[CO] Police seek dismissal in Columbine massacre suits

[KaMaKaZe]

Police seek dismissal in Columbine massacre suits

The Associated Press

DENVER (August 22, 2000 11:18 p.m. EDT http://www.nandotimes.com) - The Jefferson County Sheriff's Office and other defendants on Tuesday argued that five lawsuits filed by the families of Columbine victims should be dismissed because they have failed to prove their claims.

The defendants have asked a federal judge to dismiss the wrongful death suits filed over the April 20, 1999, shootings at Columbine High School. Two teen gunmen killed 12 students and a teacher before committing suicide.

Some of the defendants - the sheriff's office, Sheriff John Stone, seven sheriff's officers and former Sheriff Ronald Beckham - filed documents Tuesday saying the lawsuits failed to show that the victim's constitutional rights were violated because the U.S. Constitution does not guarantee a right to police protection.

They also said officers have no constitutional duty to investigate crime to prevent violence by private citizens; that the families failed to prove the officers' actions put the victims in danger; and that the officers are entitled to qualified immunity from lawsuits.

The lawsuits were filed by the families of Richard Castaldo, Sean Graves, Lance Kirklin and Mark Taylor, who were wounded in the attack, and the family of Isaiah Shoels, who was killed.

The suits were originally filed in state court and then transferred to federal court.

The story can be found HERE.

------------------
God, Guns and Guts made this country a great country!

oberkommando sez:
"We lost the first and third and now they are after the Second!(no pun intended)"

 

[TheBluesMan]

If this does get dismissed (and it probably will if the court studies Warren v. District of Columbia or DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services or Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Department) then this may help to wake up the American Sheeple to the fact that you can't just rely on the police to protect you. You must also rely on yourself!

I ain't holdin' my breath though.


------------------
RKBA!
"The people have the right to bear arms for their defense and security"
Ohio Constitution, Article I, Section 4
Concealed Carry is illegal in Ohio.
Ohioans for Concealed Carry Website

[This message has been edited by TheBluesMan (edited August 23, 2000).]

 

[Donny]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Two teen gunmen killed 12 students and a teacher before committing suicide. [/quote]

As has alreay been established, the two were STUDENTS, not gunmen. Yet the misdefinitions continue, for purpose of confusion, and association of terms.

I would envision a gunman as one who does contract work for say, the Mafia, or a similar structure, eliminating certain risks to the business.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Some of the defendants - the sheriff's office, Sheriff John Stone, seven sheriff's officers and former Sheriff Ronald Beckham - filed documents Tuesday saying the lawsuits failed to show that the victim's constitutional rights were violated because the U.S. Constitution does not guarantee a right to police protection.

They also said officers have no constitutional duty to investigate crime to prevent violence by private citizens; that the families failed to prove the officers' actions put the victims in danger; and that the officers are entitled to qualified immunity from lawsuits. [/quote]

This is certainly a clear message to any who're listening, and understands the premise that police are Historians by nature.

Hell, insurance companies can't prevent the disasters that occur. They merely provide monetary offset in the eventuality of such.
No matter what size policy, or premium you pay. And then not for every disaster.

Such is life, when every effort is being made to bare the throat of society to anyone with an evil intent.

One must ask the question, why are LEO armed?
If the mass of our society is being asked, nay, forced to go unarmed. The why are the few being guaranteed immunity from the evils that fall such a choice?

Why are Bank security guards allowed to be armed. Or the Armored car/truck occupants?
Is is because money is valuable and human life is not? Rather someone else's money, just not your's.

Other TFL posts' have given substance of the crime problems the Aussies have been having, as well as the Britson the the issue of a disarmed populace. And the problems associated with that. Not to mention the example cases made of one who dares defend himself from violent criminals.

The message there is clear, you can't, or are not allowed to protect yourself, and on the same hand, the police aren't there to protect you either. A LOSE-LOSE situation.


------------------
The most foolish mistake we could make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms;
History shows that all conquerers who have allowed their subjected people to carry arms have prepared their own fall.
Adolf Hitler
-----------------
"Corrupt the young, get them away from religion. Get them interested in sex. Make them superficial, and destroy their rugged- ness.
Get control of all means of publicity, and thereby get the peoples' mind off their government by focusing their attention on athletics, sexy books and plays, and other trivialities.
Divide the people into hostile groups by constantly harping on controversial matters of no importance."

Vladimir Ilich Lenin, former leader of USSR
-----------------
Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom.

John F. Kennedy

 

[Dead]

As Mentioned above, those court cases show that the Police DO NOT HAVE ANY DUTY WHAT-SO-EVER to protect the people! In other words they dont have to do anything if you call 911, it simply is NOT a part of their job legally. (Though most all of the Cops will 'protect' the people if the need should arise)

my .02cents.

------------------
Dead [Black Ops]

 

[Donny]

My previous post wasn't an attempt to flame.

I was trying to emphasize the fact of why LEO are armed. While it is probably true that the average schmuck won't run into the class of citizens that LEO do, we still have occasion enough to do so, and the results are usually disastrous for us.
Mostly because were not armed as a part of life. That most of our occurences occur in our own homes, where you're most at ease, and least expect trouble.

It's claimed that most auto accidents occur within 25 miles of one's own home. Complaceny is given credit for most of that.

Jury's still out for me on whether to pass blame there. Haven't seen enough of the footages from whom/whatever to express outrage, or sympathy!