Coming up Wednesday

Wildfires burn through Colorado causing thousands to evacuate, and protests in Turkey are in 13th day. Tune in at 7am ET.
January 2nd, 2013
10:05 AM ET

Lawyer Irving Pinsky explains why he withdrew his Sandy Hook lawsuit petition following Newtown shooting

An attorney in Connecticut has withdrawn a request to sue the state for $100 million in the wake of the Sandy Hook School shooting after facing strong disapproval from people across the country. The New Haven attorney represents the family of a six-year-old girl who witnessed and survived the shooting. The lawyer says the state failed to take steps to protect the children from harm. After this statement Pinsky received a flurry of comments on his Facebook page blasting the lawsuit and accusing him and his client of trying to profit from last month's tragedy. This morning the attorney Irving Pinsky joins “Starting Point” to discuss why he dropped the suit and his plans to file again sometime within the year.

Regarding the outpour of disapproval on filing the lawsuit Pinsky says, “It’s a natural reaction to get that backlash.” He adds that he was doing his job which is to save the evidence and that he “can’t wait for the attorney general to get their evidence or the police to get their evidence. As a lawyer I’m looking for different evidence then they are. So I had to go in early and that was not made clear to the public because there’s so much of the fog of disaster.” On the topic of where the backlash was stemming from Pinsky says, “I didn’t have any problem with the people of Newtown… but out of 340 million people in this country if that you’re going to have all kinds of people including some crazy people who are going to start issuing death threats left and right” and labeling him a “greedy lawyer.”

Legally Pinsky says “this shouldn’t happen. A crazy young gunman shouldn’t be able to walk into a school and start doing this over and over and over.” While it has been reported that the shooter shot through the glass to gain entry to the school, Pinksy argues the glass was supposed to be bulletproof. Pinksy adds, “It had to be assumed that this was going to happen eventually somewhere.” He goes on to say, “I cannot tell you for sure at this point…I cannot tell you beyond a reasonable doubt…that this would have happened or should have happened or they should have known.” He says regardless his job is to follow the evidence, “authenticate it, make sure it credible…and if the evidence shows that there’s no case – I don’t bring a case.”

Pinsky says his mission now is to “stop this from happening again,” although he says it is going to happen again even though he does not want to admit it. He says his lawsuit aids the process to “get higher standards for security in the schools.”


Filed under: Gun control • Gun violence • Guns • Sandy Hook • Sandy Hook Elementary
soundoff (9 Responses)
  1. Lisa in Glastonbury

    Sueing the state for $100 million isn't going to stop a gunman from doing this again. Bullet proof glass in all entryways and windows in all schools isn't either. If a crazy person wants in, he will find a way and once in the building, the first thing he will do is shoot the armed guard and take his weapon so forget that idea. Better mental health care and bans on killing machines would be far more effective and much cheaper. Instead, if you really want to make a difference, start a campaign to collect funds for better Mental Health Care access or an assalt weapon buyback program instead of punishing the ultimate sufferers of a lawsuit, Connecticut taxpayers, which by the way would include the families of the Sandy Hook students.

    January 3, 2013 at 10:24 am | Report abuse | Reply
  2. atheist

    air head lawyer. of course this will happen again. U can put in a bullet proof windows and electrified fence. or even send in the marines! it will happen again.
    the best thing though, is people shoot the lawyers. I remember once on TV some shot his lawyer. that was fun.

    January 3, 2013 at 1:58 am | Report abuse | Reply
  3. Mary G

    Sue, sue, sue. That's the American way. Always have to blame everyone else for money.

    January 3, 2013 at 12:18 am | Report abuse | Reply
  4. Jonny

    It's not about greed? Are you kidding me? What did that school do wrong? Who could have stopped that crazy nut? Your client has a live child. The child has learned a frightening lesson, but unfortunately, it seems to be a part of life as we know it these days. And if you sue the school, and others follow suit, who are they ultimately suing? Themselves, any way you look at it.. This makes no sense, and I find the whole thing extremely distasteful. Shame on those parents, and shame on you. I hope you can all look yourselves in the mirror in the mornings. You all are abominations.

    January 2, 2013 at 7:07 pm | Report abuse | Reply
  5. Greg Faith

    Really? Pathetic!!

    January 2, 2013 at 5:03 pm | Report abuse | Reply
  6. Mike

    As an attorney, your job is to represent your clients to the best of your ability. Public policy, legislation, law enforcement, etc. are all no more your responsibility than mine, or anybody else. If you are really intrested in preventing criminal activity, within the schools, lobby for qualifying those teachers who have a desire to carry concealed weapons, to be able to do so. The current tactic of declaring "weapons free schools" isn't working. Within the ambulance chaser community Isn't that called "maintaining an attractive nusance"? I don't understand why anyone is surprised that weapons free zones are attractive to deranged persons who want to commite suicide in a spectacular way.

    January 2, 2013 at 2:24 pm | Report abuse | Reply
  7. JH

    Going to be hard for the schools to buy bulletproof glass when the government is having to fork over $100 million to private citizens from its reserves. Unless this guy is going to donate it to the schools to pay for the increased security measures?

    January 2, 2013 at 12:38 pm | Report abuse | Reply

Post a comment


 

CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.