Posted in: News

$100M Newtown Lawsuit Sparks Criticism, Outrage Online

Newtown lawsuit sparks controversy online

Meriden, CT – We reported earlier on a $100M lawsuit against the state of Connecticut, the first piece of legal action to come out of the Sandy Hook School shooting two weeks ago. The lawsuit, filed on the behalf of an unnamed 6-year-old Sandy Hook survivor, has sparked a massive amount of outrage online.

The client, referred to as “Jill Doe,” is said to have heard “cursing, screaming, and shooting” over the school intercom when shooter Adam Lanza commenced his massacre two weeks ago, reports NBC News. “As a consequence, the … child has sustained emotional and psychological trauma and injury, the nature and extent of which are yet to be determined,” said the suit.

The claim also holds that the state Board of Education and others failed to protect children from “foreseeable harm.” Filed by New Haven-based attorney Irv Pinsky, the claim must be reviewed and either approved or denied by Claims Commissioner J. Paul Vance Jr. before the lawsuit can officially be levied against the state of Connecticut.

Despite the wide deluge of opinion and debate that has filled the void left in the wake of 20 murdered children, not everyone is on board with the lawsuit. In fact, many on the internet have outright condemned the claim.

“I know 20 parents that would love to have their child alive and traumatized,” wrote one Yahoo commenter (via MSN Now).

Many Twitter users have also sounded off on the Newtown lawsuit, finding that it is at the very least in poor taste for a surviving child’s parents to file the suit. The $100M pay-day makes it look like profiteering of the worst kind.

What do you think? Do these parents have a right to sue Connecticut on behalf of their child, who survived the Sandy Hook massacre? Does it matter?

Articles And Offers From The Web


15 Responses to “$100M Newtown Lawsuit Sparks Criticism, Outrage Online”

  1. Michael Jenkins

    The parent should be thankful that her own childs life was spared. I'm sure the parents of the children who were taken from them would gladly PAY a 100 million to have thier child back. People like this profiteer should hang thier head in shame and just walk away.

  2. Delia Oriol Palmer

    ohhh, is this is now a businesse, making money out of this? coz this parent child is alive? who si this parent is, is desgusting and greedy, what about the the parents lost thier childrens and the family lost thier mom, sister, don't heared doing sueing the city, good for them, and I am very saddened losing the innocent lifes.

  3. Kay Culver

    If that child and teacher didn't hear that over the intercom, that child would have been in more danger because the her teacher would not have been aware that something was going on. That 'trama' probably saved her life!

  4. Christy Burse

    the should be very thankful that there child is still here, like the child never heard cursing before, that school that day did not no that a crazy sick sob was going to come in and kill these innocent people , im sure if there was warning no one would of been there , people are money hungry bottom line.

  5. Christy Burse

    the parent should be very thankful that there child is alive, like there child has never heard cursing before, who could of known that a crazy sick sob was going to come in and kill these innocent people, sounds like the parents are just trying to make money, how bout they ask for counseling fees for the child to see someone and talk to them, that wont cost 100million dollars, how does someone sue for that much and there child still be alive .

  6. Terri McLemore

    As a parent and a teacher, I am appalled at these parents filing a lawsuit contending that their child was "unprotected". Tell that to the families of the six staff members who gave their lives protecting the students in their care.

  7. Lula Flowers

    I always have an opinion but not on this subject. I feel more appalled than anything else that such a claim would be filed citing cursing, screaming, etc. and failure to protect from a "foreseeable" event. WOW! My thoughts are: should this suit could have waited at least through a grieving period? should it be filed at all? amazing! Astonishing!

  8. Gary Mussen

    Nothing but a money grab by opportunistic parents and a scumbag lawyer. If the lawyer is so interested in protecting the children he should do his work for no compensation and the parents should have their children taken from them as they seem unfit to parent.

  9. Kristen Fleming

    They ought to just be grateful they didn't have to BURY their child like some of these poor parents! How truly disgusting and opportunistic!

  10. Joseph Wickham

    I think it is a good idea to hold the State accountable. From what I can see, they were probably negligent. These school shootings happen all the time. Why did they use a glass door to secure the building?

  11. Linda End Bsl Anderson

    It is NOT a good idea to hold the State accountable, and they were NOT negligent. These school shootings do NOT happen ALL the time. As for the doors, most buildings and most schools have those kinds of doors. Should there also be no windows in a school?! This guy would have found a way in no matter what and safety measures HAD recently been put into place by the principal who gave her life to try and protect those students. This lawsuit is disgusting and so is this greedy lawyer and those parents who still have THEIR child!

  12. Robin Preskitt Deardeuff

    Appalled at the thought of anyone making a monetary profit from this tragic attack. Bet if the lawyer had to do all of this FREE and retain no money and the parents of this child retain no money; they wouldn't go through with it. If such a suit is filed and approved, the judge should take 100% and disperse to the families of the deceased victims only and rebuild a new school!

Around The Web