Is it true that the airlines pay for security services at the airports? Surely there are several if not many airlines that use each airport and I think it may be possible that the airlines are only acting as collectors of the security costs as part of their ticketing and then pass the money on to the security companies.
There are many questions that need answers in relation to this subject :
1. Is there a government or FAA regulation requiring secuity checks at airports (or was there before Sept. 11?
2. If there is such a regulation who is responsible for inspecting and regulating the work of the security staff?
3.What is the responsibility of the airport authorities?
4.Since the attacks on Sept. 11 have been declared "an act of war", by the President, does this mean that the Government assumes responsibility for reparations and compensation to those affected?
5. Did the claimant in this case initiate the legal action by contacting the law firm or did they contact her with an eye to lucrative fees by suggesting she took action.
Whoever initiated the case, if they did not already have the answers to my first four questions, should, in my opinion, be held liable for all the defendents costs if they lose the case.
I do not know the answers to the above questions but believe they are vital in any attempt to lay blame or justify legal action. While the families of the victims have my deepest and genuine simpathy, no legal action will bring back their loved ones or remove the hurt they feel. I am sure that security messures in the states have been and will continue to be strengthened as a result of the lessons learned. Its time that these get rich quick lawyers were put in their place, and that those who failed in their duty to provide security and/or the government are given the opportunity to provide proper compensation to all those who lost lives or limbs. Starting what, if successful, would be the first of many many destructive compensation awards is not only counter productive it is downright stupid. Where I live, those who start vexatious or agravated claims through the courts can find themselves on the wrong side of a heafty penalty to cover the costs and workloads of the defendents. It seems from earlier posts that this is not the case in the USA. What a pity