MovieChat Forums > Politics > Was the $88M DOJ settlement for the SC s...

Was the $88M DOJ settlement for the SC shooting victims too generous?

posted 3 years ago by joej2923 (3021)
12 replies | jump to latest

It was a tragic incident when Dylan Roof murdered people in the SC church and I'm glad he was sentenced to death. I do question whether the federal government should pay $6M to $7.5M to the relatives of the dead and $5M to the survivors. The federal government did not directly kill the attendees of that church so I don't understand why there is a liability. Roof could have gotten a gun illegally and still carried out the attack. Most gun owners don't shoot up a church so the federal background checks are irrelevant.

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/578942-families-in-south-carolina-church-massacre-settle-with-doj-over-faulty?rl=1

[–] chilidoggg (14270) 3 years ago

I think this is absurd. The Feds shouldn't have any liability for the deaths of those people.

Does this settlement have a precedent? I don't recall reading about one before. It would be nice if the "news" would give a little background on the law here.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/dylann-roof-charleston-church-shooting-doj-settlement/

The families and victims who filed the 2016 lawsuits argued Roof's earlier felony arrest for illegal drug use should have prevented him from purchasing a .45-caliber pistol.

"Illegal drug use." Not "illegal drug distribution, purchase, sale, etc"

I have to believe that there is specific legislation that allows victims like these to sue for the FBI's error. I can't believe that a trial judge and perhaps a dozen appellate judges would conclude that the law says that these victims were harmed BECAUSE of the FBI's action.

That specific legislation (if it exists) needs to be revisited. And if there isn't specific legislation, maybe one has to be written to cap the award to some fixed amount, like $1 million per person, for facts like this particular case.

[–] ultravioletx (10237) 3 years ago

It does sound like a lot, but it's a compromise.

It appeases the left by fully compensating victims, and appeases the right by backing away from politically divisive gun control.

[–] chilidoggg (14270) 3 years ago

It's ridiculous. I'm sure there are literally THOUSANDS of instances where the FBI made a mistake on the background check. We have to insure every bad thing that happens as a consequence? Is there a statute of limitations? How about the liquor store owner who got held up by a guy who got the gun because of a mistake? What if THAT robber got his gun from some other guy who was able to buy it because of a mistake?

From the link in the OP:

"According to Comey, the FBI background check examiner who evaluated Roof's request to buy the gun never saw the arrest report because the wrong arresting agency was listed on the list rap sheet that she reviewed."

WTF does the "arresting agency" have to do with this? The CONVICTION comes out of the COURTS. "Gee, the report shows this fellow was arrested by the Sheriff's Department, but he was actually arrested by the Police Department, or the State Park Ranger, or the Game Warden..." I'm guessing there's a law that says the District Attorney is supposed to report to the FBI any felony conviction. What if the D.A. screwed up there? We all have to open our wallets?

[–] Theman (1224) 3 years ago

The fact that he used drugs had nothing to do with the murder.

[–] chilidoggg (14270) 3 years ago

Exactly. Maybe, MAYBE, the victims would have a sniff of a case if Roof had a prior felony conviction for something with a weapon. But those aren't the facts.

[–] kspkap (13555) 3 years ago

All of these asinine settlements are making a lot of Black folks wealthy. Do you suppose AOC will aim her “Tax The Rich!” at them? With not referencing these peaceful victims which was horrific for them and their families, I can just see a birth mom with 6 illegitimate kids saying “What the hell! I don’t know where they are half the time anyway.” Government entities are paying out huge sums to people who raised criminals and were shot by police.

[–] chilidoggg (14270) 3 years ago

Impressive. You went full Appalachia on that one.

[–] kspkap (13555) 3 years ago

Truth hurts!

[–] chilidoggg (14270) 3 years ago

Look, I'm sure y'all get your inbox ful'd up with messages sayin' "Dair goan taik yer guns!"

Why don't you do something constructive and forward this story to them and find out why the hell the taxpayers are liable for a mistake made by the FBI, and what we need to tell our representatives to change so that this doesn't happen next time.

[–] chilidoggg (14270) 3 years ago

"A district court judge initially ruled that the victim families did not have legal grounds to sue the government for those failures [of the FBI], but that finding was overturned by a federal appeals court."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/fbi-dylann-roof-charleston-lawsuit/2021/10/28/87c37102-37fd-11ec-91dc-551d44733e2d_story.html

So there appears to be hope that there isn't a specific statute that codifies liability for the FBI's mistake.

I still want to know if there were prior instances like this where DOJ/FBI were held liable for such a mistake. But that would require real journalism.

Maybe one of y'all can read the opinion of the Appellate Court.

[–] Bloodworth79 (5687) 3 years ago

Should the people affected by the Boston bombing sue?

Because Russian KGB called the FBI to warn about the 2 brothers..

[–] kuatorises (7467) 3 years ago

I don't have a problem with them getting money. What happened to them is unfathomable and deserve compensation. It's just a shame someone has to pay for Roof's crimes.