BY CAROL A. OVERLAND
It was the Mall’s choice to call in the extra police/security from various sources. They did not do that for an even larger gathering prior to the one last Saturday. It was the Mall’s choice to close parts of the mall.
How do they propose to determine what that cost is and to apportion that cost? Restitution is for damages directly caused by an individual—I’ve gotten restitution on an animal hoarding case, and we had to demonstrate every cent. I’ve also seen restitution for embezzlement, and the judge nitpicked through everything and it had to have very solid documentation. How will they prove up the amount claimed, establish responsibility for that cost, and how would it be apportioned amongst defendants? Jointly and severally, to catch the last defendant standing?
How would any amount be apportioned to anyone other than the Mall, which made the decision to call in the troops?
Also, I’d heard claims that they wanted to charge demonstrators for lost revenue. That’s even more bizarre. What amount might that be? How would any amount be apportioned to anyone other than the Mall, which made the decision to close parts of the stores? What do the stores have to say to this, are they wanting this to be done? What entities are saying they lost revenue and what is it based on? The Mall chose to close some stores, it was not the protesters’ decision. And how would they prove up something so speculative as lost revenue, much less seriously try to hold a protester accountable?
This is a legal absurdity. I have a vision of the judge looking over her glasses and showing Bloomington the door.
And the fact that Bloomington is talking about it, LOUDLY, and not _doing _it, that sounds like a PR push, a threat.
