Victim sues Kroger and armed citizen who saved her

[gthaustex]

Well, Atkinson did have a history of commiting armed robbery and was out on work release at the time. Both lawsuits should be thrown out. If not, 1 penny for each plaintiff. If Nelson didn't want to be involved / around violence and criminal activity, then she should not have been working for a security company. The perps mother is suing because the store did not "exercise reasonable care for his safety". It seems to me her son did not exercise reasonable care for his own safety when he tried to commit another robbery.

OTOH, I'm sure Atkinson was a good kid, was raised in the church and sang in the choir......

[BigGuy]

The perps mother is suing because the store did not "exercise reasonable care for his safety". It seems to me her son did not exercise reasonable care for his own safety when he tried to commit another robbery.

[smart alek]
Sorry. I've got to disagree with you on this one. The store was posted as a designated victim zone. The poor perp had every reasonable expectation that he could enter and commit any atrocity he wanted with out the interference of an armed potential victium. Clearly misrepresentstion on Krogers part.
[/smart alek]

[TexasCajun]

This can & does happen all over the place. Even in our beloved Texas. While the Texas penal code says that someone involved in a justifiable shoot cannot be awarded damages from the offender/offender's family, it's an affirmative defense. That means that if you shoot a BG, he/his family can sue you for damages (even though they were determined to be commiting a crime & even though the use of deadly force was justified). Then you can present the affirmative defense of it being a justified use of force in response to the commission of a crime and move to have the case dismissed. But even with that protection, there's a fair amount of lawyering that will have to be done.

[67SS]

Bet it gets tossed.... at least I hope it does....

[TexasCajun]

If Indiana has a similar provision, then it's a matter of having a lawyer gather up all of the pertinent info & filing the correct paperwork. If not, then it'll be somewhat more involved and somewhat more costly.

[C-dub]

Bet it gets tossed.... at least I hope it does....

I too, hope both get thrown out, but while a justifiable shooting may absolve the shooter it may not release the company from any liability if they have a "no firearms" policy. Unfortunately, I think they may both end up with a settlement before any court decision is rendered.