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.

 

Las Vegas Massacre - Lawsuits For NEGLIGENCE Filed. Are All Named Entities Negligent?.

page: 2
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 12 2017 @ 01:59 AM
link   
"Mandalay Bay staffers didn't call cops until he opened fire on concert-goers - despite being made aware a security guard had been shot on the 32nd floor".

Quote from www.dailymail.co.uk...

Can't Mandalay Bay/MGM be held liable because they knew Campos was shot and didn't call police immediately?




posted on Oct, 12 2017 @ 01:59 AM
link   
I thought that what happens in vegas stays in vegas so why all the media exposure?

I guess motto like , if you get shot by a terrorist in vegas it`s gonna hurt isn`t a good advertising motto to bring in the money and tourists



posted on Oct, 12 2017 @ 02:04 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust
I believe its owned by MGM but I'm not 100% sure



posted on Oct, 12 2017 @ 02:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: andrew778
a reply to: carewemust
I believe its owned by MGM but I'm not 100% sure


Yes it is owned by MGM



posted on Oct, 12 2017 @ 02:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: andrew778
a reply to: carewemust
I believe its owned by MGM but I'm not 100% sure


You are correct. Member hartbeat confirms it. MGM has DEEEEP pockets. They might just pay every wounded victim, and family of those who were killed, at least $1 million each, just to wind this down and get it behind them.



posted on Oct, 12 2017 @ 03:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: hartbeat
"Mandalay Bay staffers didn't call cops until he opened fire on concert-goers - despite being made aware a security guard had been shot on the 32nd floor".

Quote from www.dailymail.co.uk...

Can't Mandalay Bay/MGM be held liable because they knew Campos was shot and didn't call police immediately?


Yes that would be enough if proved for negligence. Not sure how strong would be the case as an ex FBI agent already said that the six minutes wouldn't change anything in the outcome.

From the same source:




The six minutes that passed between the hallway shooting and the start of the shooting into the crowd wouldn't have been enough time for officers to stop the attack, said Ron Hosko, a former FBI assistant director who has worked on SWAT teams.



posted on Oct, 12 2017 @ 05:46 AM
link   
a reply to: pheonix358

Incorrect.

You have not SEEN evidence that he fired a weapon. But there again, it is decidedly uncommon for laypersons outside the forensics field, or the courtroom, to EVER actually SEE the evidence in a criminal case, leave alone have time to examine it. Its worth pointing out that people have been put to death in America, without anyone other than the police, the forensics specialists, the medical examiner, judges, lawyers and jurors, EVER laying eyes directly on the evidence involved in the cases which saw them convicted.

It would be unusual, strange, bizarre even, for the police to issue a catalogue of evidences, and make them available for public examination in a museum like setting, even had Mr Paddock lived and been arrested, investigated, charged and convicted by this stage.



posted on Oct, 12 2017 @ 09:27 AM
link   
They'll never win against the hotel. What the # was the hotel supposed to do? Put cameras in all the rooms and spy on everyone 24/7?



posted on Oct, 12 2017 @ 01:37 PM
link   
Who says they want to win against the hotel, a settlement may be all they want.



posted on Oct, 12 2017 @ 01:59 PM
link   
Whew if I was the owner of Mandaly i would
sell my shares fast !
Oh wait he and the other big players
already did a month ago.



posted on Oct, 12 2017 @ 02:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Taggart

I see your point. If I were the hotel though, I'd fight it. You don't want to set a precedent that if people get injured at your property through actions you had absolutely no control over, you'll just pay up. Millions of people stay there every year.



posted on Oct, 12 2017 @ 02:11 PM
link   


although there is no evidence that he actually fired a weapon.


Maybe that will cause that evidence, if any, to be known.



posted on Oct, 12 2017 @ 02:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: EternalShadow

originally posted by: diggindirt
a reply to: EternalShadow



Now, if the evidence in this case is declared to be classified due to national security issues---I'll put on my tin foil hat.


Excellent point there because his employment record includes working for Lockheed Martin and his actual job there has yet to be disclosed. A possible, convenient fill in the blank escape clause for the defense.

Considering the company has, and continues to do classified work and projects, the defense may use that as a way to seal the court records in their entirety under the guise of national security.

Plausible, and highly probable that may transpire.

I'm going to go ahead and start my Reynolds Wrap origami now to lessen the "sticker shock".


That last line made chuckle. Thanks.

I've done some far and wide listening to theories and if one were to believe a quarter of what's floating around out there this guy had worked on everything from the exploded space shuttle to the secret space program and Reagan getting shot! My problem with any number of those theories is that the ones pushing them only have, "We know...." from "sources" but never put anything provable on the table to show how they "know" these things. I was trained to examine evidence so unless some evidence is actually presented (beyond "anonymous sources") I don't pay much attention to those theories. As I said on another thread, I have done contract work in the past for several different agencies of government, including the US Army at Ft. Knox, KY but that doesn't mean I'm a spook. It simply means they let a contract for work that needed doing and our company got the contract.



posted on Oct, 12 2017 @ 03:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: pheonix358
The Fourth Amendment prevents searches of luggage without warrant. That clears the Hotel.


The Constitution only prevents unreasonable search by the government. If any private business wants to go through your baggage prior to staying at their property that is their call and yours if you chose to stay there.



posted on Oct, 12 2017 @ 03:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: UnderKingsPeak
Whew if I was the owner of Mandaly i would
sell my shares fast !
Oh wait he and the other big players
already did a month ago.


The MGM Resorts group is a publically traded company, no one 'owns' it outright.







 
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join