Posted on 01/24/2024 1:56:42 PM PST by grundle
I don't see how this rape can be the fault of Starbucks.
The article says one of the rape suspects had a long criminal history. He should have already been locked up for that. Then maybe this rape never would have happened.
The article also says that 78 crimes have been committed at that bus stop. I've said before that these serial criminals should have been locked up. I don't know why the city (or the county) is allowing these criminals to go unpunished.
I currently live very, very close to this bus stop, and I have been very critical of what seemed like a media blackout on this rape since it was first reported 15 months ago. I'm glad that we have been updated with new information.
I wish the best for this girl in this horrible situation that never should have been allowed to happen. I don't know why the city (or county) has allowed these serial criminals to run around free for so long and commit so many, many crimes.
> I don’t see how this rape can be the fault of Starbucks. <
Agreed. I am very quick to criticize school districts. But I also don’t see how the rape can be the fault of the school district either. It should be difficult to enter a school from the outside. But fire codes prohibit the locking of doors from the inside.
If a high school student - or a group of high school students - want to leave a school, you cannot physically stop them. And you cannot call the police every time high school students just decide to walk out of a building.
Now, if the district knew a crime was about to be committed, that would be a different story. But I don’t see that here. This is 100% on the filth who did the rape.
I'll try 'negro immunity' for $1,000, Alex
That is pretty attenuated logic. If that's the basis for the claim against the school, it fails. And telling Starbucks that they need security cameras in the bathroom???? Please.
Let me guess: it’s them again, Boo boo.
FTA....
The lawsuit said Starbucks leases the building from Kappa Drive Associates, and that they both, “refused to supply adequate security so that patrons could safely use its premises.”
“Because Starbucks did not have security or trained staff present in its store, the students took turns going back and forth from the bathroom as they sexually assaulted and raped her,” the lawsuit said.
Sounds like Starbucks was operating in a dangerous area with "78 incidents of criminal activity had been reported in the area, including vandalism, drug dealing and assaults."
They had a duty to provide extra security and safety. But I can just hear the cries of racism if they did take proactive action. When in a dangerous environment like that, they should have done what most businesses do.
Close.
When you have to go to civil action like this, you sue everyone who might possibly be considered liable (”deep pockets” theory) knowing most of them will probably be removed as defendants. The problem is, the perps are judgement-proof, i.e. they have no money or assets so the only choice the grandma has is to go after them under this negligence theory. Pretty likely the whole suit will fall apart if so as there’d be no reason to waste money on legal fees.
tru dat.
Lean harder. It’s not working.
If I’m wrong here, please explain. Maybe I’ll learn something new, and change my opinion.
If they can take them for gender bending treatment or abortions, then yes.
This ping list is for the other articles of interest to homeschoolers about education and public school. This can occasionally be a fairly high volume list. Articles pinged to the Another Reason to Homeschool List will be given the keyword of ARTH. (If I remember. If I forget, please feel free to add it yourself)
The main Homeschool Ping List handles the homeschool-specific articles. I hold both the Homeschool Ping List and the Another Reason to Homeschool Ping list. Please freepmail me to let me know if you would like to be added to or removed from either list, or both.
How could anyone change your opinion?
You say they’re all a little bit guilty, so you blame no one.
I will point out, though, that this sounds like a lawsuit, because criminal law can touch no one. That, to me, is the real problem.
Invoking the doctrine of in loco parentis, schools are quick to assert rights over the students and parents. They are not so keen about the flip side of the doctrine which involves the duties.
> You say they’re all a little bit guilty, so you blame no one. <
I think you misread my post. Or perhaps you responded to the wrong person. I do not blame Starbucks at all. And I do not blame the school district at all.
The last sentence of my post #2: This is 100% on the filth who did the rape.
Unless I missed something, the three accused rapists are the only people NOT being sued. Is that becuase they have no $$$ to tap?
Allderdice ranks in the bottom 50% of schools in PA.
Majority black enrollment.
I don't keep up on the local news, so I missed it, first time.
Yeah, the perps bear first responsibility for committing the rape.
Second is the parent(s) and criminal justice system for continuing to let criminals skate.
Third, the school. They are responsible for the safety of students in their care.
Fourth, Starbucks. At least civilly.
A public accomodation must take reasonable steps to ensure the safety of patrons.
I remember this from a case some years ago.
> Allderdice ranks in the bottom 50% of schools in PA. <
Now, here’s an interesting thing. Allderdice is one of the best schools in the Pittsburgh School District (not kidding). A teacher or student who is assigned there could do much worse.
And that gives you an idea of what the rest of the schools are like. Weak and woke administrators have destroyed that school district. Pittsburgh won’t be bouncing back, ever.
Apparently, I read your post entirely correctly - you blame no one.
Yet you list what the defendants of the suit did wrong.
Welcome to the world of the real. O.J. really killed those people. It is sad that criminal justice cannot always prevail, but sometimes it falls to civil law to obtain some semblance of justice. Your blame of the unknown is meaningless since they cannot be prosecuted.
If this suit goes forward, perhaps “schools” will pay attention to males escorting special needs females off campus. Perhaps Starbucks will realize that they are not selling coffee when they are really providing an unmonitored location for lawlessness.
Call the parents/guardians first. They need to know their offspring aren’t following simple rules. Parenting begins with parents, not with police.
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.