Charleston mass shooting victims can sue U.S. over gun purchase: court
Send a link to a friend
[August 31, 2019]
By Jonathan Stempel
(Reuters) - Survivors of a 2015 mass
shooting at a South Carolina church can sue the U.S. government over its
alleged negligence in allowing Dylann Roof to buy the gun he used to
kill nine African-Americans, a federal appeals court said on Friday.
The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the government was not immune
from liability under either the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) or the
Brady Act to prevent handgun violence.
Friday's decision by a three-judge panel revived 16 lawsuits that
challenged lapses in how the government vetted prospective gun
purchasers, including the FBI's management of the National Instant
Criminal Background Check System (NICS).
The U.S. Department of Justice did not immediately respond to a request
for comment.
William Wilkins, a former chief judge of the 4th Circuit representing
the victims, said Congress had charged the FBI with adopting procedures
"to stop people like Roof who could obtain assassins' weapons" from
doing so.
"The government has to do what the law requires," Wilkins said in an
interview. "It failed to do that in this case."
Roof, a white supremacist, had been admitted to a Bible study session at
the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston on June 17,
2015, where he then used his .45-caliber Glock semiautomatic pistol in
the shooting.
Victims said a proper background check would have shown that Roof had
recently admitted to drug possession, which would have disqualified him
from buying the gun from a federally licensed dealer two months earlier.
[to top of second column]
|
Dylann Roof sits in the court room at the Charleston County Judicial
Center to enter his guilty plea on murder charges in state court for
the 2015 shooting massacre at a historic black church, in
Charleston, South Carolina, U.S., April 10, 2017. REUTERS/Grace
Beahm/Pool/File Photo
Chief Judge Roger Gregory wrote for the Richmond, Virginia-based
appeals court that no one disputed that a proper check would have
stopped Roof.
But he said U.S. District Judge Richard Gergel in Charleston was
wrong to dismiss the lawsuits on immunity grounds in June 2018, even
as Gergel faulted the government's "abysmally poor policy choices"
in managing the background check system.
Gregory said the case turned on the NICS examiner's alleged
negligence in disregarding mandatory procedures. "The government can
claim no immunity in these circumstances," he wrote.
Circuit Judge G. Steven Agee partially dissented, saying the
government was not immune from Brady Act claims, but that Gergel
properly dismissed the FTCA case.
Roof, now 25, was sentenced to death in January 2017 after being
convicted on 33 federal counts related to the shooting, including
hate crimes. He pleaded guilty three months later to state murder
charges, and was sentenced to nine consecutive life terms without
parole.
(Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; Editing by Leslie Adler
and Alistair Bell)
[© 2019 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]
Copyright 2019 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content. |