None of the defendants were immediately available Wednesday for comment, except for YouTube.
A spokesperson for the company said in a statement: “We have the deepest sympathies for the victims and families of the horrific attack at Tops grocery store in Buffalo last year. Through the years, YouTube has invested in technology, teams, and policies to identify and remove extremist content. We regularly work with law enforcement, other platforms, and civil society to share intelligence and best practices.”
The suit, which alleges negligent infliction of emotional distress, seeks unspecified damages from the companies as well as the cost of their legal fees.
An uncommon strategy
As mass shootings in the U.S. have increased, so have the lawsuits pointing responsibility at gun companies and others. But so far the vast majority of that litigation has come from victims injured during the tragedies or family members of those who didn’t survive.
Wednesday’s lawsuit, however, focuses on witnesses of the Buffalo shooting who survived unscathed or with minimal physical injuries, but say they were emotionally traumatized.
“Given that there was an injury, even though a psychological injury, it’s a small step for a lawyer to figure out a basis for suing to receive damages for that injury, just like a person who’s physically injured,” said Robert Spitzer, a gun policy expert and former chairman of the political science department at the State University of New York at Cortland.
That legal strategy, according to Spitzer, is sure to catch on.
“When you think about the number of people who are emotionally affected by a mass shooting, it’s a pretty big number,” he said.
Despite being an uncommon legal maneuver, the lawsuit is not unprecedented following a high-profile mass shooting. A class-action lawsuit was filed in 2017 on behalf of three people who attended the Route 91 Harvest Moon Festival in Las Vegas, the worst mass shooting in modern American history in which at least 59 people were killed and hundreds more were injured.
The plaintiffs in that case brought the lawsuit “on behalf of themselves and on behalf of all persons who tragically suffered emotional distress as a result of the shooting that occurred,” the suit said.
The defendant in that lawsuit was a bump stock manufacturer. Bump stocks allow semi-automatic rifles, such as the popular AR-15-style weapons, to fire more quickly. The gun accessory was used in the mass shooting.
It’s not clear how the case ended. It was moved to federal court and was closed in September 2020, according to court records.
In July, families of the victims killed during the Tops shooting — which included many of the same defendant’s as this week’s lawsuit — sued social media companies, weapon manufacturers and gun retailers as well.
White shooter carrying assault-style rifle livestreamed the massacre
On May 14, 2022, the gunman, who was 18 at the time, drove more than 200 miles to a Tops Friendly Markets with a horrific plan. In a racist tirade he published online, the shooter admitted to researching what zip codes had the highest population of Black residents. He also detailed his belief in the “great replacement theory,” a false conspiracy that nonwhite immigrants are slowly displacing white Americans.
Dressed in tactical gear and body armor, the shooter used an assault-style rifle to gun down employees and customers. He also wore a helmet with a GoPro camera on it and broadcast parts of the attack for approximately two minutes on Twitch.
He was sentenced in February to life in prison without the possibility of parole.
The Tops survivors’ attorneys also filed another lawsuit Tuesday on behalf of Wayne Jones, the only child of Celestine Chaney, a 65-year-old woman who was shopping at Tops for her favorite dessert, strawberry shortcake, when the gunman fatally shot her last year, according to the suit.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
Source: | This article originally belongs to Nbcnews.com
