An attorney is Connecticut is attempting to sue the state because of the Sandy Hook shooting, representing a six-year-old client known as Jill Doe. He is seeking $100 million in damages from the State Board of Education, Connecticut Department of Education and State Commissioner of Education, because they failed to protect his young client. The suit will claim that the child has emotional and psychological damage as a result of surviving the shooting.
This is a court case that is probably going to open doors for several other suits, or perhaps several attorneys and children joining forces for one big suit, but there are two problems with it. First, the attorney's motivations are certainly suspect, as it seems rather immoral to profit from the death of twenty children and six adults. Number two, the school district and the state simply won't be able to meet those expenses if the case wins, and even if it is settled for less, it is money being taken directly from the children it is intended for.
Not much is known about "Jill Doe". It seems that she was in the school and heard the screaming and gunfire over the intercom. Attorney Irving Pinsky's letter to the State Claims Commissioner said that the state had failed to provide a safe setting, and that the state was at fault for not requiring the school to have an emergency response plan. This incident stems from the December 14th Sandy Hook shooting when Adam Lanza, 20, killed 20 children between the ages of 6 and 7, and then killed himself.
"Everybody says they want the state to do the best investigation they can and I can help them," Pinsky said in an interview with CNN. But how does a lawsuit help them, and more importantly, what effect will the state having to shell out millions of education money to attorneys and victims have on the children who are educated in Connecticut?
Photo: Askjoanne on Flickr.com
Gabriel Legend covers current events for Gather News, and writes horror fiction. If you like an article from Gabriel please share it using the social media links below. Follow Gabriel Legend on Twitter (@GabeLegend).
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 10
Now onto the lawsuit. The parents and lawyer are right on, there was no emergency response plan......And even if there was, would there have been time to enact an emergency response plan?
Do the kids of that school suffer PTSD, most likely yes, should the school and state be held responsible, since it happened on school property, I think so.
Should they get 100M, we will have to wait to see what a jury says.....
Every parent has the right to now that the school will try to enact whatever emergency plan necessary for their kids to be protected..
The trauma experienced by all the children is beyond horrifying, but this lawsuit seemed more like ambulance chasing & sensationalism on the part of the attorney than it was about the kids. Sure, turning on the PA system exposed them to things no parent wants their child to hear. But, you're right, Mooch, I prefer that they do whatever is necessary to protect the kids. The benefit of advanced warning outweighs any other complaint that can be made. This staff should be praised, & thanked, not subjected to garbage lawyers out to capitalize on a tragedy. It's disgusting!
I think that the teachers/faculty who lost their lives that day proved that & the lawsuit being withdrawn had nothing to do with averting another tragedy...only a law banning assault weapons will at least, attempt to do that!