CNN.com reported that a Florida jury in the Nathaniel Brazill shooting civil trial found the distibutor Valor Corp partly responsible in the shooting death of Barry Grunow and awarded his widow $1.2 million rather than the $75 million asked. The breakdown of responsibility was as follows, Valor Corp 5%, the school board 45% for allowing Brazill back on school grounds after he had been expelled and 50% to Elmore McCray for not securing the gun so Brazill could not get to it. I realize this is the civil suit but this sends the message that the person who did the shooting has zero responsibility. It’s enough to piss of the pope.
If you think Brazill has been held to zero responsibility, how do you account for the 28 years he will be spending in the penitentiary? Or maybe you think he should pay the victims family the $1.50 a day he will be making in the prison laundry?
The civil trial is a separate matter. My point was that it’s wrong to base financial responsibility only on ability to pay.
Padeye, you don’t understand the verdict at all.
First, responsibility was **not[/n] based on ability to pay. McCray and the school board were not parties to the lawsuit, so self-evidently their ability to pay was not relevant - they aren’t paying. If ability to pay were the basis, Valor Corp. would have been found 100% responsible. ('Sides, I really doubt that McCray is a “deep pocket.”)
Second, this trial was only about whether any party’s negligent conduct facilitated Brazill’s intentional act. Brazill was not responsible for any negligence because he acted intentionally. The verdict does not say that Brazill had no responsbility - indeed it says that he has full responsibility for the death. What the verdict answers is whether anyone negligently failed to take steps to stop Brazill before he could pull the trigger.
Sua