# Target Suing Man Who Saved Teen Girl from Stabbing in Its Store



## Melensdad

Target needs a lot of bad publicity over this 

Inside a Target store a kid got stabbed by some crazed jerk.  A group of customers save the girl, one man in particular is heralded as the hero and chased the criminal out of the store.  Target now says that because the criminal ran out the front door he ran past other customers, potentially endangering those customers too ... and its the fault of the hero that the criminal ran out the door.  So therefore, the hero endangered customers.  But if nobody stood up and stopped the criminal the girl would likely be dead and possibly many other customers would be injured too.  

Story Here => http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...o-saved-teen-girl-from-stabbing-in-its-store/

Another Story Here => http://newschannel9.com/news/local/target-sues-chattanooga-girls-hero-05-18-2016

And another version Here => http://thefederalist.com/2016/05/19...-to-death-and-now-target-is-suing-him-for-it/



> *Target Suing Man Who Saved Teen Girl from Stabbing in Its Store*
> 
> In 2013, everyone agreed that Michael Turner saved the life of a teenaged girl who was attacked in a Pennsylvania Target store. Now, Target is suing him.
> 
> When she was sixteen, Allison Meadows was shopping in an East Liberty, Pennsylvania, Target store when Leon Walls rushed into the outlet and stabbed her.
> 
> With the assistance of surveillance video, Walls was convicted of attempted homicide for his attack on the girl.
> 
> The only reason the girl did not suffer more injuries is because Michael Turner interceded and, along with several other men, confronted Walls. Turner himself chased Walls out the store with a baseball bat.
> 
> Unsurprisingly, Meadows was extremely thankful for Turner’s efforts.
> 
> “I thank him,” Meadows has said. “I thank him every time I see him.”
> 
> But Meadows launched a lawsuit against Target, saying the store’s lack of security put all shoppers, not just her, in danger.
> 
> Target, however, is less grateful for Mr. Turner’s heroics. And now the retailer is suing him for “endangering” the store’s customers.
> 
> According to the company’s filing, Target says Turner and several others chased the suspect toward the store’s entrance after the attack on the girl. The store insists Turner put other shoppers at risk with his actions.
> 
> The victim of the stabbing and her family are furious with the retail chain and say Target is just trying to shift the blame away from its own security failures.
> 
> “Suing Michael Turner is just Target’s way of trying to blame someone else for what happened under their own roof,” the Meadows family attorney said. “The family certainly doesn’t blame Mr. Turner and they are thankful he was there that day.”
> 
> . . .


----------



## road squawker

well, at least he never chased the guy into the women's restroom, Target would never complain about that.

BTW, I refuse to shop @ target


----------



## FrancSevin

road squawker said:


> well, at least he never chased the guy into the women's restroom, Target would never complain about that.
> 
> BTW, I refuse to shop @ target



 Agreed.

 I also refuse to shop there.


----------



## mla2ofus

Never have shopped there and I damn sure won't now on account of this and their bathroom policy!! Aren't they owned by a French company??
                                 Mike


----------



## Jim_S RIP

road squawker said:


> well, at least he never chased the guy into the women's restroom, Target would never complain about that.
> 
> BTW, I refuse to shop @ target





FrancSevin said:


> Agreed.
> 
> I also refuse to shop there.





mla2ofus said:


> Never have shopped there and I damn sure won't now on account of this and their bathroom policy!! Aren't they owned by a French company??
> Mike



Same here. I've made my last trip to Target.

Jim


----------



## Doc

jim slagle said:


> Same here. I've made my last trip to Target.
> 
> Jim


same here.

I read today that they have lost a good bit of business over the their transgender stance.  Now they should lose even more after this stupid move.


----------



## Catavenger

It seems difficult for me to sort out what is true and what isn't. Target claims something like: 
  Michael Turner  and friends had been arguing with a homeless man.  They had a car. With it some of them anyway - not sure if it was all of his friends it's vague (to me) to the Target.  It also seems vague where exactly Turner got the bat that he beat the homeless man with.
 They whole thing seems like a confusing mess so sorry I am not going to refuse to shop at Target because of it.

http://www.snopes.com/target-sues-hero-stabbing/


----------



## leadarrows

I don't shop at Target because their stores suck. This is just another reason.


----------



## jpr62902

Okay, so now there's a version that says this "hero" was part of group of guys who chased the attacker into Target, then cornered him.  Well duh.  Of course you're gonna get sued if you brought your brawl to someone else's place of business.

 I own Target shares (great stock) and I won't stop shopping there.  Who cares what their bathroom policy is?  And yes, I think they're right to sue the dudes who chased a crazy guy _into_ their store and tried to corner him there.


----------



## Catavenger

Target seems to be between a rock & a hard space when it comes to the rest room policy. If they let "transgendered" (guys dressed as gals) etc. use the restrooms people will bitch. If they don't people will bitch. I would imagine that's it's not easy now days to run a business.


----------



## EastTexFrank

I'm a bit confused to so I will refrain from judgement until I know all the facts. 

The only Target I have been in during the last year had three bathrooms, "Men", "Women" and "Unisex".  So, what's the problem????  This whole bathroom thing is a non issue to me.  I have other things to worry about.


----------



## jpr62902

EastTexFrank said:


> I'm a bit confused to so I will refrain from judgement until I know all the facts.
> 
> The only Target I have been in during the last year had three bathrooms, "Men", "Women" and "Unisex". So, what's the problem???? This whole bathroom thing is a non issue to me. I have other things to worry about.



Bingo.


----------



## road squawker

EastTexFrank said:


> ... had three bathrooms, "Men", "Women" and "Unisex".  So, what's the problem???? ....



The PROBLEM is that the *TRANSJENNERS* (pun intended) won't accept that, they DEMAND to be allowed into restrooms that are not for their natural born sex.


----------



## Knocker of rocks

Melensdad said:


> Target needs a lot of bad publicity over this
> 
> Inside a Target store a kid got stabbed by some crazed jerk.  A group of customers save the girl, one man in particular is heralded as the hero and chased the criminal out of the store.  Target now says that because the criminal ran out the front door he ran past other customers, potentially endangering those customers too ... and its the fault of the hero that the criminal ran out the door.  So therefore, the hero endangered customers.



Won't go anywhere.  The girl getting stabbed was a seperate event as far as Tagets claims are concerned.  

Target suffered no damages.


----------



## Melensdad

road squawker said:


> The PROBLEM is that the *TRANSJENNERS* (pun intended) won't accept that, they DEMAND to be allowed into restrooms that are not for their natural born sex.



I disagree.

I think the transgender population _(which is tiny at something like 0.2%)_ are being used by politicians as well as the greater gay rights advocates.  I personally know a transgender and he_ (born she) _would never choose to turn his situation into a political event.  From my understanding he is not unusual in his beliefs that his transition from his birth sex to his chosen sex is a very private struggle.  While obviously shared with family/friends, its not a hill upon which many would choose to fly a flag.

From what I can see, there are many who want to separate themselves from the LGBT community leaving the "T" group as a separate group.


----------



## jpr62902

Knocker of rocks said:


> Won't go anywhere. The girl getting stabbed was a seperate event as far as Tagets claims are concerned.
> 
> Target suffered no damages.



 Actually, Target says the girl wouldn't have been stabbed at all if the "hero" hadn't chased the stabber into a Target store.  Not separate events.


----------



## Melensdad

jpr62902 said:


> Actually, Target says the girl wouldn't have been stabbed at all if the "hero" hadn't chased the stabber into a Target store.  Not separate events.



I wondered about that too.

But then there is the argument over the terms:  

"chased into" the store
-- or --
"chased" into the store
-- or --
"followed" into the store

If the hero "follows" someone that does not mean the person being followed has been corralled or directed into a location.

If a person is "chased" and they go into a store that still doesn't imply they were directed, even if passively, into a specific location.

If a person is "chased into" a store that implies that there was some effort put into getting the bad guy into a specific location.

All that said, if the hero's defense can control the narrative then it should not be a real hard stretch to get any sort of jury to side with the hero.


----------



## jpr62902

Melensdad said:


> I wondered about that too.
> 
> But then there is the argument over the terms:
> 
> "chased into" the store
> -- or --
> "chased" into the store
> -- or --
> "followed" into the store
> 
> If the hero "follows" someone that does not mean the person being followed has been corralled or directed into a location.
> 
> If a person is "chased" and they go into a store that still doesn't imply they were directed, even if passively, into a specific location.
> 
> If a person is "chased into" a store that implies that there was some effort put into getting the bad guy into a specific location.
> 
> All that said, if the hero's defense can control the narrative then it should not be a real hard stretch to get any sort of jury to side with the hero.


 
 All relevant considerations.  But you're leaving out the notion that the "hero" was chasing the crazy dude because the crazy dude stabbed "hero's" friend first and outside the Target store.

 And let's not also forget that all this legal maneuvering started with the stabbee suing Target for not protecting her from the crazy dude with a knife.  Target's response to the lawsuit was to file a third party complaint against the "hero" and his buddies.  If stabbee doesn't sue Target, Target doesn't sue "hero."


----------



## Melensdad

jpr62902 said:


> All relevant considerations.  But you're leaving out the notion that the "hero" was chasing the crazy dude because the crazy dude stabbed "hero's" friend first and outside the Target store.


And the lawyers will define "outside the Target store" too.

Not sure if this is an urban/suburban setting where there are many other stores around, up and down the road and across the road ... or if this is a suburban/rural setting where the store sits alone/nearly alone on a large property with its own parking lot.

If this is an urban type setting its going to be even harder to argue that the guy was chased into the store.






jpr62902 said:


> And let's not also forget that all this legal maneuvering started with the stabbee suing Target for not protecting her from the crazy dude with a knife.  Target's response to the lawsuit was to file a third party complaint against the "hero" and his buddies.  If stabbee doesn't sue Target, Target doesn't sue "hero."


Agreed.  I noted this same point in a conversation locally.  Had the girl's family not sued then this lawsuit would have likely never have occurred.


----------



## road squawker

and how is this any different than the police chasing/following/ect a person, and don't even try to use the "badge of office" smoke screen. 

 as a private citizen, they had not only the right, they also had the law on their side when they followed the person that had just committed attempted murder.


----------



## jpr62902

road squawker said:


> and how is this any different than the police chasing/following/ect a person, and don't even try to use the "badge of office" smoke screen.
> 
> *as a private citizen, they had not only the right, they also had the law on their side when they followed the person that had just committed attempted murder*.



 They might have been _allowed_ to do it, but that doesn't relieve them of responsibility for the consequences of doing it.


----------



## squerly

Tuck Farget


----------



## waybomb

TGT was at about $84 a month ago. Now it's at 67.77.
Might be a buying opportunity, or maybe wait a while.


----------

