XPost: misc.legal, rec.arts.movies.current-films   
   From: g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies   
      
   In message    
     BTR1701  wrote:   
   > In article ,   
   >  "Leroy N. Soetoro"  wrote:   
      
   >> Cinemark's lawyers argued that the theater couldn't have prevented the   
   >> attack and that Holmes, who’s now serving multiple life sentences, was   
   >> solely responsible.   
      
   > Shocking! You mean the party with the deepest pockets isn't   
   > automatically liable for giving everyone involved a payday?   
      
   > This cannot stand!   
      
   >> It was obvious that the other suit, originally filed in federal   
   >> court by 42 survivors, would likely go the same way.   
      
   > Why was this even a federal issue in the first place?   
      
   >> Then one plaintiff rejected the deal. Her suffering had been profound: Her   
   >> child was killed in the shooting, she was left paralyzed and the baby she   
   >> was carrying had been lost.   
      
   > That's horrible, but the fact that she suffered a terrible tragedy   
   > doesn't mean the movie theater is responsible for her tragedy, just   
   > because it happened there.   
      
   Their lack of security on the emergency exits directly contributed to   
   his being able to carry out the attack.   
      
   But Cinemark has already lost way more than $700,000 from people   
   outraged at their suing survivors and will continue to lose far more   
   money in the future.   
      
   They will certainly never get another dime from me.   
      
   --   
   The reaper does not listen to the harvest. --Reaper Man   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)