Pulse nightclub shooting victims sue gunman's employer, wife

ORANGE COUNTY, Fla. — Victims of the Pulse nightclub terror attack and their families are suing the gunman’s wife and his employer, claiming the security company knew he had violent intentions.

The lawsuit was filed Wednesday in federal court in South Florida on behalf of more than four dozen of the survivors and family members of those killed at Pulse nightclub last June. Forty-nine people were killed during the worst mass shooting in modern U.S. history at the gay nightclub. Dozens more were injured.

The lawsuit claims wrongful death, negligence and other counts.

It says Omar Mateen, who opened fire inside the club killing 49 people and injuring dozens, was aided by security licenses he obtained from G4S Security Solutions, a Britain-based company in which Mateen worked since 2007.

Personal injury attorney Antonio Romanucci said G4S knew Mateen was mentally unstable yet allowed him to carry a gun in his job as a security guard. Mateen had a firearm license through his job.

“These factors made this tragic event predictable and preventable,” said Romanucci.

The complaint said, “The company maintained its stance that Mateen was psychologically sound and fit to carry a firearm on the job as a security agent.”

State records show Mateen held the firearms license since at least 2011. It was set to expire in September 2017.

While working as a security guard at the St. Lucie County Courthouse, Mateen was investigated by the FBI in 2013 after he told co-workers he had connections to terrorists and a mass shooter. He later told his bosses he had made that up to get his co-workers to stop teasing him about being Muslim and the FBI determined he was not a threat.

Some victims spoke at a news conference about the lawsuit Wednesday.

“I had to pretend I was dead when the shooter came into the room. He shot everyone around me,” said Ilka Reyes.

She said she thought staying quiet might stop the rampage.

“There was a shadow around next to me. And I was being shot in the back eight times,” Reyes said.

"I feel angry when I think about the very clear warning signs Omar Mateen gave," said another victim.

The lawsuit also claims Mateen's wife, Noor Salman, had knowledge of the attack and did not report it to authorities.

Romanucci said Mateen's wife, Noor Salman, knew her husband was going to carry out the killings.

Salman currently is in jail awaiting trial. She has pleaded not guilty to federal charges of aiding and abetting, and obstruction of justice. Prosecutors have said Salman accompanied her husband when he cased locations for potential terrorist attacks and knew ahead of time that he was planning the attack.

"Rather than warn authorities, she kept it a secret and acted as his accomplice," Romanucci said.

Salman's defense attorney in her criminal case did not respond to an email seeking comment.

Statement from G4S:

“G4S continues to have the deepest sympathy for the victims, friends and families who were affected by the Pulse nightclub shooting.

G4S Secure Solutions (USA) Inc. (G4S) notes the lawsuit filed today in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. G4S intends to vigorously defend itself against the lawsuit which it considers to be wholly without merit.”

The most recent effort to hold an outside company liable for a mass shooting has failed, at least for the time being. A judge in Connecticut last fall dismissed a lawsuit brought against the manufacturer of the rifle used in the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting massacre, saying a federal law shields gun manufacturers from most lawsuits over criminal use of their products. The Connecticut Supreme Court, though, has agreed to hear an appeal brought by the victims' families.

The advantage of suing Mateen's employer, rather than the firearms manufacturer or seller, is that the victims don't have the obstacle of the federal law, said Sachin Pandya, a law professor at the University of Connecticut.

But even if the plaintiffs can show Mateen's employer should have taken some precautions, "you still have to show that what the employer failed to do caused the mass shooting," Pandya said.

This isn't the first lawsuit to be filed by family members or victims of the Pulse massacre. Families of three patrons killed in the nightclub sued Facebook, Google and Twitter, claiming Mateen was radicalized through propaganda found through social media.

A fund that was formed after the massacre has distributed almost $30 million to the survivors and family members of victims.

UCLA law professor Adam Winkler said the plaintiffs are going to have to show that the security firm had a duty, failed in its duty and is responsible for what happened. With Salman, they are going to have to show that she was a co-conspirator or that her failure to report that her husband was dangerous led to the attack.

"This will be a very challenging lawsuit," Winkler said. "Victims of gun violence are looking for second-best options and that is what this is."

The Associated Press contributed to this report

Cox Media Group