I am really confused on this one. Most apartment complexes have a clause in their lease that says the resident is responsible for their own personal safety. How is the apartment complex negligent or responsible for the robbery of a man while he was walking home? I am guessing there is much more to this story than what’s provided in this article.
I’m with you, DMS. Even if the complex knew there was a personal threat (which doesn’t appear to be the case here) and then did nothing, I still don’t see how they could be held liable, barring failed locks on the doors or something to that effect.
DMS,
One could only hope that you are right and there is more to the story. Somehow though I doubt that is the case as I have seen the guest of a tenant bring a dog on premise that has a no pet clause in the lease, dog bites third party and the court still hangs the property owner out to dry with a stupid verdict in favor of the poor plaintiff. Property owner in this case had no knowledge that the dog was even on the premise.
Seems like it is always the individual who does the right thing that gets stuck with the bill because of course if someone is hurt someone has to pay, it is the American way after all.
I am personally appalled by the fact that we now hold property owners responsible for the actions of third parties on their premises. Had the complex had armed security even and this happened the stupidity of our current legal environment would still require a verdict for the plaintiff.
What ever happened to the concept of bad things happen to good people and the only one to blame is the criminal.
Don’t we all pretty much choose where we live? This is a sad story, but the guy was walking home from going to the store. Unless the property owner made him live in his apartments, or made him go to the store, not sure how the property owner could be liable for $10,000,000.
Another nail in the coffin of the primacy of the individual and
another mile on the road to collective private responsibility for the actions of that individual. Only the government represents
the collective responsibility to react to and prevent crime.
Such societal responsibility exists, but the expression of that responsibility is a Police Department.
If the owner provided the kind of security necessary to prevent the crime, then the victim would have likely been unable to afford to live there.
Where was this judge and jury during George Zimmerman? I have walked to the store in a hoodie to buy candy and a sports drink, then walk through my neighborhood, about 50 times and not been killed.
Good point. Fortunately this jury was tied up making a really stupid decision and Zimmerman’s jury got it right !!
Be sure not to try to beat an armed man to death while you’re doing your hoodie-walk and you should be fine.
Ever think Trayvon was standing his ground? Of course not. But, we all do know it is a fact Zimmerman was totally casing the poor kid. And, we know a lot about Zimmerman’s character after his murder, too. Guy has a hard time staying out of trouble.
Zimmerman was looking to assert himself (wanted to be a badass) and without a doubt, Zimmerman is an idiot…..a very special kind of idiot. But none of that gives anyone, Trayvon included, the right to physically assault another person, and in this case, it appears that Trayvon was beating Zimm senseless. At that point, Zimm was within his right to defend himself (as the court found).
Zimm should have left the kid alone. If he had, Trayvon would be alive today (incarcerated maybe, but alive) and Zimm would still be an idiot, but he wouldn’t have a target on his chest, and his life would not have spiraled into the sewer. A total Charlie/Foxtrot.
Jax,
I understand some of what you are saying. But, Zimmerman never should have left his car. If I recall correctly, dispatch told George not to engage. Had he never left his car and approached Martin, no altercation, no one dead or hurt.
September 19, 2016 at 2:06 pm
Bob says:
Like or Dislike:
1
2
No. Trying to police your neighborhood and following someone who is black is not wrong.
What we need to tell black people is that someone questioning whether or not you are a criminal is not reason to instigate a crime. Following someone is not instigating a crime, even if Zimmerman went up to him and said racist leanings of why he thought Trayvon was a thief, Trayvon should never have thrown a single fist.
What you are advocating would leave communities not checking into or being active regarding potential theft.
I just recently checked into someone who was in our neighborhood that was new. If this kid had started punching me, I would have been vindicated in shooting.
Also, your first implication was that walking with a hoodie is what caused it. If you can’t see why that is intentionally misleading and isn’t ok to foster your flawed premise we have an issue.
You are basically lying to push a point because you have an ideal. That isn’t ok.
September 19, 2016 at 7:03 pm
Jax Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
3
1
Cpt Planet: Parsing each and every action that Zimmerman and Trayvon took won’t get us very far. Zimm didn’t break the law by following Treyvon/ he didn’t break the law by stopping him and speaking to him, even if Trayvon thought he was being ‘dissed’ or whatever. Trayvon took the confrontation into the physical (probably because he was a lot bigger than Zimm) and got shot for his trouble.
Was Zimmerman wrong: not legally, but maybe from a common sense standpoint.
Was Trayvon wrong: definitely from a legal standpoint and probably from a common sense standpoint.
If Zimm hadn’t left his car, this wouldn’t have happened.
If Trayvon had kept his cool, this wouldn’t have happened.
No winners here.
September 19, 2016 at 8:25 am
CL PM says:
Like or Dislike:
7
1
Zimmerman was let off because the state attorney over-charged in the case and the jury thought the crime did not rise to the level of the charge. If he would have been charged with manslaughter he would likely be sitting in a cell today. And by the way, that state attorney just lost her bid for re-election. I think she lost three trials where the opinion was she over-charged.
To be sure, the DA – Angela Corey – definitely over-reached, but I’m not sure the jury would have convicted even on the lesser charge. And you are correct, Ms. Corey was defeated two weeks ago for a number of reasons.
September 16, 2016 at 3:09 pm
mrbob says:
Like or Dislike:
9
4
Although I do not fully agree with all of the actions of Mr. Zimmerman before or after the death of Mr. Martin, it is my opinion that at the point of the shooting Zimmerman had no other choice and did what he needed to do to save his own life.
With the police not having a responsibility to protect us from the bad guys who else but the citizen’s then can step up and protect the community?
While Tragic ~I don’t see how this case has any merit whatsoever? Why wouldn’t the Store and Township(poor police protection/lightening) then share equally in this unforeseen incident ? Needless to say no one ever gives a second thought to the actual culprit – the Perpetrator…
Here in Florida, lack of adequate security is a tough one to prove. Almost never a payment to the claimant. Been an agent for 46 years and never saw one get settled for other than maybe a med pay if injured on the property. And yes, it would be interesting to see the full story and why such a high judgment was awarded. The Lawyer comment, yes, he should be fired for sure.
I am really confused on this one. Most apartment complexes have a clause in their lease that says the resident is responsible for their own personal safety. How is the apartment complex negligent or responsible for the robbery of a man while he was walking home? I am guessing there is much more to this story than what’s provided in this article.
I’m with you, DMS. Even if the complex knew there was a personal threat (which doesn’t appear to be the case here) and then did nothing, I still don’t see how they could be held liable, barring failed locks on the doors or something to that effect.
DMS,
One could only hope that you are right and there is more to the story. Somehow though I doubt that is the case as I have seen the guest of a tenant bring a dog on premise that has a no pet clause in the lease, dog bites third party and the court still hangs the property owner out to dry with a stupid verdict in favor of the poor plaintiff. Property owner in this case had no knowledge that the dog was even on the premise.
Seems like it is always the individual who does the right thing that gets stuck with the bill because of course if someone is hurt someone has to pay, it is the American way after all.
Lawsuit lottery is for the birds.
I am personally appalled by the fact that we now hold property owners responsible for the actions of third parties on their premises. Had the complex had armed security even and this happened the stupidity of our current legal environment would still require a verdict for the plaintiff.
What ever happened to the concept of bad things happen to good people and the only one to blame is the criminal.
To the person who voted my post down, why?
I’d love to see the make up of that jury. Nevermind, I already know. Litigation lottery.
Also, I am pretty sure I wouldn’t want my atty stating publicly that ‘this should have been a $2M dollar verdict’. Really ? What about not guilty?
Don’t we all pretty much choose where we live? This is a sad story, but the guy was walking home from going to the store. Unless the property owner made him live in his apartments, or made him go to the store, not sure how the property owner could be liable for $10,000,000.
Another nail in the coffin of the primacy of the individual and
another mile on the road to collective private responsibility for the actions of that individual. Only the government represents
the collective responsibility to react to and prevent crime.
Such societal responsibility exists, but the expression of that responsibility is a Police Department.
If the owner provided the kind of security necessary to prevent the crime, then the victim would have likely been unable to afford to live there.
I write many large hab accounts all across the US. This is why both GL and Excess is needed and why the GL rates are high and generally a E & S play.
Where was this judge and jury during George Zimmerman? I have walked to the store in a hoodie to buy candy and a sports drink, then walk through my neighborhood, about 50 times and not been killed.
Good point. Fortunately this jury was tied up making a really stupid decision and Zimmerman’s jury got it right !!
Be sure not to try to beat an armed man to death while you’re doing your hoodie-walk and you should be fine.
Ever think Trayvon was standing his ground? Of course not. But, we all do know it is a fact Zimmerman was totally casing the poor kid. And, we know a lot about Zimmerman’s character after his murder, too. Guy has a hard time staying out of trouble.
Zimmerman was looking to assert himself (wanted to be a badass) and without a doubt, Zimmerman is an idiot…..a very special kind of idiot. But none of that gives anyone, Trayvon included, the right to physically assault another person, and in this case, it appears that Trayvon was beating Zimm senseless. At that point, Zimm was within his right to defend himself (as the court found).
Zimm should have left the kid alone. If he had, Trayvon would be alive today (incarcerated maybe, but alive) and Zimm would still be an idiot, but he wouldn’t have a target on his chest, and his life would not have spiraled into the sewer. A total Charlie/Foxtrot.
Jax,
I understand some of what you are saying. But, Zimmerman never should have left his car. If I recall correctly, dispatch told George not to engage. Had he never left his car and approached Martin, no altercation, no one dead or hurt.
No. Trying to police your neighborhood and following someone who is black is not wrong.
What we need to tell black people is that someone questioning whether or not you are a criminal is not reason to instigate a crime. Following someone is not instigating a crime, even if Zimmerman went up to him and said racist leanings of why he thought Trayvon was a thief, Trayvon should never have thrown a single fist.
What you are advocating would leave communities not checking into or being active regarding potential theft.
I just recently checked into someone who was in our neighborhood that was new. If this kid had started punching me, I would have been vindicated in shooting.
Also, your first implication was that walking with a hoodie is what caused it. If you can’t see why that is intentionally misleading and isn’t ok to foster your flawed premise we have an issue.
You are basically lying to push a point because you have an ideal. That isn’t ok.
Cpt Planet: Parsing each and every action that Zimmerman and Trayvon took won’t get us very far. Zimm didn’t break the law by following Treyvon/ he didn’t break the law by stopping him and speaking to him, even if Trayvon thought he was being ‘dissed’ or whatever. Trayvon took the confrontation into the physical (probably because he was a lot bigger than Zimm) and got shot for his trouble.
Was Zimmerman wrong: not legally, but maybe from a common sense standpoint.
Was Trayvon wrong: definitely from a legal standpoint and probably from a common sense standpoint.
If Zimm hadn’t left his car, this wouldn’t have happened.
If Trayvon had kept his cool, this wouldn’t have happened.
No winners here.
Zimmerman was let off because the state attorney over-charged in the case and the jury thought the crime did not rise to the level of the charge. If he would have been charged with manslaughter he would likely be sitting in a cell today. And by the way, that state attorney just lost her bid for re-election. I think she lost three trials where the opinion was she over-charged.
To be sure, the DA – Angela Corey – definitely over-reached, but I’m not sure the jury would have convicted even on the lesser charge. And you are correct, Ms. Corey was defeated two weeks ago for a number of reasons.
Although I do not fully agree with all of the actions of Mr. Zimmerman before or after the death of Mr. Martin, it is my opinion that at the point of the shooting Zimmerman had no other choice and did what he needed to do to save his own life.
With the police not having a responsibility to protect us from the bad guys who else but the citizen’s then can step up and protect the community?
While Tragic ~I don’t see how this case has any merit whatsoever? Why wouldn’t the Store and Township(poor police protection/lightening) then share equally in this unforeseen incident ? Needless to say no one ever gives a second thought to the actual culprit – the Perpetrator…
Here in Florida, lack of adequate security is a tough one to prove. Almost never a payment to the claimant. Been an agent for 46 years and never saw one get settled for other than maybe a med pay if injured on the property. And yes, it would be interesting to see the full story and why such a high judgment was awarded. The Lawyer comment, yes, he should be fired for sure.