After the October 1st Las Vegas shooting that was carried out by Stephen Paddock, numerous families searched for legal recourse for the various damages their loved ones sustained. Nearly 60 people were killed in the shooting and over 800 more were injured. It took the title as the deadliest mass shooting in the history of America, and in the aftermath, reform and accountability were discussed for weeks. One of the most popular discussions concerned liability and who to blame. Of course, Paddock holds the largest amount of responsibility for the crime; had he not had the ability to purchase a gun and carried out the act, no other entity would be able to be held accountable. However, in addition to Paddock, the Harvest Festival and the Mandalay Bay Casino and Resort can receive a small percentage of the blame as well.
Liability of the Festival
The Harvest Music Festival at Route 91, located on the strip, was an open air festival, meaning it took place completely outside. There were various booths and vendors set up, as well as bathrooms and other tables, but none could have provided ample protection in the event of an attack. When Paddock began shooting down at the patrons at the festival, there were no safe locations they could run to and take cover behind. The potential victims were forced instead to crouch or lie down and protect themselves with their hands or belongings, neither of which can effectively block rifle rounds. The festival organizers’ choice to not provide numerous locations could have played a part in the deaths of some victims.
Further, the festival was structurally set up in a way that was not conducive to emergency exits. The perimeter was fenced in, but there were no areas that operated as emergency exits for the patrons, and the only way out of the festival was also the only way in. In the panic to leave, this single entry and exit point created a bottleneck situation that caused many people to get stuck and crowds to come to a standstill. Other people chose to chop the fences where they could; those who could not get over the fences themselves were helped over by others. Various emergency exits or even just breaks in the fence could have made it much easier for people to flee the concert.
Both of these factors contributed to the status of victims as sitting ducks. Although Paddock was firing down from some distance away, it was still easier to hit stationary targets, even with indiscriminate fire.
Lastly, the festival’s security and personnel did not have adequate emergency response training. Many workers did not know what to do, and no proper protocol was established. Panic was a part of why many people were injured, and if the festival had hired and trained individuals to sufficiently and effectively respond in the event of emergency, the injury rate would have greatly decreased.
Liability of the Hotel
Police reported that Paddock checked himself into two adjoining rooms at Mandalay Bay. While there for a few days, he set up closed-circuit surveillance system outside of the room. The fact that this was not noticed by any hotel worker throughout Paddock’s stay is shocking, and the negligence of the hotel may have contributed to the attack. If someone had noticed earlier, security and police could have investigated and become involved well before the shooting happened. Although a worker did eventually notice a problem with the room, it was by then too late; Paddock had already begun to carry out his attack.
Further, there were no routine checks to see what Paddock was bringing up to his room in his numerous suitcases, no sufficient monitors to see his paths, and no metal detectors to see if he were transporting certain lethal objects. The lax security by the hotel was blamed for the attack – Paddock essentially met no resistance the entire week he prepared for his shooting and was able to carry it out uninterrupted for ten minutes. To a lesser extent, some people blamed the hotel for how easy it was for Paddock to break the windows, but he could have opted to shoot them if necessary.
The hotel deflected a lot of the criticism, saying that it does not check the belongings of its customers, for one. Additionally, the presence of gun shows and gun auctions could make the possession of such a plethora of weapons seem ordinary.
Lawsuits
Numerous lawsuits were filed in the aftermath of the shooting. Some of the lawsuits include class action claims against the festival for its negligence, wrongful death claims against Paddock’s estate, and liability claims against the hotel for its lack of security. Many attorneys have snatched up these cases left and right, but there has not been a lot of resolution. These lawyers saw a quick cash grab and decided to take it. Unfortunately, this is not an uncommon tactic by many lawyers – as soon as a story breaks, they will try to secure clients to receive quick settlements and move on.
We consider this an act of bad faith and dishonesty towards the client. If you were injured in the Las Vegas shooting, contact us for a free second opinion on your case. You may be able to earn more than what your current lawyer is suggesting. If you let us take a second look, we will be able to tell you if we feel you are being misrepresented and if we believe we can bring you a larger settlement than your current offer.
Our Firm
Call our law firm today for a free legal consultation with an experienced attorney. You can ask us questions about your case and we will gladly answer them. Our consultations are completely confidential as well, and you will never have to worry about your private information being leaked.
Additionally, if you select us for our legal services, you will receive a zero fee guarantee on your case, meaning you will pay no out of pocket expenses from start to finish. We only get paid if we win, and the money comes from the settlement we earn for you; if we lose, you owe us nothing.
Contact Normandie Law Firm today to speak with an experienced lawyer and to receive a free second opinion about your Las Vegas shooting lawsuit.
