http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_263468...oreseeable

Quote:The owner of the Aurora movie theater that was the site of a deadly 2012 attack could have reasonably enough foreseen the danger of such an attack to be held liable for it, a federal judge ruled Friday.

Noting "the grim history of mass shootings and mass killings that have occurred in more recent times," U.S. District Court Judge R. Brooke Jackson ruled that Cinemark — owner of the Century Aurora 16 theater — could have predicted that movie patrons might be targeted for an attack. Jackson's ruling allows 20 lawsuits filed by survivors of the attack or relatives of those killed to proceed toward trial.

"Although theaters had theretofore been spared a mass shooting incident, the patrons of a movie theater are, perhaps even more than students in a school or shoppers in a mall, 'sitting ducks,' " Jackson wrote.

So now this innocent vendor is potentially held liable for another's actions. And you wonder where liberty and free enterprise has gone?

This is out there and I mean waaaaaay out there. Now anything that happens anywhere at any time should have been foreseen. If this was actually possible we wouldn't need car or home insurance, would we?

This reminds me of that Italian court that convicted seven scientist in 2012 for not predicting an earthquake that occured.

(08-28-2014 01:57 PM)VA49er Wrote:  This reminds me of that Italian court that convicted seven scientist in 2012 for not predicting an earthquake that occured.

That's not exactly what happened.

One of the crew told everyone it was safest to go back inside.

The other 6 should not have been punished.

Ridiculous. Just like getting out of a brutal murder by pleading Temporary Insanity. Well, not JUST like it, but just as ridiculous.

That judge was completely off in that assessment. Granted, we publicize mass shootings when they happen, the probability of actually being involved in one in very, very small. So, a ruling based on this "new norm" or mass shooting, is inherently flawed.

Wow, he should have hired this guy.

By that logic any business or institution that posts "Gun Free Zone" signs should be held liable in civil court for persons harmed or killed in said zones for enticing gun toting criminals onto their properties.

This judge was a far left appointee. This wasn't meant to be a sound ruling, it is a part of a strategy.

Judges should be personally liable for the costs of an appeal if their decisions are overturned - that would put a stop to things REAL quick.