry, but I don't find the theater at fault. Holmes is a whack job. He should be sued.

[nc4bo]

8. But maybe he has a point.

Hindsight is 20/20.

If theater employees were alerted when that a door was open, even for the simple reason of a friend letting other friends in for free, perhaps Holmes' plan could have been interrupted.

Don't have all the answer HopeHoops - just thinking out loud.

[HopeHoops]

13. Those theater employees are paid minimum wage to dole out popcorn and soda.

You can't expect them to take on the role of security guard.

[Aerows]

17. You are right

They shouldn't. It would have been prudent to have an alarm on the exit door, just to make sure that theater workers were aware that someone was using that door, but it's not a legal requirement.

This guy is a nut job from hell. I'd be shocked if he, at this point, was able to even function whatsoever in society now that people know who he is.

He destroyed 12 people, harmed 59 more, and decimated his own life. Just tragic as hell all the way around.

[nc4bo]

18. I was going to add this to my thoughts

I'm sorry I didn't - just didn't walk down the road to obvious.

I'm sure they already have employees trained to spot and possibly confront people trying to pirate movies on camcorders and cells - something they aren't paid enough for either.

[SoCalDem]

44. A simple pager-like device

that would receive a signal when an "emergency door" is opened, would go a long way to solving this..

Manager on duty clips it to his/her belt and it buzzes if a door opens.. perhaps all theaters are assigned a number on the device and the message is "door #9"..

surely some bright computer/phone wizard could design this "app"..

cheap ..easy & perhaps a money-saver as well as a life saver

for those who lament the "extra" duties foisted on the beleaguered underpaid managers..let me say this..

they ARE already responsible to see that the theater is locked up when they close for the day, so why not make sure that doors are kept closed DURING duty hours..

a simple walk into the affected theater and a quick latching of the door could have meant NO entry back in for the guy in Aurora.. would he have brazenly waltzed back through the front ..well lit lobby?..maybe not.

[Blue_Tires]

9. Always go after the big pockets in lawsuits, and involve as many defendants possible

What would you expect to get from suing Holmes?

[HopeHoops]

14. Easy. If he ever gets out of prison, he'll be liable for a massive payment.

He was the criminal, not the theater.

[Aerows]

16. Liable for a massive payment

That he will never be able to pay, and this guy isn't going to ever get out of jail.

[HopeHoops]

30. Call it hedging a bet. The theater is NOT at fault here.

[Blue_Tires]

24. ok, so the jury finds him liable for, say $250 million

1. He'll almost certainly spend the rest of his life in prison or a mental facility
2. Even if he got paroled, no income he'd earn would ever make a dent in the payments, so the plaintiffs and attorneys would get nothing...

First rule in lawsuits: ALWAYS go after the people with money first, not the people at fault (although ideally they would be one and the same)

[HopeHoops]

32. What is the fixation on money here? I'm confused.

[Blue_Tires]

34. I'm just explaining the lawyer's strategy in a high-profile suit

[magical thyme]

35. the purpose of lawsuits is compensation

thus the focus on money. The litigant is claiming psychological injury that will have a monetary value for treatment and pain and suffering. The lawyers likely expect to be compensated as well. They can't all do pro bono all the time.

There are many ways to make pr points that do not clog up courts and spend taxpayer dollars on lawsuits that will generate nothing.

[HopeHoops]

40. It still doesn't make sense to sue the theater.

[magical thyme]

43. I agree on that; I think it's a sure loser

unless there's more than is being reported. On the other hand, I had a co-worker sue a hospital when she tripped in their parking lot and broke her ankle. They immediately offered her free treatment of the ankle, a half-time person to care for and help her at home until her ankle healed, and other bennies. She decided that wasn't enough compensation and sued them anyway, which I thought it was frivolous. They settled at full time help at home and some other bennies, I forget what now. So who knows...

But anybody who is seeking compensation for injury is going to go after whoever has deep pockets. That's the 1st rule of law suits.

[Blue_Tires]

48. I think it's a sure winner for a half-decent lawyer

Because the theater will most likely settle out of court than take their chances with what would be a VERY harsh Colorado jury...

But suing the doctors and time warner? Yeah, those will get thrown out pretty quick...

[magical thyme]

50. good points. nt

[HooptieWagon]

54. They way it works...

Lawyer lists anyone he can think of on the lawsuit. Judge throws out defendants with no bearing. If jury finds merit in the remainder, they assign proportionate liability , and the total damages. So, even if the theatre is held only 5% culpable, that would be a $12.5 million dollar judgement of the $250 million total damages. Even if Holmes is found to be 90% at fault, he won't pay a dime.

[steve2470]

10. agreed nt

[4th law of robotics]

23. Ah but why go after the $mall fi$h?

[HopeHoops]

28. If you're just in it for the money, you don't deserve to be in it.

[4th law of robotics]

33. Exactly my point

this is the very definition of a frivolous lawsuit.

They went right past the guilty parties and straight to the entity with the most money.

[HopeHoops]

38. Yep. Insult to injury.

[Chuuku Davis]

11. If I was suing the theater it would be for

Not allowing law abiding people who have been through a background check to carry concealed in the theater.

Now I will get in my foxhole for the barrage that is coming.

[Robb]

27. I'm sorry, you missed the cutoff for stupidest fucking post before 9 a.m. Mountain Time.

The 10 a.m. slot is, however, wide open.

[Larkspur]

47. Your problem is that Holmes was covered from head to toe in body armor

so your guns would have no impact other than attracting his attention so he could shoot and kill you.

This also assumes that you would not mistakenly shot or kill innocents who are in a panic trying to escape the chaos.

Even police officers have difficulty in situations like this and they are TRAINED to deal with these types of situations.

Average citizens with concealed weapons are a threat not to criminals as much as they are to innocent people. The man with a concealed weapon admitted that he almost shot and killed the heroes at the Giffords shooting who had wrestled the gunman while he was changing magazines. At the moment he saw the heroes take the gunmans' weapon away, this man wasn't sure who was the actual gunman or not. Luckliy for the heroes and this concealed gun carrier, the latter chose discretion as the better part of valor.

Why don't we take a lesson from the townspeople of the Old West, who supported gun control within their town limits. If gunmen wouldn't hand in their weapons to the sheriff, they were not welcomed in town.

[Aerows]

15. I agree with him about the theater

I thought it was standard to have an alarm on an exit door, because it lets the theater owners know there is a problem.

The other two? He's just trying to hit people that have the most money. Warner Bros. has been very apologetic in this situation, and has even donated proceeds to a fund for the victims. The doctor that prescribed him medication? How is it his fault that this guy was a psychopath and the doctor didn't know it? It's not like doctors are omnipotent.

In my opinion, the only entity he has a claim against is the theater.

[Comrade_McKenzie]

31. I've never been to a theater with an alarm on the exit door. nt

[hamsterjill]

20. We knew lawsuits would be coming, of course.

But I think this timing is a little too quick. Has his friend, Mr. Boik, even been laid to rest yet?

And of course the lawyer is going to enjoin any one and every one in the filings, but I seriously doubt that he's going to be able to prove that the Dark Knight movie (which had not even been viewed in its entirety yet when the shooting began) has any liability.

As to Holmes' doctors, they will have no liability here, I'm sure, as they cannot be held accountable if their patient didn't take medication as it may have been prescribed. Plus, I've not yet read anything indicating that Holmes was or was not taking meds - maybe I'm behind in reading today's headlines.

As to the theater, has there been any consideration that Holmes may have visited the theater earlier and somehow disarmed the alarm on the exit door? I mean, we're not dealing with a dumb criminal here. We're dealing with someone smart enough to booby trap his apartment, etc.

[NYC Liberal]

21. I disagree about the theatre.

If the intended purpose of the emergency exit door had been to prevent weapons or dangerous people from entering then the claim would have merit.

But since the purpose of the emergency exit door isn't that, but rather to allow people to exit in an emergency (such as a fire), how can the theatre be negligent? Why would an emergency exit door need to be guarded? If the door had been broken and the theatre hadn't fixed it, thus preventing people from using it in an emergency, that would be negligence. An un-alarmed and unguarded emergency exit doesn't interfere with its intended use.

[4th law of robotics]

22. Sounds like a frivolous lawsuit

you can't protect against every thing in an open society.

[Comrade_McKenzie]

29. Yeah, bankrupt the theater and put people out of work...

That's silly.

The theater is no more responsible for those murders than the people who decided to go to the movies at the wrong place and time.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

36. The movie was too violent....

....and yet this kid was so stoked to see it, he went at midnight as soon as it opened.

Seriously, fuck him and his ambulance chasing dickhead lawyer.

[progressivebydesign]

52. Nothing says lovin' like a big fat payout.

How American.... because we all know that money will bring your loved ones back, or at least make you feel better with a new house, a pool, an SUV, and a trip to Europe.

[Alduin]

55. I'm guessing Mr. Brown is looking for easy money.

[arcane1]

56. That sound you hear is Judas Priest and Ozzy Osbourne says "jeez, not this shit again" n/t

[DirkGently]

57. Seems like he'd have a hard time proving foreseeability.

There's no alarm on a door, so the theater should expect a madman to come in and shoot people? That'd place a pretty heavy burden on any venue with ... doors.

I see the same plaintiff is also suing the killer's doctors for not "monitoring" him, and Warner Brothers because Batman is a violent movie. ????

There may be legitimate suits to bring over this, but this doesn't sound like it.

[cbdo2007]

59. Theater should have some viable security, so I would back a lawsuit against the theater

in that regard. I don't know the details of what security procedures were in place, if there were security gards there, or police patrols or what not, but anytime you can hold open an exit door and bring in an arsenal of weapons, that is something that shouldn't be able to happen even if it's just some bozo sneaking all his friends in to see the movie.

Especially for crowds with multiple sold-out shows and people wearing costumes, seems like a no brainer to have greatly increased security for those occasions.