Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1 Brutalized Trump Ralliers Notch Win in Lawsuit Against San Jose 
    Senior Member Banacek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Peoples Republic of Connecticut
    Posts
    7,377
    judge has refused to toss out a federal lawsuit against the city of San Jose, California, in which the city police are accused of allowing an angry mob of left-wing agitators and violent protesters to target peaceful pro-Trump ralliers.

    Several people were injured during the June 2 rally. A picture of a pro-Trump woman being pelted by eggs during the incident went viral last spring.

    “Citizens ranging from their teens to their 70s were assaulted, abused, chased, hunted, and terrorized in a situation for which the city is responsible.”

    The city was sued by attorney Harmeet Dhillon, in a pro bono case, representing some of the victims. Dhillon, the national committeewoman of the California Republican Party and a contender to lead the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice, also attended the rally
    http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/t...suit-san-jose/
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    Senior Member SVPete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Silicon Valley
    Posts
    6,341
    San Jose: Judge won’t throw out Trump supporters’ negligence suit over rally melee
    By RAMONA GIWARGIS | rgiwargis@bayareanewsgroup.com |
    PUBLISHED: March 15, 2017 at 1:31 pm | UPDATED: March 16, 2017 at 5:19 am
    “We look forward to pursuing discovery in this case — getting to the bottom of why this situation happened, holding the city liable for what happened to these individuals and ensuring this type of tragedy doesn’t happen again,” said San Francisco attorney Harmeet K. Dhillon, who is representing 20 plaintiffs.

    The lawsuit, filed in July 2016, claimed San Jose officials allowed Trump supporters to be attacked by directing them to walk through a “violent mob” of protesters as they left a downtown Trump rally on June 2. It alleged negligence and civil rights violations.

    Dhillon’s clients have alleged police officers, who wore full riot gear, looked on while Trump supporters were brutally attacked.

    “It felt like we were the lamb being led to the slaughterhouse,” said Juan Hernandez, a Trump supporter and Log Cabin Republican who suffered a broken nose. “I went down into a fetal position and the punches were coming in at every angle. The officers weren’t doing anything as the attacks were happening. This should not happen anywhere — no matter who you support, Democrat or Republican — this should not happen.”
    This lawsuit wades into complicated territory. Police are protected from lawsuits where they are unable to provide protection due to response time or not being somewhere 24x7. What makes this lawsuit different is that the police were on site where the attacks happened, and had directed the victims to go through the area where they were attacked. I do not know whether there are any laws or cases that address this kind of situation.
    I support UNexit: Get the US out of the UN; Get the UN out of the US!

    BIG CHEETO Is Watching You!

    Note to "Warpy": I voted for Donald Trump! I would do so again!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    Power CUer NJCardFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    19,641
    Quote Originally Posted by SVPete View Post
    San Jose: Judge won’t throw out Trump supporters’ negligence suit over rally melee
    By RAMONA GIWARGIS | rgiwargis@bayareanewsgroup.com |
    PUBLISHED: March 15, 2017 at 1:31 pm | UPDATED: March 16, 2017 at 5:19 am


    This lawsuit wades into complicated territory. Police are protected from lawsuits where they are unable to provide protection due to response time or not being somewhere 24x7. What makes this lawsuit different is that the police were on site where the attacks happened, and had directed the victims to go through the area where they were attacked. I do not know whether there are any laws or cases that address this kind of situation.
    I'll answer this with a question: What if everything that had transpired did so in the exact same way except this was a Pride rally and it was gays who were beaten, chased, terrorized, and were pelted with eggs. Still think the law or lawsuit would be ambiguous?
    Deplorably Proud To Be An American
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Senior Member cadillac shark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    2,387
    Quote Originally Posted by NJCardFan View Post
    I'll answer this with a question: What if everything that had transpired did so in the exact same way except this was a Pride rally and it was gays who were beaten, chased, terrorized, and were pelted with eggs. Still think the law or lawsuit would be ambiguous?
    Officers and perps would've been awaiting trial...

    This news is extremely gratifying. Mayor Liccardo is already in-disgrace for his handling of the San Jose flood non-evacuation.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    Senior Member SVPete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Silicon Valley
    Posts
    6,341
    Quote Originally Posted by NJCardFan View Post
    I'll answer this with a question: What if everything that had transpired did so in the exact same way except this was a Pride rally and it was gays who were beaten, chased, terrorized, and were pelted with eggs. Still think the law or lawsuit would be ambiguous?
    The identities and causes don't change the law or issues the court should decide. But if you're asking whether current courts would be more inclined to favor your hypothetical plaintiffs, yes, I do think our current courts are as partial as you seem to suggest.
    I support UNexit: Get the US out of the UN; Get the UN out of the US!

    BIG CHEETO Is Watching You!

    Note to "Warpy": I voted for Donald Trump! I would do so again!
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •