12 thoughts on “The Vegas Shooting: A Survivors Story

  1. I believe I understand this right, but I’m not sure. Here is what I discovered in my research regarding the matter…MGM is not suing the victims for money. They are basically asking for a judgement to be made in regards to liability. They are arguing that they should not have to pay the bills that resulted from this event. I would guess mostly medical, and end of life costs. If they win, they just aren’t liable. I’m not sure if primary insurance would pick up the bills after this or how that works. 

    And they are also doing some legal acrobatics, because they are technically “suing” the victims, the victims must countersue in response. Those that fail to countersue, cannot sue MGM at a later date. They are just trying to eliminate a few future lawsuits. 

    This does not mean that MGM is less of a villain than they sound like when you tell the story. It seems they have so much money they should be able to just eat it and pay the victim’s  medical bills. 

    Not to mention the security guard possibly being in the hallway before the shooting.

    Feel free to correct me if I am wrong on any of this. 

    • @lameegs, thank you for doing your own research on this matter. I agree with you that MGM is “not suing for money”, but it is my position that technically they are suing for money, because if they are not found to hold any liability they will NOT have to pay a $750 million dollar insurance policy that has been dedicated for events of this nature.

      Also, our survivor on the episode told me that her insurance is refusing to pay her multiple medical bills and has even resulted to suing MGM (her insurance company is suing MGM). Legal acrobatics is a FANTASTIC word for what they are doing and I wish I would of used that term in the episode.

      I personally feel that MGM is bullying victims.

      Here is a really powerful statement from one of the victims that makes me tear up when he tells his story – https://youtu.be/jMf_dN0cKD0?t=16

      Thank you Megan!

      • So I definitely don’t know how insurance works in that sense. I mean who is the insurance provider of the 750 million? If they already have that policy..MGM doesn’t pay, the insurance provider does, right?  And because her insurance is suing MGM, if they are found to not be liable, does that insurance then have to pay the claims? 


        I just want everything to be clear. And try to understand exactly what is happening. 

        MGM also stated that they are doing what they are, in order to save victims from long drawn out trials and such. I would like to hear their point of view on that, because it seemed like before victims just wanted to receive care and move on, but all the legal kungfu happening right now is definitely re opening healing wounds. I don’t see how they are making it easier on the victims. I would just like to hear them explain their reasoning on that.

        And I’m definitely NOT taking up for MGM. I just want to make sure I understand everything without a pre-existing bias. Which I’m drawn to have because they look like assholes right now.

        • Okay so the biggest thing to remember besides them serving lawsuits, is MGM liability here. One of the lawyers who is fighting on behalf of the victims sums it up perfectly here – https://www.npr.org/2018/07/18/630246430/mgm-resorts-sues-victims-of-las-vegas-shooting-over-liability-claims

          Because if MGM can prove they are NOT liable then they won’t have to pay, even though they have a 800mil policy – https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2019/05/20/526790.htm

          True MGM is stating that serving lawsuits will “help” the victims in the future, but just think about that a minute and you’ll understand how nonsensical that sounds. Because suing victims, as far as public sentiment is concerned, is not helpful, it’s grotesque.

          There are some activist out there (besides us) that can see that this is just a form of bullying including NY State Senator Shelley Mayer – https://www.nysenate.gov/newsroom/in-the-news/shelley-mayer/senator-mayer-calls-mgm-drop-lawsuit-against-las-vegas-shooting

          IMHO, MGM is absolutely responsible. The fact that they let this man (privileged high-stakes gambler) into their hotel with 21 suitcases, not to mention leaving the empty food cart in front of his suite, would never fly with an ordinary person like you or me. *Which our guest brought up in the interview.

          I know I may sound a little biased here, and I apologize, but I do want to give everyone the facts and let people come to their own conclusions. If you find any articles, or information please be sure to share it in a comment.

          ALSO, I need to say that I am seeking a lawyer right now familiar with this case to come on the show and explain the legalities, because I am definitely NO expert on this matter

          Here is a good video explaining this way better than I am – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MC5fFQnq5ZQ

          • I have been reading reddit as a source as they have a few lawyers on the subs who know how the legal king fu works better than I do. 

            I think my conclusion hinges on multiple questions.

            First of all, before I state the questions, let’s establish a couple facts we can all agree on..it is no question that MGM’s decision to sue the victims is most damaging in 3 senses: emotional and financial distress to begin with..financial in the sense that every defendant must respond to the suit, which means you need a lawyer. And lawyers aren’t free. The 3rd way this suit is damaging to the victims is it prevents a future lawsuit. Once you are sued, you can countersue, but you cannot come back and sue later, it all has to be in the same chain of events. This means that a year from now, if a smoking gun reveals itself showing negligence on behalf of MGM, you cannot choose to sue at this point. This is basically a cya, as they don’t want info to come out and change the minds of those who weren’t planning on suing.

            But I do have questions… was MGM negligent? How are the liable? Did they have a bag limit or a check policy over a certain number of bags? I doubt it, and I am not sure a policy of this sort would be well received. I think if there is negligence, it would be more related to whether or not they were under staffed, and followed security protocol. This includes when the security guard noticed the blocked door and waited 4 minutes to notify anyone. And then they didn’t notify security, they notified maintenance. And the cart in the hallway. This could be negligence in my opinion, but would it stand up in court?

            I have to say I am not sure I blame MGM for trying to shirk responsibility. I don’t see that they should be liable…PROVIDED they followed security protocol. If Paddock had stood on the sidewalk, who would be liable?

            And I don’t think they are trying to bully the victims. They are trying to save their own ass. They don’t want to be liable for something that they didn’t do. They didn’t help him kill all those people..BUT THEY MAY HAVE BEEN NEGLIGENT. 

            I guess it comes down to one thing. Are they aware of negligence on their behalf that could prove they are liable, and they are trying to shirk the liability? 

            I hate that they are suing the victims, and they are having to relive this, and now they have to pay for lawyers in response to the suit, but I am not sure I blame MGM for wanting to shirk the liability on all those insurance claims when they weren’t responsible for the safety of people not staying at their hotel. However, all of this hinges on whether or not they were negligent. If they handed paddock a schedule and a map and helped him commit the crime, that would be a lot different. And not following security protocol could have been like leaving the front door unlocked to let the killer in.

            I am also curious if any other entities were sued alongside MGM by the victims? Like the venue or organization that housed the actual event, and all the attendees? Were there multiple entities being sued, and we are only hearing about MGM because of their response?

    • Awesome job digesting all of that additional research- it’s a lot to sift through and hard to understand exactly how MGM is using the lawsuit to do a few things: consolidate lawsuits which makes total sense, and to try to get the whole liability and future liability settled. So I totally get the standpoint of trying to get everything settled and done. However, from my research, MGM did not have to take this approach to get to the same desired outcome. One article I found where NY Senator encourages MGM to drop the suit, who is also a lawyer herself, talked about how they could have simply taken that in defense of the active lawsuits and that decision would impact future suits/liability claims. Instead, they are actively suing – which may get to the same result in the end, and to those still grieving that’s a huge amount of stress to put on someone who has PTSD or is suffering from the loss of a loved one. If one of those victims/survivors was suing MGM, they could simply consolidate the suits and act in defense, and it would also drop future liabilities from others who attempted to sue later. But I just can’t wrap my brain around the active suits they decided to pursue instead. And that’s just not even taking into account that in my opinion they do have liability in this case. They weren’t the shooters, but they sure as hell allowed 21 suitcases uninspected because the guy was a high roller into the hotel. If I think about what other institutions where mass shootings take place- they may not be getting sued for liabilities- but they might be setting up a fund or memorial for victims because like it or not they are connected to this horrific event. MGM has every right to defend themselves from the liabilities of the expenses…. but do something good for the victims rather than sue them, you know?

  2. I just realized you said that normal citizens wouldn’t get away with the food cart and all the bags. I think we have to admit that it would be a lot more sketchy for me to take 30 bags in a tiny 1 bed hotel room vs a millionaire taking them into a suite. And I’m not sure I would outwardly question it if I saw a millionaire doing that. I would definitely wonder in my head.

    And I guess if the suit was just to declare whether or not they are liable for medical bills, that would be pretty different. Now they are avoiding future suits if people discover negligence in the future and decide to sue at that point. I wish they could just have a judge decide on who carries liability for medical bills. It seems it will either be MGM or your primary insurance. I would think your primary has to pay, as it sounds like they are currently stating they are secondary to MGM. And then the victims who choose to sue can do so on their own accord and have their day in court. 

    • Megan, great points there.

      It will be interesting to see how this all plays out in the long run. I agree with you that this all hinges on is MGM liable or not, and also I believe that is a good point about having a judge decide who should pay the insurances.

      I think you asked the right questions here, and we’re pretty much on the same page. I think your research so far has been phenomenal and extremely helpful to me, especially. If you continue down this road, I would LOVE to hear what else you can find. For instance, as you said, are there multiple parties being sued (the venue perhaps?), how much does negligence weigh on liability? Etc.

      I know I’m super biased, but then again, I have my guest to consider. I can tell she was struggling and although I don’t understand exactly what she’s going through, I can still emphasize with her situation. I guess I’m sort of the cheerleader in a sense.

      It seems like you’re interested in this and I would like to see what you more you can uncover so we can tell it on the show. Good or bad, we want the truth. 🙂

      • I completely understand you supporting your guest. And I want to be supportive as well. I have not experienced anything like this, but my husband had a traumatic accident and people asked if we would sue. I just wanted to move on and forget it. It’s still hard to remember the details. I can imagine a lot of the victims don’t wish to be going through any of this that rehashes that day for them. I just hate the nature of society that this even has to be what it is. Why can’t primary just pay, and victims can sue for negligence, to recover copays, other expenses, and emotional damages? But no, it’s got to be a war, a war that’s really only about who has a better-probably more expensive-lawyer.

        I also read somewhere that the way this is coming into the court may play a role in MGM having a say in where the case is heard. If they get to pick a place, they could choose based on a judge that leans pro-business, which would obviously weigh in big time favor of MGM. But I don’t know how that works, and if they really will have a say.

        • I totally agree with you Megan- the fact that insurance companies of the victims are not covering the costs has thrown a huge wrench and complications into it- because that’s forcing an issue that didn’t need to be there    Medical expenses are medical expenses- you know? But clearly those companies feel MGM holds the liability and it’s a complicated mess. I think I would do the same and just want to move on- pay my medical expenses according to my medical plan and depending on the situation sue for negligence or whatever. If I wasn’t in that mindset of suing and all that, I would be so pissed to be forced there. 

  3. I wish I had access to someone fluent in Nevada law, but I think my conclusion is..in theory nobody is liable except Stephen Paddock. The hotel bell boys did their job by courting luggage for guests. If this weird rich guy has 30 bags, you move 30 bags. Note that I did say in theory though. The hotel used a Homeland Security approved security team. They did what they were supposed to on that end. Now, were they under staffed? Did they follow protocol? Did the security team follow protocol, the event organizers? I’m not sure if all these other entities will be investigated, but it is all up to the courts to decide.

    From what I understand, if the insurance companies are trying to sue MGM and say they are liable, MGM must respond. They could go to court on every case. But its wasting everyone’s time and money if a judge can just make a declaratory judgement on whether or not MGM is liable. If MGM is found liable by this judgement, they will lose big money. They have made an estimate on the settlement, but it sounds like it’s too early to make any kind of educated guess on that end. On top of that, if they are found liable, it may prevent MGM from being able to find coverage after such a heavy insurance hit. No insurance, no business. 

    I think at the end of the day, MGM is worried, and trying to stay afloat. And unless the court finds they were negligent, they are doing what they have to. 

    I do not understand why those who have chose not to sue (and their insurance providers) must be listed, but it sounds like it’s kind of a technicality to have the victims names as defendants on the suit. The crappy part is it sounds like Nevada law may require defendants to respond which means lawyers fees. But they don’t go after schools in school shootings. Primary insurance went after MGM, and they have to do something. They just want a judge to decide whether or not they are liable. And it sounds like a beneficial side effect for MGM is that this route forces victims to countersue or not sue at all. 

    I think victims want healthcare and to be left to heal. I think primary insurance companies always try to find a liable party. They are forcing MGM to do something. And MGM’s response, and Nevada law mix together to make a mess of crap for the victims to deal with. I don’t think this is a storm targeted at anyone. I feel like a bunch of storms collided and it’s kind of raining on everyone and the victims feel it the most, because they are the little people in the story. They can’t afford the kind of lawyers MGM has. And they are already traumatized.  

    We need a lawyer to clean all this up for us and tell us what this means for the victims in real terms and what other options did MGM have, because we really don’t know.

    And I’m sorry if I seem insensitive to the victims. I am sorry that they experienced this traumatic event. I am sorry that they relive it over and over. And I am sorry that they are facing this legal mess. 

    I am mostly sick of the media. They take every story they can and twist it any way they want, and they are making MGM look so evil, when in reality, I don’t think they have a choice. And I don’t think they see the repurcussions of their actions on the little guys. Their field of vision is focused on their own issues. 

    I would also like to add that I am getting my info from the internet. But like I have said, the main suit is MGM basically reacting to being sued by primary insurance for liability. They are requesting a declaratory judgement to encompass all cases. Condensing them makes sense. This is not a suit against the victims, it is a request for a judge’s decision. Unfortunately I think Nevada law requires each listed defendant to respond. I am reiterating all this to say that I realize you personally spoke with a victim who stated she is named in 2 law suits. I would like to know more info on the second one. Is it another declaratory judgement suit, or an actual lawsuit?

    • Megan, you’re not “insensitive to the victims,” you are finding the truth and your doing a fantastic job. I can tell this case bothers you, and I hope it’s not pulling too hard at your heartstrings, but its people like you who can sort through thousands of biased news articles to discover what lies in the center.

      It also seems to me like you’re a bit conflicted on matters such as liability, legalities of MGM’s lawsuits, healthcare, and insurance rights, etc. and that’s not a bad thing. You have thought hard about this case and how it’s been playing out for the victims and casino, and it shows. At this point, it’s clear you know more about the legalities of this case than most people ever would.

      On our next episode I will direct people to read your comments because although some won’t agree with you on some of your positions, no one can say that you haven’t put in the due diligence in this case.

      Next stop, a law degree because I think you would make a fantastic attorney by the way.

Leave me a comment (Email, Facebook, Twitter, Wordpress, or Google +)