It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
A young man who survived Friday's shootings in an Aurora, Colorado movie theater is planning to file suit against Cinemark, TMZ reported Tuesday.
Torrence Brown, Jr. was also close friends with one of the 12 people killed in the attack, 18-year-old A.J. Boik. Neither of Brown's parents would confirm the planned lawsuits Tuesday afternoon, referring Yahoo News to Brown's lawyer, who didn't return requests for comment.
Attorney Don Karpel told TMZ that the suit will allege that the Century 16 theater, which is owned by Cinemark, was negligent for not having the exit door guarded or equipped with an alarm that would sound when it opened. (Holmes reportedly left the theater via the exit door, propped it open, and reentered with his weapons.) The suit also targets Warner Brothers, blaming their movie's violence for inspiring Holmes. Also named in the suit: suspect James Holmes' doctors, if they exist, for hypothetically not monitoring his hypothetical mental condition adequately.
Originally posted by xenthuin
Also named in the suit: suspect James Holmes' doctors, if they exist, for hypothetically not monitoring his hypothetical mental condition adequately.
Originally posted by 3n19m470
They should sued for not allowing guns in there so people could protect themselves from criminals. Criminals often use places of darkness to hide their crimes, so it should have been obvious something would happen sooner or later...
Originally posted by alfa1
Originally posted by xenthuin
Also named in the suit: suspect James Holmes' doctors, if they exist, for hypothetically not monitoring his hypothetical mental condition adequately.
If one can sue people that only hypothetically exist, for doing (or not) hypothetical things, they should name God in the lawsuit as well.
Its only fair.
Originally posted by Shirak
reply to post by freethinker123
Lets get something straight fire escapes are mandated by law in all public places. The door was opened from within. Fire exits may not be blocked and are not required by law to be not locked from the exit side.
Unless a law is passed that all public places should have alarms on their doors and armed security within their facilities. The cinema has done no wrongdoing. This is a tradgety that could not have been circumvented by an alarm on a door. There would have been nothing to stop an entry from the front. Lets not forget the cinema owners are also victims here.
Originally posted by edaced4
Originally posted by 3n19m470
They should sued for not allowing guns in there so people could protect themselves from criminals. Criminals often use places of darkness to hide their crimes, so it should have been obvious something would happen sooner or later...
I very much second this notion. I'm not a big gun person myself, and don't know Colorado's laws (don't need to cause I don't live there...), but 3n19m470 is partially right. Maybe if just one or two people, who were CC licensed, were carrying, this might have all turned out differently. Do I know that? Know. I don't. But we'll never know, will we...
but the cinema does not allow weapons in the theater