Sheriff’s Office Claims Infant at Fault for SWAT Team Blowing His Face Apart with Grenade

[dgauss]

22. Right, those are quotes from the blogger not the actual defense.

Here is where he gets them from:

This is the defense presented by Haberham County Sheriff Joey Terrell and his comrades in their reply to a federal lawsuit filed last February on behalf of Bou-Bou Phonesavanh and his family.

It's 36 pages and mostly goes like this:

40.
Responding to the allegations contained in paragraph 40 of plaintiffs'complaint, these defendants admit only that defendant Charles Long deployed adiversionary device into the subject residence pursuant to the pre-operational plan.These defendants deny the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 40 of plaintiffs' complaint.


41.
Responding to the allegations contained in paragraph 41 of plaintiffs'complaint, these defendants admit only that plaintiff Bounkham "Bou Bou"Phonesavanh sustained injuries from the noise flash diversionary device. These defendants deny the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 41 of plaintiffs'complaint

.....

48.
These defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 48 of plaintiffs' complaint.
49.
These defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 49 of plaintiffs' complaint.
50.
These defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 50 of plaintiffs' complaint

But then you get to this in the last few pages:

FIFTHDEFENSE
Plaintiffs' damages, if any, resulted solely from the voluntary and intentional conduct of plaintiffs or others and not from any conduct of these defendants or those over whom these defendants had any control.

SIXTH DEFENSE
Plaintiffs' damages, if any, were caused by the independent acts and decisions of persons and entities other than these defendants or those over whom these defendants had some legal right of control.

SEVENTH DEFENSE
To the extent as may be shown by the evidence through discovery, these defendants show that plaintiffs' damages, if any, were directly and proximately caused by the contributory and comparative negligence of plaintiffs and their failure to exercise ordinary care.