Family sues Harrah's for assault using security video
From http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/news/breaking/family-sues-harrah-s-for-assault-using-security-video/article_f94fadb2-9ba8-11e3-b2bc-0019bb2963f4.html
I saw no sign of a weapon or anything that would be evident of a physical threat by the family members.
It shocked me.
Being Devil's Advocate :
*Something we didn't see got the the security people called over.
*The article makes it sound like the family may have knowingly tried to charge meals on defunct room cards. [this would assume the advocate's assertion that the guy was at the desk to get proper cards is baloney]
*All adults should know how to defuse a situation. In this case, Epic Fail on both sides.
Not being Devil's Advocate:
*Isn't Security 101 to call the police instead of handling this situation in house?
*Security 102 has to be, hey, don't rough up families for any reason.
It also stated the man has a pace maker and the family was afraid he would have a heart attack. In essence, they were trying to save his life.
The power of lawyer's and publicity agents.Quote: beachbumbabsI can't get this video to load on either IE or Chrome. Any suggestions/other links? Thanks!
Rent a cop mentality has never been good. Violence is common, though a lot does depend upon what has been communicated versus what actually happened.
Taking someone to the ground seems excessive in this situation, particularly unarmed and non-violent types. Harrah's has a reputation for fighting hard and taking endless appeals.
Harrah's doesn't have anything to worry about.
They will present evidence that this family was ripping them off, and it all goes away.
The family filed suit because its all they got.
Sucks to be on the wrong side of security, but that is what happens.
Not defending the security folks. But over-reaction is the rule now.
SFB
*indisputably the man is at the desk, doing something, at the beginning. What was the problem, "no room at the Inn now?". Did he refuse to pay for something unless he got a room?
*the guy does react to security grabbing him by struggling. He did not want to be detained? escorted out seems less likely, because...
*the women try to leave, and are stopped. Why stop them if the man has been detained? Big mistake, even if they 'ate free' or some similar thing.
Quote: beachbumbabsI can't get this video to load on either IE or Chrome. Any suggestions/other links? Thanks!
Video and nuther video. Good article.Quote: FleaStiffThe power of lawyer's and publicity agents. Rent a cop mentality has never been good. Violence is common, though a lot does depend upon what has been communicated versus what actually happened. Taking someone to the ground seems excessive in this situation, particularly unarmed and non-violent types. Harrah's has a reputation for fighting hard and taking endless appeals.
Lamentably so. And it seems to be a growing problem in Atlantic City, what with the backrooming in the screwed-up baccarat card case and the Golden Nugget. The complete silence and apparent non-response of the Division of Gaming Enforcement is accelerating the demise of the gambling industry.Quote: SFBActually looks like a pretty normal security response. Harrah's doesn't have anything to worry about. They will present evidence that this family was ripping them off, and it all goes away. The family filed suit because its all they got. Sucks to be on the wrong side of security, but that is what happens. Not defending the security folks. But over-reaction is the rule now.
Quote: SanchoPanzaVideo and nuther video. Good article.
Fixed those links for you (they all had crap at the end of them)
Quote: djatcHarrah's should send them some room offers
Quote: News article cited by SanchoPanzaAccording to Maggiano, John Binns continues to receive invitations to gamble at Harrah’s Atlantic City.
ZCore13
Quote: Zcore13I see no liability at all on Harrah's part if the people involved are legally allowed to put hands on someone and detain them. ZCore13
I agree. People don't realize that when they're
in a casino they aren't in their local grocery
store. Security will beat the crap out of you
with very little provocation. So realize where
you are at all times, this is not the happy place
you see in the ads on TV.
Tks. I'll try harder.Quote: AxiomOfChoiceQuote: SanchoPanzaVideo and nuther video. Good article.
Fixed those links for you (they all had crap at the end of them)
Quote: SanchoPanzanuther video. .
This is a better video. You can see these people
were calm when they got attacked. You can see
one of the security guards laughing after the
guy is down.
Quote: EvenBobThis is a better video. You can see these people
were calm when they got attacked. You can see
one of the security guards laughing after the
guy is down.
Yeah, this is going to be expensive for the casino.
I say good evidence to them.
ZCore13
Quote: JohnnyQNot defending the Casino at all, but I would certainly want to hear the other side of the story as well. Is this a case where there is more to it than meets the eye ?
Video is an amazing thing.... its harder to TWIST the truth with video of the event
I like the last line of the write up about them trying to make it law to have cameras in the stairwells.... nothing ever happens in stairwells ( wink wink)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xf2uuulBim4
Quote: Zcore13I watched it again. I hope they don't pay one cent. The security went to grab the guys arm and he started fighting and resisting. Same thing with the ladies. If they tell you you are leaving, you are leaving. If you don't like it, it doesn't matter. They were a guest in a private business. They don't get a say in the decisions or rules other than if they decide to spend their money there.
I say good evidence to them.
Of course they have the right to ask them to leave. That does not given them the right to wrestle the guy to the ground. Worse, it looked like the woman and her child were in the process of leaving when they were attacked.
I hope that they are forced to pay a 7-figure amount. Entering an establishment does not give them the right to assault you.
+1Quote: AxiomOfChoiceOf course they have the right to ask them to leave. That does not given them the right to wrestle the guy to the ground. Worse, it looked like the woman and her child were in the process of leaving when they were attacked.
I hope that they are forced to pay a 7-figure amount. Entering an establishment does not give them the right to assault you.
Totally agree.
In this case however it seems like security placed their hands on the guy first which prompted him pulling his arm away and then it was miller time. Security has to walk a very fine line between over reaction and not reacting strongly enough.
I have seen it in South Africa, Europe, US and Asia. Security always reacts exactly the same way, no matter where they are from or how they were trained. Take down the person and worry about reprecussions later.........
I'm not sure which one is best to be honest. I'm a little torn here.
What I can tell you that there is never a reason to take down a 17 year old girl and an elderly woman the way they did, not even if they had just eaten a free meal or called the security officers' names. For whatever reason they did that, they are going to pay, no doubt about it.
If the mother and daughter did not want to co-operate with the security detail then the police department should have been called especially if they thought that a possible crime or other wrongdoing was being committed.
There was a similar situation at Crown Melbourne a few years ago where a guy died after being wresteld to the ground and another patrons wrist broken. One security officer was found guilty and the other acquitted.
Not a job I would want to get in and try make judgement calls with drunk or disorderly people daily....not sireee bob!
Quote: TomspurIn this case however it seems like security placed their hands on the guy first which prompted him pulling his arm away and then it was miller time.
That's the part I don't understand about those who are reflexively defending the casino. If you put your hands on 100 people for no reason at all, I can guarantee that ALL 100 would try to pull away. It's just a natural human reaction. The question is, was security justified in putting their hands on the guy? It doesn't appear so, although no one knows for sure, of course.
Quote: TomspurIf the mother and daughter did not want to co-operate with the security detail then the police department should have been called especially if they thought that a possible crime or other wrongdoing was being committed.
If it's like Vegas police, this stuff isn't high priority unless an assault had already occurred. They know drunk and/or belligerent people are in casinos everyday. There is always on-site security. The incident can be long over before the cops arrive. If they happen to be right outside they might catch it as it is happened, but there's no rush getting to the casino.
Quote: rxwineIf it's like Vegas police, this stuff isn't high priority unless an assault had already occurred. They know drunk and/or belligerent people are in casinos everyday. There is always on-site security. The incident can be long over before the cops arrive. If they happen to be right outside they might catch it as it is happened, but there's no rush getting to the casino.
That really does depend on the situation. I have had metro in the casino within 10 minutes of a serious incident and then, when an Irish kid head butted his girlfriend in the pit, we had called them straight away and they only caught up with the ambulance transporting the girlfriend at the actual hospital where they arrested the kid.
Kind of a lottery with Metro. Sometimes they are unbelievable and sometimes they are really not.
Quote: TomspurThis is a tough situation. I'm not sure that the force used was justifiable especially the force used on the mom and teen daughter but fortunately or unfortunately casino security is trained to take down a person who could pose a threat to themselves, security or any other patrons around.
No. Its not a tough situation at all.
First, let's stop with this casino nonsense. Its a hotel situation in a hotel lobby area forty feet from any casino.
Second, its the hotel's key card system that malfunctioned and the guests may have annoyed the clerk but the proper response is to improve the key card system. At some point the clerk decided to physically eject the guests despite their being paying guests. There does not appear to be lawful grounds to eject the guest (heck, they cant even eject a man from the hotel if he cheats in the casino). The most they can do is say we've changed the locks, you no longer have any right to enter any hotel room here, leave the premises immediately. He apparently argued,,, so they laid into him. Even if an offense had been committed, the force used against him is excessive, as is the wife and teenaged daughter.
Harrah's has insurance and is famous for fighting tooth and nail, endless appeals, appealing all punitive damage awards as excessive and seeking remittur of compensatory damages and of course at all times seeking endless delays. This makes it hard for law firms to keep taking on Goliath. Many personal injury firms are small and can't swing the costs.
Quote: FleaStiffNo. Its not a tough situation at all.
First, let's stop with this casino nonsense. Its a hotel situation in a hotel lobby area forty feet from any casino.
Second, its the hotel's key card system that malfunctioned and the guests may have annoyed the clerk but the proper response is to improve the key card system. At some point the clerk decided to physically eject the guests despite their being paying guests. There does not appear to be lawful grounds to eject the guest (heck, they cant even eject a man from the hotel if he cheats in the casino). The most they can do is say we've changed the locks, you no longer have any right to enter any hotel room here, leave the premises immediately. He apparently argued,,, so they laid into him. Even if an offense had been committed, the force used against him is excessive, as is the wife and teenaged daughter.
Harrah's has insurance and is famous for fighting tooth and nail, endless appeals, appealing all punitive damage awards as excessive and seeking remittur of compensatory damages and of course at all times seeking endless delays. This makes it hard for law firms to keep taking on Goliath. Many personal injury firms are small and can't swing the costs.
You don't have nearly enough of the facts to make the statements that you have made. We don't know what happened between the guest and the reception person. We don't know how threatening or abusive the man was towards security. All we can do is comment on what we saw.
Security was WRONG to lay their hands on him initially because he then reacted. After he did so, everyone was in on subduing him. I agree this escalated past what should have happened but the Security officers reacted to the "perceived" aggresive act from the man of pulling his arm away.
My comment as to this being a "tough situation" is because after security had made the initial move they had very little choice but to follow through, no matter how unfortunate the situation. What if the guy was carrying and pulled a gun after being touched? There are 100's of scenarios at play here and we simply don't have enough information to make a decent call here.
What I do wholeheartedly agree with you on is the absolutely inexcusable handling of the mother and daughter.......that was absolutely crossing the line.
In my opinion this will be settled out of court very quickly even though CET has a history of delaying tactics.
Quote: FleaStiffHarrah's has insurance and is famous for fighting tooth and nail, endless appeals, appealing all punitive damage awards as excessive and seeking remittur of compensatory damages and of course at all times seeking endless delays.
You're probably right. But it really is not in Harrah's best interest to drag this one out. Sure, there are plenty of frivolous lawsuits involving a guy who "slipped" on a wet floor in the bathroom and wants a million bucks for his "emotional distress."
But not in this particular case. This video footage is ugly. Harrah's needs to settle this lawsuit IMMEDIATELY and get it off the nightly news. Even if they can prove in court that the man was somehow cheating the casino, none of that matters with video footage of security personnel assaulting his teenage daughter, breaking her nose, and detaining her for no reason.
If Harrah's is too boneheaded to realize this, serves 'em right. Fine, drag it out, keep it on the nightly news. The media will play the footage over and over (Rodney King style.) Either way, this family will win in court.
Cheaper for Harrahs to fight than cave in.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceOf course they have the right to ask them to leave. That does not given them the right to wrestle the guy to the ground. Worse, it looked like the woman and her child were in the process of leaving when they were attacked.
I hope that they are forced to pay a 7-figure amount. Entering an establishment does not give them the right to assault you.
You are just assuming things that are not necessarily true.
If when they are talking to him they are asking him to leave and he is not, then of course they have the right to put there hands on him and he has no right to fight it.
Also, who says the lady and daughter are in the process of leaving. Maybe the staff is telling them to stop and they aren't listening.
I see people all the time that think they are owed something or can do whatever they want as long as they are not breaking any laws. That's not the way it works when you're in someone else's house.
ZCore13
Quote: Zcore13You are just assuming things that are not necessarily true.
If when they are talking to him they are asking him to leave and he is not, then of course they have the right to put there hands on him and he has no right to fight it.
That is a ridiculous statement. Refusing to leave is not grounds for assault. They can call the police.
Quote:Also, who says the lady and daughter are in the process of leaving. Maybe the staff is telling them to stop and they aren't listening.
Also not grounds for assault. If you are in an establishment and you don't listen to what they tell you to do, they do not have the right to break your nose.
Quote:I see people all the time that think they are owed something or can do whatever they want as long as they are not breaking any laws. That's not the way it works when you're in someone else's house.
Actually, it is. They did not break in -- they were granted access. When you are granted access to a place, that does not give the owner the right to assault you if you do not follow their orders.
This will almost certainly be a seven figure settlement. They do not want this getting in front of a jury -- the video makes it pretty clear.
+1
Totally agree. The treatment of the guy was bad enough, but seeing what happened to the woman and the underage daughter looked really, really, really bad.
ZCore13
In my company, a person was hailed a hero for standing up to and disarming a gunman......he was fired for violating company policy.
A stolen meal, an unpaid room, a stolen ashtray....isnt worth the legal woes. Isnt worth the workers comp claim when the employee wrenches his back tackling someone.
It reminds me of how well these rent-a cops are sometimes trained,
I remember about 10 years ago in michigan, a Rite AId security guard caught someone stealing, and called the police, and sat on the person until the police arrived.
The woman died from the weight crushing her chest. ...OOPS
If just one person in the world views this video and makes it a point to avoid harrahs and their sister properties.....Harrahs has lost. Even if they dont lose a dime in the lawsuit.
But the fact is...even if they dont lose the lawsuit..they are already paying lawyers and they are getting a ton of bad publicity.
Quote: Zcore13You are delusional. No assault takes place until the people start resisting and fighting. Security grabbing someone's arm that is not listening or leaving is not assault. The aggression starts with the family members, not security.
I don't know where this ridiculously biased view comes from, but that's not the way that a jury will see it.
These guys just won WAY bigger than they would have won in the casino. Getting mugged by minimum-wage, minimum-IQ rent-a-cops is +EV, for sure.
Quote: LarrySThe funny thing is that in most retail situations people are fired for trying to detain or confront someone who is stealing.
In my company, a person was hailed a hero for standing up to and disarming a gunman......he was fired for violating company policy.
A stolen meal, an unpaid room, a stolen ashtray....isnt worth the legal woes. Isnt worth the workers comp claim when the employee wrenches his back tackling someone.
It reminds me of how well these rent-a cops are sometimes trained,
I remember about 10 years ago in michigan, a Rite AId security guard caught someone stealing, and called the police, and sat on the person until the police arrived.
The woman died from the weight crushing her chest. ...OOPS
If just one person in the world views this video and makes it a point to avoid harrahs and their sister properties.....Harrahs has lost. Even if they dont lose a dime in the lawsuit.
But the fact is...even if they dont lose the lawsuit..they are already paying lawyers and they are getting a ton of bad publicity.
That's one of the big unanswered questions here. Were the employees authorized to put hands on customers if there was no threat to them. In a casino the answer is almost always yes. You are correct that in most other businesses the answer is usually no.
ZCore13
I would bet the casino has some very vague charge used as an excuse to justify almost anything and able to pin on anybody. The casino probably knows they're full of it, but can get away with it and that would be the problem. Too much leeway.
Quote: Zcore13That's one of the big unanswered questions here. Were the employees authorized to put hands on customers if there was no threat to them. In a casino the answer is almost always yes. You are correct that in most other businesses the answer is usually no.
Authorized by whom? If the casino allowed them to do this they would be even more liable. They will most likely claim that it was just some rogue employees and claim that they train them not to do that, in an attempt to avoid punitive damages.
Quote: Zcore13That's one of the big unanswered questions here. Were the employees authorized to put hands on customers if there was no threat to them. In a casino the answer is almost always yes. You are correct that in most other businesses the answer is usually no.
ZCore13
In addition to what happened here, police in the same situation will often beat people with clubs after they have someone on the ground. I'm just not sure any injury here can't be blamed on all the struggle which is why I just think it's not all that clear cut who will win in court.
