Family sues Harrah's for assault using security video
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceAuthorized by whom? If the casino allowed them to do this they would be even more liable.
Am I and Zcore the only ones not puzzled by this
video? A casino is not the happy zone you think it
is. At all. What you see is in this video is who these
people really are. They're like a bank, only the
bank is run by not very bright thug like people.
Try getting into a yelling match is a bank that
has security and see what happens. Casinos are
all about protecting the money. So that means
any potentially violent people are dealt with harshly.
They thought the guy would get violent so they took him
down. Are they Mossad trained high tech security?
No, they're HS drop out Dunkin Donut trained, the
best a dollar over min wage can buy. But they got
the job done. Should they have manhandled the
underage girl? Donuts interfere with judgement
calls, nobodies perfect. It's all part of what you get in
the casino 'entertainment' package.
Quote: EvenBobAm I and Zcore the only ones not puzzled by this
video? A casino is not the happy zone you think it
is. At all. What you see is in this video is who these
people really are. They're like a bank, only the
bank is run by not very bright thug like people.
Try getting into a yelling match is a bank that
has security and see what happens. Casinos are
all about protecting the money. So that means
any potentially violent people are dealt with harshly.
They thought the guy would get violent so they took him
down. Are they Mossad trained high tech security?
No, they're HS drop out Dunkin Donut trained, the
best a dollar over min wage can buy. But they got
the job done. Should they have manhandled the
underage girl? Donuts interfere with judgement
calls, nobodies perfect. It's all part of what you get in
the casino 'entertainment' package.
I wish I was lucky enough for that to happen to me. Do you know how long it will take me to win as much as these guys are going to get?
They didn't even have the brains to do it in the back room where there are no cameras.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceAuthorized 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.
I think thats the way they will go. In the poker thread people tell me that poker dealers are poorly trained to handle incidents. I dont know what kind of continued training casinos give these make believe police.
But when you think about the downside of physical confrontations where passerbys can be injured, the guards can be injured and go on workers comp, the detainee can claim injjury. Everyone and their mother will try to have their hands out in a chaotic situation that is always possible when physical confrontation is initiated.
it isnt the old days anymore where the old boys brought someone into the back room, and smacked them around. You have to worry about lawsuits by anyone "traumatized" by the situation
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceI wish I was lucky enough for that to happen to me. Do you know how long it will take me to win as much as these guys are going to get?
They didn't even have the brains to do it in the back room where there are no cameras.
There are cameras in those rooms, there are cameras everywhere. You are not allowed to have sensitive areas without cameras. Now can you lie and say..."there is nothing sensitive in here" but when Surveillance has to submit their yearly report to the NGC, they have to inform them of such places and if they don't then the Director of Surveillance gets shown the door at the behest of the NGC........
In this case, Oceans 11 is not correct :)
Boycott Harrah's.
Quote: mickeycrimmThe security thugs involved should be fired, horsewhipped, and relegated to picking tomatoes in Mexico.
Boycott Harrah's.
Yeah they are in need of tomatoe pickers in Mexico as most of them have left for the promised land of Leamington Ontario green houses
Quote: mickeycrimmPaging Robert Nersessian. Although he is not licensed back east. The family's lawyers should consult with Bob. He would chop Harrah's lawyers up in court. The reason this crap is still going on back east is there is no Bob Nersessian back there. The security thugs involved should be fired, horsewhipped, and relegated to picking tomatoes in Mexico.
Boycott Harrah's.
They should call him, he'd likely have no trouble getting admitted pro hac vice as a local attorney would just have to be counsel of record for the case.
http://www.ratzanlawgroup.com/sites/default/files/pdfs/Free-Resources-for-Practicing-Attorneys/pro-hac-vice-rules-for-florida.pdf
I'd originally looked it up for New Jersey, a state in which he'd have had to meet one of six criteria, (he'd have met the first, considered a specialist in the field of gaming law) and it seems that it is even easier in Florida as you just have to had represented in less than three cases within the last year in Florida and be in good standing in the State(s) in which you are licensed. The, "Local Attorney," which means counsel of record, must be in good standing in Florida, of course.
Here's an example of what a Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice in Florida would look like:
http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/pub_info/summaries/briefs/11/11-2568/Filed_03-14-2012_Pro_Hac_Vice_Pedersen.pdf
In New Jersey, you have to have a pretty specific reason for wanting the person as your Attorney:
Quote:NJ Rule 1:21-2 Appearances Pro Hac Vice:
(3) In civil actions the motion shall be granted only if the court finds, from the supporting affidavit, that there is good cause for such admission, which shall include at least one of the following:
(A) the cause in which the attorney seeks admission involves a complex field of law in which the attorney is a specialist, or
(B) there has been an attorney-client relationship with the client for an extended period of time, or
(C) there is a lack of local counsel with adequate expertise in the field involved, or
(D) the cause presents questions of law involving the law of the foreign jurisdiction in which the applicant is licensed, or
(E) there is need for extensive discovery or other proceedings in the foreign jurisdiction in which the applicant is licensed, or
(F) such other reason similar to those set forth in this subsection as would present good cause for the pro hac vice admission.
In Florida, it would seem that the person can practice simply because you want him/her as your attorney, but again, under New Jersey law, Attorney Nersessian would clearly be admitted to practice pro hac vice pursuant to 1:21-2(3)(A)
Quote: mickeycrimmBoycott Harrah's.
I already do, for several reasons!
Quote: Mission146They are suing them in the State of Florida, theoretically, Harrah's could file a Motion to Change Venue, but I doubt it would be granted, or even that they would bother because of the extremely low probability of it being granted. In a transaction involving parties from two different states, unless there is a contract that has a Forum Selection Clause, either party can sue from anything arising from that transaction in either State.
Why wouldn't they sue in Federal court? They've got to be claiming more than 75k in damages, no?
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/culture-of-corporate-indifference-pattern-of-security-guard-misconduct-cited-in-civil-action-filed-against-caesars-entertainment-harrahs-atlantic-city-2014-02-19?reflink=MW_news_stmp
Here's the docket, anyway:
http://apps2.leeclerk.org/freesearch/CaseDetail.aspx?CaseID=252327095
There's a Pro Hac Vice Motion at the bottom, can't tell what party filed it, though.
Quote: Mission146I don't know, but check this, the female adult victim is herself an attorney:
Lol. They messed with the wrong people.
Hey, Mission, out of curiosity, if you asked someone to leave your hotel, and they refused, so you beat them up, bodyslammed them, and broke someone's nose, would that be considered acceptable?
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceLol. They messed with the wrong people.
Hey, Mission, out of curiosity, if you asked someone to leave your hotel, and they refused, so you beat them up, bodyslammed them, and broke someone's nose, would that be considered acceptable?
It really depends because the situation is entirely different. I'd pretty much have to make a good case that they were a physical threat to me or could reasonably have been a physical threat to the other guests.
If you're talking about an unarmed woman, for example, she would probably have to do some actual physical damage to me for me to have a leg to stand on, and even then, I'd just pin her arms or something, so any physical damage to her would be unintentional.
If it were a guy, and I'm not saying I would do this, but I'd probably only have to claim he took a swing at me, missed, and I defended myself according to the level of physical threat I perceived. IOW, if there's no video directly contradictory to what I am claiming, (area of the hotel w/o cameras) I'm probably in the clear as long as the force isn't excessive for what I am claiming.
If it were a guy and on-camera, then he would actually have to take a shot at me, or at a minimum, approach me in a physically aggressive way. I'd either have to be in direct physical danger, or the possibility of physical danger would have to look very real.
The other thing that makes a situation a bit different here is the fact that, if I am involved in such an altercation, it's a one-on-one matter at best, and, at worst, I'm somehow outnumbered. I'm the only employee on the premises the majority of the time I am here.
Quote: Mission146I don't know, but check this, the female adult victim is herself an attorney.
I love it. Grab some popcorn, this will be a good show.
Also, I think the family made a savvy move to have the teenage girl file a separate lawsuit. Even if it turns out that dad was up to something sneaky with the keycards, the teenager's lawsuit will still be a slam dunk winner.
http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Lawsuits-Accuse-Casino-Security-Guards-of-Brutality-246967931.html
Quote: Dicenor33Casinos seem out of control sometimes, as if the law does not apply to them. I hope that attorney beat a crap out them, they might treat their guests a bit better after the case is over.
I've never been treated poorly at a Harrah's property. I've also never pointed my finger in a Staff members face, yelled at them and not listened to a request to leave. I'd like to say I'm lucky that trouble never seems to find me, but I think it has a bit more to do with I don't do things to allow trouble to even know where I am.
ZCore13
Thank you very much !
Quote: Mission146It really depends because the situation is entirely different. I'd pretty much have to make a good case that they were a physical threat to me or could reasonably have been a physical threat to the other guests.
If you're talking about an unarmed woman, for example, she would probably have to do some actual physical damage to me for me to have a leg to stand on, and even then, I'd just pin her arms or something, so any physical damage to her would be unintentional.
If it were a guy, and I'm not saying I would do this, but I'd probably only have to claim he took a swing at me, missed, and I defended myself according to the level of physical threat I perceived. IOW, if there's no video directly contradictory to what I am claiming, (area of the hotel w/o cameras) I'm probably in the clear as long as the force isn't excessive for what I am claiming.
If it were a guy and on-camera, then he would actually have to take a shot at me, or at a minimum, approach me in a physically aggressive way. I'd either have to be in direct physical danger, or the possibility of physical danger would have to look very real.
The other thing that makes a situation a bit different here is the fact that, if I am involved in such an altercation, it's a one-on-one matter at best, and, at worst, I'm somehow outnumbered. I'm the only employee on the premises the majority of the time I am here.
Do you carry or have access to weapons? Perhaps a pistol or Mace? Those expandable police batons are nice as well.
Quote: 1BB
Do you carry or have access to weapons? Perhaps a pistol or Mace? Those expandable police batons are nice as well.
I probably could if I wanted to, but I've only really had three such incidences in my entire time here. Actually, I was outnumbered 3:1 in one case, and that didn't go very well for me. Mace probably wouldn't be a terrible investment.
I had a piece when I managed the hotel in KC, but that was because armed robbery was a feasible possibility there.
Quote: Zcore13I've never been treated poorly at a Harrah's property. I've also never pointed my finger in a Staff members face, yelled at them and not listened to a request to leave. I'd like to say I'm lucky that trouble never seems to find me, but I think it has a bit more to do with I don't do things to allow trouble to even know where I am.
ZCore13
Blaming the victim is a page taken from the rape defense playbook.
Quote: mickeycrimmBlaming the victim is a page taken from the rape defense playbook.
That would make sense if they were the victim rather than the party that started the aggression and refused to abide by the request of the business to leave the premises.
But I should take a step back and not allow this subject to pisseth me off. The same type of people that think they are owed something or that these people have the "right" to not listen to the Management or that it's ok to argue, raise your voice, point in people faces and cause a scene, are the same people that think we should extend unemployment benefits for years and years, take money from the top 1 or 2 or 5 percent and re-distribute it to the bottom group that is too lazy or dumb to get out of their situation, forgive all the illegal residents of the U.S. that committed a crime in sneaking into the Country illegally and just let them stay since they are already here, or we should be able to sue a bar owner or restaurant because we drank too much at their establishment and killed or damaged something.
No personal responsibility left in this Country. Blame everyone else. Life is not fair. Give me what others have. It's not my fault I drank too much. Why should I work if I can get stuff free? What, I have to work hard to succeed? Isn't there an easier way?
ZCore13
http://counterassault.com/selfdefense.htm
The 3 oz cone spray. Have to watch local laws though. In my state you can't have more than .75 oz. by law.
And this lawsuit isn't in Nevada. The guy alone, maybe he doesn't win. Add in the attack on the wife and daughter plus the daughters injuries and I think this family has a very good chance. Always lots of agitated patrons in casinos by nature. This isn't the first time security had a situation with an agitated patron and should have been properly trained for it.
And I've been surrounded by goons at a Harrahs property simply for holecarding.
Daughter wins vs Harrah's
Yes --700
No +550
Husband/Wife wins vs Harrah's
Yes -275
No +225
lol
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. Each of the 3 family members started the physical confrontation with their actions and resisted. Some people think they are special or should have special treatment based on how much they lose or the stakes they play. I don't know if this is the case in this video, but if someone with the authority tells you to do something, you do it. You don't fight them.
ZCore13
Rent a cops don't have the authority that you think they have.
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.
ZCore13
The ladies were trying to leave. So which is it? Were they told to leave or told to stay?
Quote: Dicenor33For some reason lawyers don't want to deal with casinos. I had a tough time finding one when I had a problem.
Traditionally lawyers don't like these kind of cases because the settlements are to low.
Quote: mickeycrimmThe ladies were trying to leave. So which is it? Were they told to leave or told to stay?
Nobody actually knows what they were told unless they were there at the time. The rumor is they were told to leave and they refused. They are walking toward their room when they were told not to and to leave. They believed they could disregard what they were told because they had personal items in the room. I contend they are wrong. If the hotel tells them to get off the property right now, they must. If then the property does not give them their property in a timely manner, that's a different story. But the guest does not get to make up the rules.
ZCore13
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
Which court ruled that casino personnel have powers that retail personnel don't?
It is a horrible thing to kick someone out of a hotel when people live so far away forcing them to live in a dumpster or pay top rate somewhere else. They're paying a price for this scandal whether or not the lawsuit is won. Facebook deals there are $79 for Waterfront tower with 2 buffets, free parking, room credit. Public humiliation and beatings not included.
Quote: Zcore13That would make sense if they were the victim rather than the party that started the aggression and refused to abide by the request of the business to leave the premises.
But I should take a step back and not allow this subject to pisseth me off. The same type of people that think they are owed something or that these people have the "right" to not listen to the Management or that it's ok to argue, raise your voice, point in people faces and cause a scene, are the same people that think we should extend unemployment benefits for years and years, take money from the top 1 or 2 or 5 percent and re-distribute it to the bottom group that is too lazy or dumb to get out of their situation, forgive all the illegal residents of the U.S. that committed a crime in sneaking into the Country illegally and just let them stay since they are already here, or we should be able to sue a bar owner or restaurant because we drank too much at their establishment and killed or damaged something.
No personal responsibility left in this Country. Blame everyone else. Life is not fair. Give me what others have. It's not my fault I drank too much. Why should I work if I can get stuff free? What, I have to work hard to succeed? Isn't there an easier way?
ZCore13
Off topic drivel.
*gagillionQuote: mickeycrimmOff topic drivel.
Quote: Zcore13Nobody actually knows what they were told unless they were there at the time. The rumor is they were told to leave and they refused. They are walking toward their room when they were told not to and to leave. They believed they could disregard what they were told because they had personal items in the room. I contend they are wrong. If the hotel tells them to get off the property right now, they must. If then the property does not give them their property in a timely manner, that's a different story. But the guest does not get to make up the rules.
ZCore13
And just how were they going to get in the room without a key? C'mon, Zcore, you can be creative here also. They were going to kick the door in, right?
Quote: mickeycrimmAnd just how were they going to get in the room without a key? C'mon, Zcore, you can be creative here also. They were going to kick the door in, right?
If they don't have a key how did their stuff get in the room? You believe too much of what the media reports (or fails to report).
They had working keys to their room. The problem was their names were not attached to the room electronically. So, when they attempted to charge items to their room, they couldn't. The issue was not that the room key didn't work to let them in the room.
The fact that you are defending them based on a false assumption and arguing things that don't exist shows you should not be arguing.
ZCore13
Quote: Zcore13If they don't have a key how did their stuff get in the room? You believe too much of what the media reports (or fails to report).
They had working keys to their room. The problem was their names were not attached to the room electronically. So, when they attempted to charge items to their room, they couldn't. The issue was not that the room key didn't work to let them in the room.
The fact that you are defending them based on a false assumption and arguing things that don't exist shows you should not be arguing.
ZCore13
This from the guy who stated in an earlier post "The 'rumor' was they were going to their room."
ZCore13
Quote: Zcore13Nobody knows where they were going. Maybe they were going to get ice cream. What is known is they were not going in the direction they were told to go.
ZCore13
So if somebody doesn't go where you want them to go you break their noses, take them down, put them in cuffs and humiliate them in front of the whole casino......
Seems completely logical to me......or not!
Quote: Zcore13Nobody knows where they were going. Maybe they were going to get ice cream. What is known is they were not going in the direction they were told to go.
ZCore13
Did you ever stop to think that maybe they were just trying to get away.
Quote: BeardgoatWhy would they just be trying to get away?
The women had to have been afraid and cinfused after what they just witnessed.
