Isla Vista rampage victim files lawsuit

June 27, 2015

Elliot RodgerA victim from last year’s Isla Vista rampage has filed a civil lawsuit against Santa Barbara County, Elliot Rodger’s parents and the University of California Santa Barbara. [KEYT]

In May 2014, Keith Cheung was riding his bicycle home from work when Roger’s BMW struck him. Following the assault, sheriff deputies allegedly handcuffed Cheung and denied him intermediate access to medical attention. Cheung’s suit alleges negligence, false imprisonment and civil rights violations.

According to the lawsuit, UCSB campus police and the Santa Barbara Sheriff’s department failed to properly investigate Rodger after he released multiple videos on YouTube revealing that he could be a threat to those around him.

In addition, the complaint also accuses Rodger’s parents of negligently entrusting their son with a BMW, knowing he was mentally unstable.

Earlier this year, the parents of three murdered college students filed suits against Santa Barbara County and an Isla Vista apartment complex and its parent company, alleging that they hold partial responsibility for the killing spree carried out last year by Rodger.


Loading...

21 Comments

  1. Rich in MB says:

    Lottery ticket

    (0) 12 Total Votes - 6 up - 6 down
  2. CentralcoastRN says:

    The parents called police, told them of their concerns. They tried everything within their power and authority as parents to get him mental health help. Law enforcement were sent to do a welfare check on April 30th; they found him to be a nice kid, even shy according to new reports. Had they searched the home (they would have needed permission), they would have found guns and his 140 page manifesto.

    In the US, people have a right to be “crazy”. You can walk around town, having a full conversation with yourself, not shower, truly believe the government is trying to steal your soul. (I had a patient tell me the government put a listening device in the toilet) If a person is not an IMMEDIATE danger to one’s self or others AT THAT MOMENT, no mental health authority can legally 5150 someone. In my line of work, I can tell you that I have tried calling for patients, only to see that “nothing could be done”.

    The parents, police were limited with that regard if this young man had not made immediate threats. A 5150 strips someone of their civil liberties and must be done only when a true risk for loss to a life of one’s self or others can be predicted. I can only imagine how many times a citizen/resident threatens another person and doesn’t really mean it or doesn’t have the means (in this case, they didn’t think he had any sort of access to guns).

    So the question in mind is this; how far should law enforcement and parents be able to go to see if a person is mentally unstable? Should law enforcement have been able to just barge in to his home without a warrant? Should parents of a 25 year old be able to take a car back from an ADULT? What is neglegence vs overstepping a US citizen’s civil liberties? I am just asking questions that need asking.

    If this Cheung was unlawfully detained, then I emphatically agree with everyone else who posted. Even a suspect can have a medical evaluation while being detained. Me must have APPEARED ok, even though that is NOT an indicator of well being when being struck by a moving vehicle vs bike. Natasha Redgrave (Liam Neeson’s wife) was killed in a skiing accident when she struck a tree or fell and declined medical assistance. She had a head injury that took hours to manifest. By the time anyone realized she was REALLY in trouble, she was hours away from the hospital.

    So long story short (LOL), he does have a case. It doesn’t mean he will win, and it doesn’t mean he will win a lot IF he wins.

    (3) 9 Total Votes - 6 up - 3 down
    • pasoparent5 says:

      Yes, the cops did a welfare check but remember, they did NOT WATCH the disturbing videos that Elliot’s parents told them about. The content of those videos would have been enough to issue a 5150.

      (4) 4 Total Votes - 4 up - 0 down
  3. achillesheal says:

    If parents were accountable for the actions of their offspring for the first 25 years, then maybe they wouldd work to be better parents or not have children if ill equipped to raise them.

    Not going to happen, but interesting to think about.

    (4) 16 Total Votes - 10 up - 6 down
    • pasoparent5 says:

      Elliot the psycho killer’s parents were rich (that’s why they’re being sued) and probably left him as a latchkey kid a lot…BUT when they saw how disturbing his videos were, they did the right thing and contacted the authorities. Some parents would’ve been too embarrassed or ashamed but at least Elliot’s folks turned him in.

      Too bad law enforcement did not watch those videos BEFORE this kid started killing people.

      I don’t place blame on the apartment complex but the campus police and sheriff’s department DID drop the ball, big time.

      (14) 16 Total Votes - 15 up - 1 down
  4. Slowerfaster says:

    To the anti-lawsuit zealots that have posted here: What part of the First Amendments Petition Clause don’t you understand ?

    The right of the people ….” to petition government for a redress of grievances ….shall not be prohibited”.

    What is it ? Do you not like government and laws in general, or just the government and laws of the United States in particular ?
    Are you anarchists ?

    (-11) 29 Total Votes - 9 up - 20 down
    • Slowerfaster says:

      I get it … the ‘;Debbie Downer’ crowd that are too timid to post in response are just upset that the litigant’s name is Keith Cheung, and not Chuck Lidell.

      (-6) 24 Total Votes - 9 up - 15 down
    • BeenThereDoneThat says:

      Ah slow, nice spin as usual. I for one have no problem with them suing HIM or in lieu of that his estate. Fine no big deal. But PLEASE explain how in the HELL is the owners of the apartment building liable??

      (10) 12 Total Votes - 11 up - 1 down
      • zaphod says:

        “When I am at a place I have a reasonable expectation that I will be safe in that place, bar house or apartment complex” .how an attorney may begin explaining this.

        (0) 6 Total Votes - 3 up - 3 down
        • BeenThereDoneThat says:

          So now we (society) are suppose to be clairvoyant? How was the owner of rental to know his intentions? How was he suppose to know he had a gun? How would he know any of this? You throw out your easy platitudes with zero explanation. Your comment has zero merit.

          Also he went out in public shooting also? Are we to make the taxpayers of the streets and sidewalks he was on the day it happened responsible? Yea I know sounds pretty stupid huh??

          (5) 5 Total Votes - 5 up - 0 down
      • Slowerfaster says:

        Not spin. This is why we have courts, and the OPPORTUNITY to introduce facts into evidence. The court will decide if those arguments have merit or not, and not ignorant public opinion that would estop any new, mitigating, or corroborative testimony. A lawsuit is the proper vehicle, and the court is the proper venue.
        Mind you, this is a civil, not a criminal case; so the burden of proof is lower.
        Plaintiff has a right, through his attorneys, to show cause for ancillary indemnification.
        This is the preliminary stage. If, after hearing interrogatories and depositions; the judge will either allow the case to proceed in whole against all parties, to proceed against some of the parties, or to not proceed.

        IDK any more of the facts than you or anyone else not completely familiar with this particular case, but this is the way things are done in a civilized society

        Two uncomfortable words for libertarian weaklings: ‘civilized’ and ‘society’.

        (0) 8 Total Votes - 4 up - 4 down
        • BeenThereDoneThat says:

          I’m trying to keep from laughing at your last comment civilized. To see a lot of your rants I am surprised you know the word.

          Anyway I digress, to the point. AGAIN (as you can’t seem to get an understanding) I don’t have a problem with following a legal course of action. But we have LAWYERS in the country that tie up the system with all kinds of frivolous crap. I use the example of the chicken/rat at KFC two weeks ago as prime example.

          This all cost money. In my industry the locusts, sorry I mean Lawyers, came in with all kinds of frivolous suits about 14 years ago. It almost sent my premiums for work insurance up 2000%!!! I did manage to look around and get it to 300% but still.

          And here is what you don’t seem to realize. YOU seem to think that there is this magic money pot. There isn’t. It will all come from you and me in higher costs. Fine go after the apt. building owner. You will be bitching in months from now when those poor kids are paying more in rent.

          (0) 6 Total Votes - 3 up - 3 down
          • Slowerfaster says:

            You DO realize that the overwhelming majority of civil court litigation are corporations suing each other and big business’s.
            Sure, it’s money. That’s what they do, and that’s what is clogging the court.
            I’ll bet it wasn’t an individual bringing in those armies of corporate hacks to your place years ago !

            Know you’re enemy …but you won’t.
            That’s why I now say, “Keep laughing”, because you’re laughing at yourself and don’t know it.

            (0) 0 Total Votes - 0 up - 0 down
            • BeenThereDoneThat says:

              Really!? I’d sure like to see the source of that information.

              (0) 0 Total Votes - 0 up - 0 down
  5. black sheep says:

    maybe he is jumping on the lawsuit bandwagon. but if I get hit by a car on bike/foot let alone by this maniac, (couldn’t imagine he was traveling very slow) and im handcuffed and denied medical attention, there is definitely something to be said about that. I don’t know the extent of his injuries, but I can guarantee you they didn’t handcuff and deny medical attention to the people he shot or others ran over. why he isn’t just suing the department makes me lean towards bandwagon though. damn near class action lawsuit by now. sad situation all around as are other mass killings/attacks around the globe, but for what its worth, I believe this one could have possibly been prevented.

    (14) 18 Total Votes - 16 up - 2 down
  6. whatdouno says:

    Disgusting opportunist. Hopefully he won’t stand a chance in court.

    (-19) 27 Total Votes - 4 up - 23 down
    • achillesheal says:

      I guess you skipped the part in the article that says the kid was hit by the bmw while on his bike and the cops handcuffed him and denied him medical attention.

      (15) 19 Total Votes - 17 up - 2 down
  7. shelworth says:

    Never let a tragedy go to waste, cha-CHING!

    (-5) 33 Total Votes - 14 up - 19 down
  8. BeenThereDoneThat says:

    Let the lawsuits begin. Let’s blame this person and that person and forget the piece of shit that caused all the harm.

    (14) 42 Total Votes - 28 up - 14 down
    • black sheep says:

      not trying to make you wrong, but the lawsuits began a while ago. I don’t think anyone has forgotten the pos that did this, its just hard to hold a dead man responsible on any level. got what he asked for though.

      (8) 10 Total Votes - 9 up - 1 down
      • BeenThereDoneThat says:

        Thank you for making my point. You can’t hold a dead man responsible so we now scour the landscape for anyone that we can. See my comment to Slowfaster above in response to. Heck did the paper boy deliver a paper to him? Heck maybe we should sue him also?

        (-1) 9 Total Votes - 4 up - 5 down

Comments are closed.