Is Legal Action An Option For Sandy Hook?

The course of action Wolfgang W. Halbig proposes to address unanswered questions concerning the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre, and a foremost reason for the funding drive he is spearheading, involves civil litigation to compel testimony from pertinent officials and parties.

Parties close to memoryholeblog.com have recently consulted a proficient attorney to discuss the effectiveness of filing suit in situations involving potential state crime, such as Sandy Hook.

An operative term the plaintiff must concern him/herself with is LEGAL STANDING – whether one is a proper plaintiff.  In other words, are you the real party in interest? What are your damages?

Many lawsuits are thrown out of court simply because the plaintiff has no such standing. In other words, if the plaintiff cannot prove s/he has been harmed and cannot assert what damages they have sustained, s/he is not a plaintiff in good standing. The courts do not render collective relief – they render relief based on how one is found to have been harmed. Mr. Halbig and/or other out-of-state parties will not be able to prove how they have personally been harmed by the Sandy Hook event. Such individuals are considered “outsiders.” Mr. Halbig cannot bring a claim for something that has not harmed him personally and directly.

Wolfgang Halbig’s grounds for a lawsuit might well be good, however. GROUNDS have to do with the nature of your claim. Even if Mr. Halbig can prove every single thing in his Complaint (the initial legal filing), Wolfgang Halbig himself has not been harmed. In short, Wolfgang Halbig cannot bring the claim for damages or harm caused by the Sandy Hook event. Only someone “closer” could do that – e.g., the parents or relatives of the alleged victims. When Wolfgang Halbig or other parties file a lawsuit, the court will ask the question: Does he have any standing to assert those grounds?

The most likely result of such a lawsuit would be a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Standing. This is quick and easy, and will eliminate the need for any discovery and depositions. The idea that Wolfgang posed in one of his early interviews – to “get some of these people and depose them” – is not even possible given his compromised position.

On the other hand, a class action lawsuit is even a more complex and large-scale project. Even $100,000 (Wolfgang Halbig’s present donation goal) would not come close to paying for a class action suit (if he were to allege harm in the way of terror/fear/anxiety caused to the American people from a fictitious event that never took place, for instance). Class action lawsuits are extremely expensive.

Wolfgang Halbig’s desire to get to the bottom of the event transpiring in Newtown on December 14, 2012 are shared by many throughout the US and world. At the same time, however, parties interested in donating to Sandy Hook Justice should be aware of the very real circumstances that prohibit straightforwardly resolving this important matter in a court of law.

——————–

Professor James F. Tracy is an Associate Professor of Media Studies at Florida Atlantic University. James Tracy’s work on media history, politics and culture has appeared in a wide variety of academic journals, edited volumes, and alternative news and opinion outlets. James is editor of Union for Democratic Communication’s Journal Democratic Communiqué and a contributor to Project Censored’s forthcoming publication Censored 2013: The Top Censored Stories and Media Analysis of 2011-2012. Additional writings and information are accessible at memoryholeblog.com.

The article Is Legal Action An Option For Sandy Hook? published by TheSleuthJournal – Real News Without Synthetics