Did negligent security contribute to the shooting at an Aurora shopping center parking lot and are justice and compensation available to the victim’s family? Read Our Legal Take below to find out what legal options are available.
LOCAL NEWS
One man lost his life and another was injured after a shooting at an Aurora shopping center parking lot early Sunday morning, Sept 25, 2022.
As reported by CBSnews.com, “[t]he shooting occurred around 1:30 a.m. in the parking lot of 2295 South Chambers Road, at the intersection of Chambers and East Iliff Avenue.“
According to the report, “officers arrived to find two men, each with multiple gunshot wounds; a 44-year-old and a 52-year-old.”
DenverPost.com is reporting, “[b]oth [victims] were taken to a hospital, where the 44-year-old man died. The second, a 52-year-old man, survived but remained hospitalized Sunday.”
IS JUSTICE AVAILABLE? OUR LEGAL TAKE
Shopping center and parking lot patrons have a right to feel safe and secure while on the premises. The level of security provided at the property is of significance, and is a relevant consideration when analyzing whether this shooting may have been prevented. The following questions are also important in assessing whether this incident may have been avoided:
- What security measures were in place to deter crime and protect the victim at the time of the shooting?
- Have there been prior incidents of violence on the property, and were any security measures added after any prior incidents?
- Was the property aware of any suspicious persons or suspicious activity on the property prior to the shooting?
- Have prior incidents of violence been reported on or near the property?
- Were any security personnel at the property?
- Have there been prior incidents of violence on the property?
- Were security measures added after any prior incidents?
- What protocol was in place to deter crime and protect the victims at the time of the shooting?
- Have authorities been to the property on prior occasions?
Property owners are generally required to protect against foreseeable harm to anyone and everyone legally on the premises. Should the investigation into this incident reveal facts that establish that the property owner or management lacked adequate security to protect its residents and visitors, the victim’s family may seek justice and elect to pursue legal claims and substantial compensation for their loss. In addition, any injured victim may seek justice and elect to pursue legal claims and substantial compensation for their injuries.
The Murray Law Firm has extensive and successful experience in handling security negligence claims on behalf of victims and their families, and suggests that an immediate, unbiased inspection of the property will need to be performed so as to limit evidence from being altered, damaged or destroyed. The complexities of pursuing a negligent security case are well understood by the legal team at The Murray Law Firm, and it is imperative that the victim’s family and any injured victim retain a capable law firm who will work without delay to protect their interests.
OUR RESULTS: OVER $125 MILLION IN VERDICTS AND SETTLEMENTS FOR OUR CLIENTS
The Murray Law Firm has a long history of representing victims of violence and security negligence. We have obtained over $125 Million in verdicts and settlements for our Clients, including:
- A $29.25 million dollar verdict for a victim of an unsafe property.
- Settlement in excess of $10 million dollars for a victim of gun violence at an apartment complex.
- Settlement in excess of $10 million dollars for a family who lost a loved one to gun violence at a commercial property.
We offer our legal assistance, if desired. We represent our Clients on a contingency agreement, which generally means that no fees or payments are owed until and unless we recover. Anyone seeking further information or legal representation is encouraged to contact us via e-mail (click here) or by telephone at 888-842-1616. Consultations are free and confidential.
How to Choose and Hire the Right Attorney (Click Here)