Deseret News | Judge will not dismiss lawsuit in shooting at Trolley Square mall

Reader comments
Judge will not dismiss lawsuit in shooting at Trolley Square mall

Craig | 10:06 a.m. Feb. 23, 2009

As has become customary in this country, another case where, for the continued support of attorneys, responsiblity is misplaced in the search for massive reparations. Sue a car manufacturer/dealer if you are hit by a car regardless of the operator's mental state. Firearms are the fashionable scapegoat, blamed instead of the corrupt culture and the lack of general morality that fosters unreasonably violent behavior. Concealed carry weapons permit holders might have stopped this before it began.

I think | 12:27 p.m. Feb. 23, 2009

Daniel Vice should go after car manufacturers, they fit his discription of this pawn shop also.

John | 2:12 p.m. Feb. 23, 2009

What a ridiculous lawsuit. Who is the mother trying to punish? The gun store did nothing to contribute to her daughter's death. She is just after the money. It's sad how grief has turned to greed.

Comments continue below

Anonymous | 2:27 p.m. Feb. 23, 2009

As much as I feel for these families and their losses, realistically, going after the gun shop to get some money is going to do what for them? Bring their loved one back? Not even.

So what we are saying as we continue to let these frivolous law suits happen is "I'm so sorry I lost you, but do you mind if I try and make a get rich quick scheme out of the whole ordeal?"

Wake up people! Money is not going to help you get happy! When my mom died, my dad had 3 different lawyers contact him about suing the hospital. His answer - "Is it going to bring her back? No? - Well then what good will it do me?"

Some lawyers (and not all - because there are good, honest ones out there) try anything they can to get money. In the end, it's only another person hurt, another company filing bankruptcy, another family struggling because of the selfishness of a fellow human being.

In this case the person selling the gun received his punsihment. Let it rest at that.

Frustrated | 5:47 a.m. Feb. 24, 2009

I feel really bad for the family, I really do but these ambulance chasing lawyers are getting out of control. If I were a car salesman I'd be worried because they're next. In the event of a drunk driver eventually these worthless lawyers will be going after the dealership and the company that made the car.

Those Brady Campaign people seem to think that firearms have some sort of power to make people do things they normally wouldn't have. The guns don't do anything, its the criminals that use them in an illegal fashion. Guns are not to blame for crimes, the criminals are responsible.

This article poorly written | 6:55 a.m. Feb. 24, 2009

This article is poorly written. The pawn shop claims the sale was legal, if so, that brings up the question why the suit and the article doesn't explain.

Is the suit just because? the plaintiffs rolling the dice and hoping for a win? Or even though legal, did the shooter give some indication that he was going to use the gun for an unlawful purpose?

I'm curious. If the pawn shop did have good reason to believe gun would be used for wrong purposes, I'd like to know that, if not likewise.

If the plaintiffs are just rolling the dice and this was a perfectly legal and innocent sale, then they deserve to lose and they deserve to be sued themselves.

Anonymous | 7:10 a.m. Feb. 24, 2009

Idiots!! Would you ell a car to an unliscensed driver? There are more procudures involved in buying a gun than handing over the cash and walking out the door. Is these steps were disregarded someone should be eld accountable.

Adam | 7:35 a.m. Feb. 24, 2009

If the gun store was negligent, or had bad policies on their books, then of course they should be held accountable. They're partly responsible. Why don't any of you see that? It's easy to pass judgment when you haven't been injured like this woman.

Mink | 7:54 a.m. Feb. 24, 2009

Just another example of worthless lawyers trying to capitolize on grieving families! I guess we should hold all alcohol comapnies responsible for alcoholics killing people. Is their a lawyer out there who would take this case? This was a tragedy, but the person who holds ultimate reponsiblity for the act is the one who pulled the trigger. Get that judge off the bench!!!!

Gun worshiper | 8:24 a.m. Feb. 24, 2009

Oh, we Utahans love our guns, don't we. So what if a few people get killed because of gun shop greed. Guns are a gift from God. Doesn't it say that somewhere in the bible?

New Yorker | 8:29 a.m. Feb. 24, 2009

Idiots?
Check your spelling and grammar. I think some that posters on DN's site need licensing also. I'm a victim of reading through some of these postings. Let's go after the auto industry, the tobacco industry, the alcohol industry and any other entity that sells something that can be harmful.

Re: Anonymous & Adam | 8:47 a.m. Feb. 24, 2009

There is no correlcation in the story to show that the gun was sold illegally. We don't know what procedures were followed and we don't know if the gun store was nigligent or had bad policies on their books. I'm wondering if you two are attorneys, work for these attorneys, or are part of the Brady Campaign. It does sound like the attorneys have taken advantage of this woman's grief to channel her anger at the gun store. If there was a person who acted on their own to sell a gun illgeally; then that person should be the one held accountable even if they don't have deep pockets.
I agree with the person who said the judge should be removed from the bench. Let's remember Judge Glenn Iwasaki the next time it comes time to vote for him. Do not vote in his favor. We need to keep our freedoms by voting intelligently. These judges act with impunity because they do not have others running against them and we only vote in favor to have them remain on the bench. Vote no on Judge Glenn Iwasaki!

Legitimate lawsuit | 9:03 a.m. Feb. 24, 2009

I'm shocked that people see no problem with a gun shop negligently and in violation of the law selling a gun to someone who is a threat to society. Talovic could not have committed this crime without a firearm; Kirsten Hinckley could still be alive today if those who worked in the pawn shop had acted differently. This is not simply a case of a lawyer trying to make a buck off some innocent party. People who sell deadly weapons need to exercise the utmost care and respect for laws governing their trade; otherwise they are recklessly endangering society. If this lawsuit wakes gun dealers up to the need to be more responsible, future tragedies may be averted.

When all fails, blame someone | 9:23 a.m. Feb. 24, 2009

The shooter is dead, his family has no money, so who is left? The store that sold the gun. The next tragedy will be the Pawn Shop settling out of court for some rediculous amount of money - which is what the ambulance chasers expect to happen. They sue for millions, knowing if they get 10%, it is still hundreds of thousands of dollars for them. They don't need to work for the rest of the year with just one "victory." I hope the Pawn Shop fights this to the end, if there is no illegal sale, and we place the blame on the shooter himself.

Fine Line | 9:31 a.m. Feb. 24, 2009

Selling illegal guns is wrong. However, no one could predict what this guy was going to do with the purchase. I'm not trying to lay blame, but simply trying to expand the conversation.

Isn't it interesting that guns get slammed, but infections from hospital stays kill more than AIDS, Breast Cancer, and vehicle accidents combined?

In this very senseless act, a lone gunman killed innocent people. No one could have predicted his behavior. Otherwise, why not sue his parents? Sue the mall owner? Sue the city for not predicting his behavior? Sue his former teachers? Sue any doctors he has ever met for not seeing this?

I hate illegal gun sales. However, we're not sure that this case was an illegal sale. How would every gun salesman guarantee that the buyer would have best behavior? How does a doctor guarantee behavior of a patient? How does the dealer guarantee the buyer will never drink and drive?

BH | 9:49 a.m. Feb. 24, 2009

It is shocking how many Utahn's will turn a deaf ear to any suggestion that gun dealers should be held accountable when they fail to follow well established regulations, that are in place to assure that things exactly like the Trolley Square tragedy do not happen.

As pointed out by Legitimate @ 9:03, Talovic was could not legally purchase a firearm. We know that the guns were not stolen, so someone broke the law when they sold guns to Talovic.

As with any right, the right to bear arms cannot be free of responsibility of those who enjoy the privelige.

These families deserve the right to have a court decide if laws were broken. If no laws were broken, then the gun dealer should prevail. If laws were broken, there should be serious consequences.

Illegal Sale | 9:55 a.m. Feb. 24, 2009

The following was taken right from the Brady Bill website on the reason they are backing the lawsuit:

The lawsuit brought by Tuft contends that the dealer is liable for the shooting of herself and her
daughter because the shotgun should never have been sold to Talovic. Federal law prohibits the
sale of pistol-grip shotguns to persons under 21, yet a licensed federal firearms dealer,
Sportsmans Fast Cash Pawn in West Valley City, Utah, sold the gun to Talovic when he was 18.
There is good reason for the law. Pistol grip shotguns have an egregious reputation among law
enforcement. As Seattle Police Chief Gil Kerlikowske has said, it is a weapon not designed for
hunting purposes but for hunting people.

The gun was sold illegally to a person under 21. That is the reason for the lawsuit. Would it have stopped to shooting...maybe not, but it may have. No one will know, but what is known is the gun shop sold a gun illegally to a person under the federal age limit and for this they should be held accountable.

RE: Legitimate lawsuit | 10:08 a.m. Feb. 24, 2009

"What ifs" and armchair hindsight are the easiest way to elevate yourself to righteous indignation. How about the firearm he bought from a private party? Humans are clever and resourceful creatures and can find a way to do others harm in any situation, if they wish. Prisons are a very controlled environment where our warehoused talking monkeys fashion toothbrushes, bits of wire and even paper goods into deadly weapons. Many in law enforcement fear knife attacks more than firearms. The violence is a human symptom, punishing a business for selling a tool is assinine. "It is a poor workman who blames the tool." It is a poor society that blames the toolmaker.

Beaner | 10:17 a.m. Feb. 24, 2009

Certainly, accountability for breaking the law in selling to a person under 21, but extending that responsibility to acts committed with it is blaming the first domino for the last domino's fall. His mother should have terminated the pregnancy, take the blame to the womb.

boxtop | 10:29 a.m. Feb. 24, 2009

In my view the key is, did the retailer sell the firearm legally? Had all steps taken as prescribed by law. If not, they certainly share responsibility.

If they sold the firearm legally, I can not see how theyd be culpable.

Next, how can a retailer determine if the purchaser is competent? I suppose if the buyer remarks, is this gun a preferred method for killing unarmed people, the retailer has the option not to sell, or do they?

Im of the belief the judge has been presented evidence creating a reasonable doubt the retailer didnt abide, therefore his willingness to proceed.

Judges are on a tight leash. Theres not huge room for maybe yes, maybe no discretion. Plus, if it goes to trial, theres likely a jury to contend with and thats a scrambled egg.

hold on... | 10:47 a.m. Feb. 24, 2009

The people posting above that think this is all about the money need to get their collective heads out of the...sand. The question is not whether or not a crime took place. This is not a criminal trial. THE CRIME TOOK PLACE, PEOPLE! The dealer, or seller, was found guilty. GUILTY! Does that mean anything to anyone? A crime was committed, and people paid with their lives.

I guess that doesn't really matter to people.

And then there are the ridiculous analogies, like the car dealers are responsible for vehicular deaths. Uhh...are cars specifically designed to kill people? How is a car anything like a firearm?

It is people that make these kinds of arguments (e.g. innumerable residents of Utah) that should never be allowed near a gun. If an individual cannot understand and see the difference between a firearm and a vehicle, I fear the day they ever get their hands on either...

My thoughts | 11:56 a.m. Feb. 24, 2009

Was it the Pawn shop that was the problem or the employee of the pawn shop. I do not ever feel that any company anywhere should be held 100% accountable for their employees actions.

I'd like anybody to tell me of a company (outside of someone with their own business that has no employees but themselves) that has every employee follow every procedure every time they do something without ever making a mistake, purposfully not following company policy, or just plain forgetting to do something.

The pawn shop hired a person in good faith believing he would follow their policies. If he chooses not too, I don't feel they should be held accountable, unless they didn't ever tell him "Here are the rules". The employee should be the one responsible. And according to the article, he pled guilty. His mistake - not the shop owner.

You can only control your actions. If every employer decided not to hire someone because they may at some time violate a policy that could cause us to be in a lawsuit - the majority of us would never have a job.

Comparison | 12:38 p.m. Feb. 24, 2009

To me this lawsuit is no different than someone providing alcohol to a minor (or anyone else) and then allowing them to leave. No one knows if they are going to drive, walk, jump, etc. However, if that person gets into a car and drives and hurts/kills someone the person that provided the alcohol would be held accountable. The intention of the person providing the alcohol did not set out to provide the "weapon" that killed someone, but it happened. It is difficult to control the actions of someone, but common sense behind your own involvement needs to be weighed. I guess none of us really know what we would do until we go through something like this. Is it about money? Possibly. Tuft and her daughter did not go to Trolley Square that day to acquire millions of dollars of medical debt, but just to buy a Valentines Day card. Someone made the choice to sell a gun illegally and someone else chose to use it. Where was their choice? Give both sides a day in court with a jury of their peers. Luckily we are not the ones trying to live each day through this.

HJS | 2:29 p.m. Feb. 24, 2009

It is interesting that most of you in these comments know Mr. Hill and the pawn shops side. I hate to tell you, but maybe what you hear in the newspaper and media isn't the truth of a story. The ATF doesn't train firearm dealers to sell a pitsol grip shotgun to 21 and older...I will pay a million bucks to the person who can find the law in the ATF Rules & Regs. that states that you have to be 21 or older! And I don't want the ATF letter from 1998 to be said...a letter isn't law! Also, he wasn't found guilty! He took a plea deal after the prosecutor found out that they didn't have a case, the paper work was approved by BCI and Immigration, he forgot to write down what was shown to him for a 2nd form a address not ID! Didn't change the transaction. It is very sad that lives were lost, but Hill didn't pull the trigger and he couldn't have known what the idiot was going to do! It will all come out and Hill/Sportsmans will win!

BH | 2:51 p.m. Feb. 24, 2009

My Thoughts @ 11:56 provides valid points.

If the gun shop has a solid reputation for expecting it's employees to follow the federal regulations, has records to show thorough employee training, and showed a strict corrective action for any deviation from these practices, then the gun shop should be found non-liable.

But if records show that the gun shop demonstrated a casual attitude towards the regulations, and practices and training were sloppily administered, then it would be easy to prove that the man that sold the gun was acting according to company practices. And the gun shop should be found liable.

upset outsider | 3:16 p.m. Feb. 24, 2009

I'd like to start by saying the family and layers are just after money. this case is like the case where a robber breaks into your house and hurts themselves, then sues you because they got hurt in your house!

Not an illegal sale | 3:42 p.m. Feb. 24, 2009

You all are wrong. The shot gun was not sold illegally. The Brady Bill web site is wrong. It is NOT illegal in Utah to sell a shot gun (long gun) with a pistol grip stock to an 18 year old.

Read the article, the pawn shops error was in the paper work that recorded the transaction, which is a misdemeanor and they have already plead guilty and server a year probation. The sale was legal. The criminal case is closed. If the sale was illegal, then his punishment would have been worse than a year probation.

So the Gold Digger of a hag is trying to cash in on a clerical error in a civil suit. I hope she doesn't get a dime! I am not a patron of pawn shops but given her money will set a bad precedence for all small business owners.

Dave | 3:51 p.m. Feb. 24, 2009

I would say that we now have to look at shovels, hoses, nail guns, water, air, and probably gold fish. They can all kill (goldfish might choke you!). We should have lie detector tests, 95 day waiting periods, and should issue mental health evaluations for anyone that is thinking of buying anything. I mean come on - if we don't monitor what people are buying then need to get someone on it. I should be able to sue Home Depot for selling a shovel that might be used violently. Car dealers should not be allowed to sell these monstrosity cars that might do harm. Did I mention icicles? We need to sue God because He made sharp objects that might kill me. Oh no the air I breath might kill me - I wonder if there would be a lawyer to sue God for me there too. There has got to be some blood sucking scum ball of a lawyer who will take my case of possible death by several different thus unheard of ways.

HJS | 4:18 p.m. Feb. 24, 2009

The records will show that Mr. Hill did follow the training from the ATF and his employer. Maybe Mr. Hill should file suit against the ATF, but in reality they won't take the blame...that is the Government and they pass the buck ALWAYS! It is very sad that this has affected so many lives...even Mr. Hill, but nobody stops to think about how his life has been...he is just labeled the horrible clerk that sold the gun! The public knows nothing about him only what they hear from the TV and newspapers....SAD!

BigPoet | 4:44 p.m. Feb. 24, 2009

How about Tavolic's friend who sold him the pistol... how about whomever sold him the car he used to drive to Trolley Square, how about whomever sold him his underwear and the Fruit of the Loom company for supporting him in his wicked endeavour??? All these should pay!!!!

killemall | 5:33 p.m. Feb. 24, 2009

HJS:

Wow. You've got a million bucks? In this economy? Good for you. Oh and yeah...nobody thinks about how this has affected poor Westley Hill. With all those lives lost, dreams gone, survivors in permanent pain, it seems the plight of "Mr. Hill" just slipped people's minds. Wes, speaking for the compassionate citizenry of Utah, we apologize. Are you doin' OK?

HJS | 5:56 p.m. Feb. 24, 2009

Killemall:
Yup! I have a million bucks! Oh and yeah...you have no idea who Westley Hill is.....he sold a legal shotgun to an idiot and he is taking the blame for what this person did. That is about how society is now days. No he isn't okay and either are all of the victims of this crime that TALOVIC committed....your and idiot! TALOVIC as affected not only the injured victims, but a lot more than what you think....if you find the law(ATF) I will give you my million bucks!

Anonymous | 7:15 p.m. Feb. 24, 2009

I didn't understand the article at one point it said Talovic bought the gun at the pawn shop and it also said he had bought the gun from a different person?

killemall | 1:22 p.m. Feb. 25, 2009

HJS:

You'd be surprised what I think...and what I know. Oh yeah. And thanks for the personal insult--very effective. Next time though, hit spell-check. You'd stand at least some sort of chance of being taken seriously without all the typos. Finally, about the million bucks: Monopoly money is not recognized as real U.S. currency & you're not a millionaire tycoon--even if you did say so on that singles Web site profile. But here's a tip...for girls? They like it when you don't live in your parents basement. And Monopoly? Always buy Park Place and Boardwalk. Have a nice day.

Anonymous | 4:42 p.m. Nov. 9, 2009

killemall, You are one sick pup! Karma is a mother that is all I can say and I hope it gets to you soon!

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.

2 photos

Tom Smart, Deseret News

Carolyn Tuft blows a kiss to the casket of her daughter, Kirsten Hinckley, in Salt Lake City on March 7, 2007. Both mother and daughter were shot in the Trolley Square shootings.

Gallery (2 photos)