FRIVOLOUS LAW SUITS MATTER …
The family of Michael Brown, the 18 year old black teen that was shot by a white police officer, is planning on filing a law suit against Ferguson for wrongful death. HUH?The formal announcement is expected Thursday morning in St. Louis. Id the Brown family looking for strike 3? A grand jury has already refused to indict police officer Darren Wilson in the shooting death of the so-called “Gentle Giant”, see below pic of Brown in a strong armed robbery of a store clerk for a box of cigars. Then, Eric Holder and the Justice Department dropped the civil law suit against officer Wilson as there was no there, there to charge Wilson on racial bias.
Does some one need to remind the Brown family that “Hands Up, Dont’ Shoot” was based upon a lie? Trust me, if Eric Holder could not get a scalp with his DOJ investigation of officer Wilson, there is nothing there. In fact, the DOJ investigation showed that all of the credible witnesses corroborated officer Wilson’s events of what happened. The family may want to really just let this go as they may do even more harm than good to the legacy of Michael Brown.
Lawyers for the parents of Michael Brown, the unarmed, black 18-year-old who was fatally shot by a white police officer in a St. Louis suburb, announced Wednesday night that they planned to file a civil lawsuit the following day against the city of Ferguson.
Attorneys for the family said in a statement Wednesday night that the wrongful death lawsuit would be filed Thursday. The lawsuit had been expected. Attorneys for Brown’s mother, Lesley McSpadden, and his father, Michael Brown Sr., announced at a press conference in early March that a wrongful death lawsuit would be filed “soon.” Attorneys said at the time that the lawsuit would also name former Officer Darren Wilson, who shot Brown.
Newtown, CT Victims’ Families Sue Bushmaster, Manufacturer of AR-15, Gun Used by Adam Lanza in 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School Attack
The Sandy Hook Elementary School murders were unspeakable, however, this lawsuit is misguided and Unconstitutional …
The murders of 27 individuals, 20 of whom were children, at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut on December 14, 2012 was a crime so heinous that it was hard to fathom how anyone could be so insane and filled with hate. However, 20 year old gunman Adam Lanza committed this act of violence as he barged into a defenseless elementary school and took part in the deadliest school shootings in U.S. history. Now the families of nine people killed in the Sandy Hook elementary school massacre are suing Bushmaster, a privately held company based in Windham, Maine that manufacture the AR-15. This was the gun that Lanza used in the mass murders.
The 40 page lawsuit, filed in Connecticut Superior Court in Bridgeport, names Bushmaster, the weapons distributor and the retailer, Riverview in East Windor, that sold the gun used in the shooting as defendants. The plaintiffs seeks unspecified monetary damages.
The families of nine people killed in a 2012 massacre at a Newtown, Connecticut, elementary school sued the maker of the gun used in the attack on Monday, saying the weapon should not have been sold because it had no reasonable civilian purpose.
While the AR-15 assault weapon used in the attack on Sandy Hook Elementary School was legally sold in Connecticut, the lawsuit contends that the weapon should not have been available to 20-year-old gunman Adam Lanza. The AR-15 is manufactured by Bushmaster, a privately held company based in Windham, Maine.
Lanza shot dead 20 first-graders and six educators in the Dec. 14, 2012, attack, which stands as one of the deadliest school shootings in U.S. history. The massacre sparked a fresh debate on gun rights, which are protected by the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
“This is a weapon that is designed for military use, for killing as many people as efficiently as possible,” Michael Koskoff, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said in a phone interview. “It’s negligent for any seller to sell a weapon like that to the general public.”
As tragic as the Sandy Hook Elementary school massacre was and as much we hope that the families affected by this tragedy can move forward from this devastating act of violence at the hands of Adam Lanza, I am sorry but this law suit is misguided. The gun was legally bought by Adam Lanza’s mother, who was also murdered by this sick kid. The guns were legally registered to Nancy Lanza. Adam Lanza was refused the purchase of a firearm as he did not pass back ground checks. If anyone was negligent, one might say it was the mother who shared her gun enthusiasm with her mentally deranged son and did not properly lock them away from this killer. Millions of Americans own AR-15′s and use them for person and civilian use. The notion that plaintiff attorneys say that this weapon is only for military use is incorrect. The AR-15 is not an assault weapon, however, the liberal MSM would like you to think so. What Adam Lanza did was an heinous an act possible … but suing a gun manufacturer that is protected by the Second Amendment and followed all the laws is wrong.
The lawsuit, hand-delivered to a Connecticut state marshal on Saturday, names as defendants Bushmaster Firearms International LLC, which is owned by Remington Outdoor Co.; Camfour, a company that distributes Bushmaster products; and Riverview Gun Sales, a East Windsor, Conn., gun shop that sold the rifle to Ms. Lanza.
It claims the gunmaker, the firearms distributor, and the store that sold firearm are liable for producing and selling a weapon unfit for civilian use, reports WSJ’s Joseph De Avila.
Remington declined to comment. Camfour and Riverview Gun Sales didn’t return requests for comment.
George Kollitides, the chief executive of Remington Outdoor, told the Washington Times in June 2013 that Mr. Lanza alone, and not the rifle, was to blame for the killings.
“It’s very easy to blame an inanimate object,” he said. “Any kind of instrument in the wrong hands can be put to evil use. This comes down to intent — criminal behavior, accountability and responsibility.”
Memphis, Tennessee Dead Beat Dad: 50 Year Old Terry Turnage Has Fathered 26 Children with 20 Different Women
Sorry, but I think it is time the Court orders Mr. Turnage to be neutered.
50 year old Terry Turnage will not be getting any father of the year awards any time soon. Unless the award because a reward for someone fathering the most children. Turnage has fathered 26 children with 20 different women to date and counting. Twenty-three of them in Shelby County, TN and it appears 3 more across the river in Forrest City, Arkansas. Three women in Forrest City went to court asking for child support from Terry Turnage. He didn’t show up. I don’t know who is more pathetic, Turnage or the 20 woman. What are the odds that all of the twenty woman are single mothers, getting public assistance from our tax dollars. Some how this walking serial impregnation is allowed to just continue along his merry way. UNREAL. Sorry, but this is serial child abuse.
Just curious, where is Barack Obama, Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson speaking out against this and the destruction of the black family structure? No where of course.
The Paternity Complaint can be read HERE.
The Tennessee deadbeat who has fathered 26 children with 20 different women has again been ordered by a judge to make child support payments, this time for a two-year-old Arkansas boy, court records show.
Terry Turnage, a 50-year-old Memphis resident, was ordered this month to pay $60 per week to Miesha Davis, mother of the pair’s son Ja’Voin. The support order came as a result of a paternity complaint filed on
Davis’s behalf by Arkansas’s Office of Child Support Enforcement.
A Circuit Court judge also ordered Turnage to “maintain health care insurance” for the child “when reasonably available” through his employer, and pay $365 in court fees.
According to Arkansas court records, state officials have filed income withholding notices with a Memphis company that operates a McDonald’s restaurant where Turnage has supposedly worked (and earned $247.28 weekly).
Conservative Radio Host Rush Limbaugh Threatened to Sue the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) for Defamation
According to The Daily Caller, Conservative Radio host Rush Limbaugh has threatened to sue the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) for defamation and interference. According to accounts, El Rushbo has retained the services of attorney Patty Glaser, who reportedly delivered a letter to the DCCC on Monday notifying the committee of the possibility of a lawsuit demanding a retraction and apology for intentionally misleading the public. Limbaugh is stating that the DCCC defamed him when they made statements attributed to Rush out of context by Democrat fundraising letters trying to ignite the liberal base. The PJ Tatler is spot on when they say, it is extremely difficult for a public figure to win a defamation case and there is none more public than Rush. However, Democrats have made a cottage industry out of try to defame Rush Limbaugh in the past, why would this be any different?
Limbaugh retained the services of lawyer Patty Glaser and demanded that the DCCC “preserve all records in anticipation of a lawsuit for defamation and interference” after the Democratic Party group led a campaign against Limbaugh based on out-of-context statements the host made about sexual assault. Limbaugh’s legal team delivered a letter to DCCC representatives Monday informing them of the legal threat. Limbaugh has also demanded a public retraction and apology.
The Limbaugh team is currently proceeding from the standpoint of litigating and has not yet made a decision as to whether the DCCC could make any concessions at this point to prevent the lawsuit.
The DCCC “has intentionally disseminated demonstrably false statements concerning Rush Limbaugh in a concerted effort to harm Mr. Limbaugh, and with reckless disregard for the resulting impact to small businesses across America that choose to advertise on his radio program” according to the GlaserWeil law firm’s letter to the DCCC, which was obtained by TheDC. “Mr. Limbaugh clearly, unambiguously, and emphatically condemned the notion that ‘no’ means ‘yes.’”
“Let’s be clear: Rush Limbaugh is advocating for the tolerance of rape” the DCCC stated in a September fundraising email after Limbaugh mocked Ohio State’s new mandatory sexual consent guidelines.
This is one law suit I very much hope goes forward.
Yet another clueless jury, do people understand what they are charged with …
Yesterday, former professional wrestler, former Minnesota governor and 911 truther Jesse Ventura won his court case against American hero Chris Kyle. Actually, since Chris Kyle is dead, Ventura won his defamation law suit against the widow of an American hero. A jury actually awarded Ventura $1.8 million. UNREAL, it would appear we have found a more ignorant one than that of the Casey Anthony case.
Defamation of Character???
A jury awarded former Minnesota Gov. Jesse Ventura $1.8 million Tuesday in his lawsuit against the estate of “American Sniper” author Chris Kyle.
On the sixth day of deliberations, the federal jury decided that the 2012 best-selling book defamed Ventura in its description of a bar fight in California in 2006. Kyle wrote that he decked a man whom he later identified as Ventura after the man allegedly said the Navy SEALs “deserve to lose a few.”
Ventura testified that Kyle fabricated the passage about punching him. Kyle said in testimony videotaped before his death last year that his story was accurate.
Legal experts had said Ventura had to clear a high legal bar to win, since as a public figure he had to prove “actual malice.” According to the jury instructions, Ventura had to prove with “clear and convincing evidence” that Kyle either knew or believed what he wrote was untrue, or that he harbored serious doubts about its truth.
Outrage at Twitchy.com … ‘F*cking disgrace’: Jury helps jagoff Jesse Ventura stick it to Chris Kyle’s widow
Ventura attorney David Bradley Olsen stated Kyle’s claims that Ventura said he hated America, thought the U.S. military was killing innocent civilians in Iraq and that the SEALs “deserve to lose a few” had made him a pariah in the community that mattered most to him – the brotherhood of current and former SEALs. If that is the case, then suing the widow of a deceased US military hero should just do wonders. Olsen stated that Ventura was proud of his military service and would never say anything like Navy SEALs “deserve to lose a few.” Hmm, of course he would say nothing bad about the military. Has anyone actually listened to the comments that Ventura has spewed? He called “Our Military” contract killers on national TV … does any common sense thinking person think he is not capable of making a snarky comment when there are no cameras on?
“Our Military Has Turned Into Contract For Hire Killers” Jesse Ventura (CNN)
And he said Ventura would never have said any of the remarks attributed to him because he remains proud of his and his parents’ military service.
“The statement is completely out of character for Jesse Ventura. He never said anything like that in his life, and he never will,” he said.
As The Gateway Pundits disgustingly says, “Congratulations Jesse! You proved your patriotism by suing the widow of a deceased American Hero! What do you do for an encore, burn an American flag?”
Football Hall of Famer & Former Miami Dolphin QB Dan Marino Sues NFL Over Concussions (Update: Marino Withdraws from Concussion Lawsuit)
DAN MARINO SUES NFL OVER CONCUSSIONS …
Hall of Famer and Miami Dolphin quarterback great Dan Marino is the latest to sue the NFL over concussions. According to court documents, a lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania by Mariono and 14 other former NFL players. Marino and the other 14 plaintiffs join more than 4,800 others who have alleged the NFL misled players about the long-term dangers of concussions. The NFL has denied those claims. Although no specific symptoms are alleged for Marino in the lawsuit, it does contain language for the QB great, “On information and belief, the Plaintiff … sustained repetitive, traumatic sub-concussive and/or concussive head impacts during NFL games and/or practices.”
Dan Marino, the Hall of Fame member and former Miami Dolphins quarterback, last week sued the NFL over concussions, according to federal court records.
As the behind-the-scenes effort to gain approval for the proposed $765-million settlement of the concussion litigation continues, Marino and 14 other former players sued in U.S. District Court in Philadelphia.
At least 41 members of the Pro Football Hall of Fame, or their estates, are among about 5,000 former players suing.
The 18-page complaint alleges the NFL concealed information about football-related brain injuries and misled players, claims that are similar to those made in more than 300 related lawsuits. The NFL has repeatedly denied such claims.
A federal judge rejected the proposed settlement of $765 million in January by the NFL, concerned about whether the settlement amount is sufficient for all affected players. To be honest, $765 does not even come close to what medical bills and treatment would cost over their lifetime. I am not even sure if $2 billion is adequate.
UPDATE I: As reported at CNN, Dan Marino is withdrawing his name from a lawsuit suing the NFL over concussions, saying he didn’t realize his name would be attached to the lawsuit. HUH? Well that’s mighty brave of him. I guess suing the NFL is bad for getting a job with the NFL. Profiles in courage.
Dan Marino, considered one of the greatest quarterbacks in National Football League history, is withdrawing his name from a concussion lawsuit against the NFL, according to published reports.
The news, first reported by the South Florida Sun Sentinel, comes a day after media reports that the Hall of Fame quarterback and 14 other players had filed a lawsuit that claims the NFL knew for years of a link between concussions and long-term health problems and did nothing about it.
Marino, 52, said he didn’t realize his name would be attached to the lawsuit.
“Within the last year I authorized a claim to be filed on my behalf just in case I needed future medical coverage to protect me and my family in the event I later suffered from the effects of head trauma,” the former Miami Dolphins star wrote in a statement published in the Sun Sentinel and on Sports Illustrated’s website.
Receipt Racism … Tennessee Man Sues Red Lobster & Waitress for Falsely Accusing Him of Writing Racial Slur “Ni**er” on Receipt
Tennessee man sues Red Lobster for $1 million for falsely accusing him of writing racial slur on receipt … Hires handwriting expert to clear his name.
Devin Barnes is suing Red Lobster and the waitress that served him for falsely accusing him of writing a racial slur “NI**ER” on his receipt in place of writing a tip amount. Barnes is suing the waitress, Toni Jenkins for posting his personal information on the Internet and for receiving about $11,000 in donations based on the story and the lawsuit is asking for a jury trial and $1 million in damages. Barnes hired a hand writing expert to review the receipt and help clear his name from this damaging accusation. At least two experts believed this to be a hoax. Barnes admitted to writing the word “none
Weeks ago, Barnes’ attorney and pastor, Richard Dugger, hired an independent handwriting expert who compared the receipt with samples provided by Barnes and his wife.
“There is no evidence that neither Devin Barnes nor his wife wrote that hideous statement on the line total, which means that someone else did,” Dugger said.
The incident occurred in September 2013 when Devin Barnes ate at the Red Lobster in Cool Spring, Tennessee. Barnes stated that he was running tight on time, so he had his waitress put the meal into a to-go container. When he paid the bill, he wrote “none” under tip. What followed would change his life forever. Toni Jenkins, a Red Lobster waitress, posted on Facebook a photo of a receipt from customer Devin Barnes with his personal information was on a receipt where someone had written the n-word.
In court on Thursday, Barnes filed suit against the waitress, Toni Jenkins, and Red Lobster, claiming that Barnes and his family have suffered because of the situation.
According to the court filing, they have expert testimony from a handwriting analyst to prove Barnes didn’t write the racial slur on the receipt.
Barnes is suing Jenkins for posting his personal information on the Internet and for receiving about $11,000 in donations based on the story.
He also contends the restaurant didn’t do enough to contain the situation.
In response, the restaurant chain said in a statement that, “it is against our policy to post guest information online. Our standard procedure is to suspend the employee involved with pay while we determine what happened. After the completion of a full investigation into this matter, Ms. Jenkins returned to work.”
The lawsuit is asking for a jury trial and $1 million in damages.
The Daily Caller: Waitress, Red Lobster Sued For $1 Million In Alleged Race Hoax.
But two handwriting experts who looked at the receipt and at writing samples from Barnes, his wife, and Jenkins determined that it was unlikely that the couple had written the slur.
The expert hired by Barnes and his attorney concluded that both Barnes and his wife were unlikely to have written the slur.
Another expert, contacted by The Daily Caller News Foundation, analyzed the receipt, comparing it to a copy of a writing sample from Jenkins. The expert determined that “within a reasonable degree of certainty” Jenkins had written the slur.
Jenkins responded at the time telling TheDCNF that she no longer believed that Barnes had written the word.
She said she would apologize to Barnes but maintained that she did not write the word either.
Asked if she planned to share any of the donations she received with Barnes, Jenkins said “Honestly I would…if there was any left.”
Hopefully Red Lobster and this waitress will be successfully sued to put an end to this crime of “Racism by Hoax”.
Portland Pimp Sirgiorgiro Clardy Sues Nike for $100 Million for Lack of Warning Label That Shoes Could be Used as Dangerous Weapon After Beating John with Air Jordans
IT’S GOTTA BE THE SHOES … File this one under, and you thought you had heard it all, subtitled, ‘Pimpin’ Aint Easy.
A Portland, Oregon pimp, Sirgiorgiro Clardy, has filed a $100 million lawsuit against Nike. This fool is actually making the claim that Chairman Phil Knight and other executives failed to properly label his Air Jordan’s as dangerous weapons and is partially responsible e for a brutal beating of a “John” where as a result he was sentenced to 100 years in prison. Clardy was wearing a pair of Air Jordan’s when he attacked an 18-year-old woman he forced to work as an escort and repeatedly stomped the face of a john who was trying to skip out on a trick without paying Clardy’s prostitute in June 2012. I guess it is good he didn’t have his Timberland’s on, he would have been tried for murder. Clardy filed his suit this week in Multnomah County Circuit Court and will be representing himself.
Jurors early in 2013 found him guilty of second-degree assault for using his Jordans — a dangerous weapon — to beat the john’s face to a pulp. The man required stitches and plastic surgery on his nose.
The jury also found him guilty of robbing the john and beating the 18-year-old woman he forced to work as his prostitute. She was injured so badly that she bled from her ears.
In his three-page complaint handwritten from the Eastern Oregon Correctional Institution in Pendleton, Clardy claims that Nike, Chairman Phil Knight and other executives failed to warn consumers that the shoes could be used as a weapon to cause serious injury or death.
“Under product liability there is a certain standard of care that is required to be up-held by potentially dangerous product …” wrote Clardy, who is representing himself. “Do (sic) to the fact that these defendants named in this Tort claim failed to warn of risk or to provide an adequate warning or instruction it has caused personal injury in the likes of mental suffering.”
As expected, Clardy has quite the past criminal record. See you in 100 years!
Robert Zimmerman Warns that Civil Suit Against His George Zimmerman ‘Might not be very Flattering’ for Trayvon Martin’s Family
Could a civil trial against George Zimmerman by the family of Trayvon Martin be more problematic that a benefit?
Robert Zimmerman states that a civil suit brought against his brother George Zimmerman, in a wrongful death trial, could be very troubling to the family of Trayvon Martin and could lead to very unpleasant facts that were never a part of the criminal trial. The rules of evidence are much different in a civil trial than a criminal one and much of the evidence that was excluded from the second degree criminal trial where a jury found George Zimmerman not guilty, could be entered into evidence in a civil trial. Sometimes it’s best not to dig up all the fact that took place because they might not be very pretty and may not follow the narrative of a made up story by the media and prosecution of Trayvon Martin. We do not like to talk ill of the dead and the death of Trayvon Martin is a tragedy no matter how you look at it, but in the end, we can all agree that he was most likely not the angel that the media made him out to be. Why drag his past through another trial and open his entire life to cross-examination? I realize those that have hijacked this case don’t care, but is that what the family of Trayvon Martin really want to do? Is “justice” really bringing up your child’s past to go after George Zimmerman because you feel wronged by a jury decision where there was no evidence to prove murder or manslaughter? That is the question that the family of Trayvon Martin will have to ask themselves.
Robert Zimmerman, whose younger brother George was acquitted for his role in the death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, told The Huffington Post on Friday that a civil suit might lead to unpleasant facts coming to light about the Florida teenager’s family.
“A myriad of things that were off-limits in a criminal trial would come into play in a civil case,” Robert Zimmerman said in an email to the Post. “Specifically, things that might not be very flattering to Trayvon or his family.”
The report comes one day after a member of the six-woman jury that acquitted George Zimmerman on second-degree murder charges told ABC News that the former neighborhood watch captain “got away with murder,” but that there was not enough evidence to find him guilty on July 13.
It could open a Pandora’s box, namely the Trayvon Martin’s cell phone that was not allowed during the criminal trial. It had been my personal contention that had a jury been able to have seen previous texts of Trayvon Martin discussing fighting and knowing that Trayvon Martin had a history of fighting, getting into trouble in school, suspension, and the rest … the jury would have come back even quicker with a not guilty verdict. This was evidence that the Zimmerman defense team said was withheld from them by the prosecution. The state IT director Ben Kruidbos was fired because of his whistle-blowing of the incident.
Another difficulty in filing a civil case in Florida is Florida’s stand your ground law. The statute provides criminal and civil immunity to anyone who uses deadly force in a situation in which one has a reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily injury.
Imagine if much of the evidence from Bill Whittle & ‘Afterburner’ … The Wretched Lynching of George Zimmerman … The MSM Participated in Criminal Fraud or Criminal Negligence was allowed to come into a civil trial?
George Zimmerman Attorney James Beasley Says All Ahead Full in Lawsuit Against NBC News Now that Verdict of “Not Guilty” Returned by Jury in Murder Trial
James Beasley, George Zimmerman’s attorney in his law suit for defamation of character against NBC News for doctoring and mis-editing Zimmeramn’s 911 call, stated that they are going forward and full speed ahead now that the criminal murder case against Zimmerman is over and he was found “not guilty”. Every one is talking about George Zimmerman’s legal troubles, a most certain civil lawsuit by the estate of Trayvon martin and a possible federal civil rights charge by the DOJ, even though the FBI has previous found that Zimmerman was not racist and did not display any prejudice or racial bias. But it would appear the most immediate legal action is going to be that of George Zimmerman suing NBC News for defamation.
Last night’s not-guilty verdict in the George Zimmerman trial will enable the neighborhood-watch volunteer to resume his case against NBC News for the mis-editing of his widely distributed call to police. Back in December, Zimmerman sued NBC Universal Media for defamation over the botched editing, which depicted him as a hardened racial profiler.
The company also noted the pivotal nature of the second-degree murder case: “[I]f Zimmerman is convicted, that fact alone will constitute substantial evidence that the destruction of his reputation is the result of his own criminal conduct, and not of the broadcasts at issue which, like countless other news reports disseminated by media entities throughout the country, reported on the underlying events.”
That formulation is now null.
According to Zimmerman attorney James Beasley, the case against NBC News was stayed pending the outcome of the criminal case. Now that’s out of the way, and Beasley is ready to proceed. “We’re going to start in earnest asap, we just have to get the stay lifted which is a ministerial act,” says Beasley, a Philadelphia lawyer, via e-mail.
Brent Bozell and Sean Hannity discussing the media and political bias against George Zimmerman … the NBC doctored 911 tape
NBC News presented the 911 call as follows, in a March 27, 2012, broadcast of the “Today” show, abridged the tape of Zimmerman’s comments to a police dispatcher on the evening of Feb. 26, 2012:
Zimmerman: This guy looks like he’s up to no good. He looks black.
However, the undoctored and full tape went like this:
Zimmerman: This guy looks like he’s up to no good. Or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about. Dispatcher: OK, and this guy — is he black, white or Hispanic?
Zimmerman: He looks black.
NewsBuster reminds us that NBC has since fired three employees because of this incident, but claims that it did not engage in a deliberate misrepresentation of the facts. Oh, of course not. This was an obvious case of NBC News going out of their way to doctor a 911 call to present a narrative to the American people that would support the LEFT’s witch hunt of Zimmerman. It could not be more clear. As Patterico’s Pontifications opines, one of the biggest villains in this case was “Big Media” and NBC was at the head of the list.
EXIT QUESTION: When has the news media ever had to edit a 911 tape except to take out expletives or addresses?