Posted on 01/06/2023 9:53:48 AM PST by Red Badger
Former President Donald Trump is facing a wrongful death lawsuit brought by the girlfriend of U.S. Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick, who a medical examiner said died of natural causes a day after the Jan. 6 Capitol breach.
Sicknick’s girlfriend Sandra Garza is seeking at least $10 million in damages from Trump and from each of the two men charged in connection with the Jan. 6 incident.
“The horrific events of January 6, 2021, including Officer Sicknick’s tragic, wrongful death, were a direct and foreseeable consequence of Defendants’ unlawful actions,” reads the complaint (pdf), which was filed on Jan. 5 at the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by attorneys on behalf of Garza, who is bringing the lawsuit both individually and as a representative of Sicknick’s estate.
Besides what could be a total of $30 million in monetary damages, Garza is seeking unspecified punitive damages and coverage of attorney’s fees.
A spokesperson for Trump did not immediately return a request for comment from The Epoch Times, but a statement provided to Fox News called the lawsuit “frivolous.”
“President Trump is immune from frivolous attacks and will continue to be fully focused on his mission to Make America Great Again,” the spokesperson told Fox, while pointing out that Trump on Jan. 6 “clearly and unequivocally stated that Americans should ‘peacefully and patriotically make their voices heard.’”
Two Jan. 6 rioters, Julian Khater of Pennsylvania and George Tanios of West Virginia, who were earlier charged with assaulting Sicknick with a chemical spray, were the two other defendants named in Garza’s lawsuit.
Their attorneys were not immediately available for comment.
Khater earlier pleaded guilty to assaulting police on Jan. 6 and Tanios pleaded guilty to two misdemeanors.
Claims
Garza claims in the complaint that Trump “intentionally riled up the crowd and directed and encouraged a mob to attack the U.S. Capitol and attack those who opposed them.”
“The violence that followed, and the injuries that violence caused, including the injuries sustained by Officer Sicknick and his eventual death, were reasonable and foreseeable consequences of Defendant Trump’s words and conduct,” the lawsuit alleges.
After the riot began on Jan. 6, Trump released a video in which he called on his supporters to “go home” and later said in a post on Twitter that the riot was a “heinous attack” and that lawbreakers would be held accountable.
“We had an election that was stolen from us. It was a landslide election, and everyone knows it, especially the other side, but you have to go home now,” Trump said in the video at the time. “We have to have peace. We have to have law and order. We have to respect our great people in law and order. We don’t want anybody hurt.”
Besides wrongful death, the lawsuit accuses Trump of violating Sicknick’s civil rights, negligence, and aiding and abetting assault.
Garza’s lawyer told Fox News that any money from the lawsuit would be donated to charity.
Sicknick died on Jan. 7 from natural causes, according to a determination (pdf) issued by Francisco J. Diaz, chief medical examiner for Washington.
The officer was sprayed with a chemical substance outside the U.S. Capitol at around 2:20 p.m. on Jan. 6 and collapsed at around 10 p.m. later that day, prompting his being taken to the hospital.
Sicknick died the following day at around 9:30 p.m., with the medical examiner determining that the cause of death was two strokes at the base of Sicknick’s brain while the manner of death was ruled “natural.”
Diaz told The Washington Post in April 2021 that he found no evidence of internal or external injuries when examining the body of the deceased officer. He also said there were no indications Sicknick had suffered an allergic reaction from the chemical irritants he was sprayed with.
The examiner added, however, that “all that transpired played a role in his condition,” referring to the events on Jan. 6, 2021, with Sicknick being among the officers who engaged the crowd amid the day’s violence.
The U.S. Capitol Police said at the time that ruling Sicknick’s death as from natural causes “does not change the fact Officer Brian Sicknick died in the line of duty, courageously defending Congress and the Capitol.”
Then-Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen stated on Jan. 8 that Sicknick died of “injuries he suffered defending the U.S. Capitol.”
Days after the riots, a number of media outlets cited anonymous sources claiming Sicknick had been beaten with a fire extinguisher, reports that were later updated to say his cause of death had actually not yet been determined.
The claim that Sicknick was killed by Jan. 6 protesters was invoked numerous times during the Democrat-led impeachment against Trump for “incitement of insurrection.”
Trump has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing in connection with the Jan. 6 incident and referred to the impeachment proceedings as a “witch hunt.”
A number of lawsuits have been filed in connection with the Jan. 6 Capitol breach. Some of them have been filed by individuals who were present at the Capitol on the day of the incident, while others have been filed by government entities or private organizations.
One notable lawsuit was filed by several House Democrats and Capitol Police officers against Trump, alleging that he incited his supporters to commit “acts of violence and lawlessness” at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6.
The lawsuit seeks to hold Trump accountable for the damages and injuries that were caused during the incident.
Trump and his allies sought to dismiss that suit, but a judge ruled in February 2022 (pdf) that the case can proceed to trial.
The lawsuits are ongoing and the outcomes have yet to be determined.
Anything goes...Just say whatever ya want and claim it as fact.
A question such as “Were you the spouse or immediate family member of the victim at the time of the incident?” should stop some of these gold-digging lawsuits before they go to court.
Suit was filed in the District of Columbia so this hag and her lawyer are probably counting on some go-away money.
Wonder who’s funding this?
Funding it and put her up to it, telling her that they’d take care of her. She’ll be fine.
How does she have STANDING if she isn’t a wife or blood relative?
They got his taxes and got nothing. Everything they’ve tried has failed.
Well, she might be messing with the wrong bull. This case gets tossed and he drops a $20mil Defamation suit on her. I bet they didn’t tell her about that possibility.
How about Nancy pelosi and Kamala Harris who supported all the killings of the police?
When do they get sued?
There’s a good thread on Twitchy from a reporter who was there throughout and watched Ashley Babbit get murdered
Sheds a whole new light on the chronology and events of that day
And guess what, the Sham Committee refused his testimony
How does a girlfriend have legal standing to bring a lawsuit?
Why doesn’t this broad sue Ray Epps and the rest of the Eff Bee Eye instigators?
I may be wrong on this but I believe under Italian law, if you bring suit against a person or business and lose, you pay all court costs and all legal fees incurred by the person/business you attempted to sue. I would think the purpose of that law is to dissuade frivolous lawsuits. U.S. trial lawyers and the politicians they own would never tolerate anything that gets between them and their lawsuits aka $$$. We in the U.S. can counter-sue but I think anti-frivolous lawsuit laws make more sense. I also know our trial lawyers would never tolerate such a change.
"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers." - William Shakespeare
There is no way any court should let this case proceed. Period.
Despite your creative suggestions, nothing short of plaintiff’s and her lawyer public dismemberment would be sufficient…
No, that was when Nancy's police were given instructions to fire tear gas and pepper spray at the peaceful part of the crowd.
I think Sicknick might have been murdered by the deep state. He was falsely reported as having died earlier, these reports were then corrected, and then he died. (”Sorry we jumped the gun on reports of his death.”) The false narrative that he died of injuries ran like wildfire, even despite concurrent stories that he wasn’t injured, including his own tweet. His body was cremated (preventing any future investigation) and then he was given an extremely rare ceremonial burial in the Capitol, under false pretenses. Then, much hay was made of his death, to the detriment of J6 people and Trump, and to the advantage of rats and the deep state, again under false pretenses. It was awfully convenient they had their “victim”. They probably needed that victim.
This kind of crap will continue until the sock merchants (NYC slang for low rent lawyers) that bring these bull shiite cases are disbarred.
Will happen? Not likely everywhere but very possible in some areas.
The Free State of Florida comes to mind.
And the judge who let it go to trial should be disbarred.
Somewhere, the “timeline” of their relationship was released showing they had not been together as “boyfriend” and “girlfriend” since 2019......and he died in 2021. His death was NOT listed as a homicide, it was ruled as the result of a stroke on the death certificate or something similar, I believe......
The rules for Article III standing took their current form in Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992). The case involved a challenge by an environmental organization to federal regulations issued under the Endangered Species Act. In ruling against the plaintiff, the Supreme Court identified a three-part test for establishing standing in federal court. A plaintiff has the burden of proving each element of the test.
1. Injury in Fact
A plaintiff must have suffered “an invasion of a legally protected interest” that meets two additional criteria: (1) it is “concrete and particularized”; and (2) it is “actual or imminent,” as opposed to “conjectural or hypothetical.” Lujan, 504 U.S. at 560. It does not need to be an economic injury, but it needs to be something that has directly affected the plaintiff.
2. Causation
The plaintiff’s injury must be “fairly traceable” to the conduct that is the subject of the lawsuit. Id. It cannot have resulted from actions by someone who is not a party to the lawsuit.
3. Likelihood of Redress
A decision in the plaintiff’s favor must be likely to provide an adequate remedy for the plaintiff’s injuries. The court specified that “redress[] by a favorable decision” must be “likely,” rather than “merely speculative.” Id. at 561.
She may have standing because if they lived together and he was the breadwinner of the household, she may have suffered a concrete and actual economic injury. I am not saying this because I support her suit (frankly, I believe its crap factually and there is no direct or proximate cause between DJT's actions and the injury complained of)
Women dont like their personal atm’s and security/maintenance people taken away from them.
Will be thrown out.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.