Families of Colo. theater shooting victims call movie invitation 'disgusting'
DENVER (AP) - Relatives of the majority of people killed in a Colorado movie theater rejected an invitation on Wednesday to attend its reopening this month, calling it a "disgusting offer" that came at a terrible time - right after the first Christmas without their loved ones.
The parents, grandparents, cousins and widow of nine of the 12 people killed said they were asked to attend an "evening of remembrance" followed by a movie when the Aurora theater reopens on Jan. 17. They released a letter sent to the theater's owner, Cinemark, in which they criticized the Plano, Texas-based company for not previously reaching out to them to offer condolences and refusing to meet with them without lawyers.
"Our family members will never be on this earth with us again and a movie ticket and some token words from people who didn't care enough to reach out to us, nor respond when we reached out to them to talk, is appalling," the letter said.
Cinemark had no immediate comment.
The company announced last month that it would reopen the theater on Jan. 17 and invite people affected by the attack and other guests, a move that Aurora officials said has strong support in the community. Gov. John Hickenlooper plans to attend.
The Aurora Sentinel reported that plans filed with the city call for turning the theater into one of the company's "extreme digital cinema" sites that feature massive screens. It's not clear from the plans whether there will be a memorial to the victims.
The invitation was emailed to families by the Colorado Organization for Victim Assistance, which said the offer was being sent on behalf of Cinemark.
It arrived two days after Christmas as Sandy and Lonnie Phillips, the mother and stepfather of Jessica Ghawi, one of the 12 people killed, were housesitting in Denver.
They had left their home in San Antonio, Texas, on the advice of their grief counselor to avoid being where they typically would have celebrated Christmas with Jessica. Sandy Phillips said they picked Denver on purpose because her daughter, a 24-year-old aspiring sportscaster, had been happy there.
The Phillipses said the invitation could be a public relations ploy to help show the public that some victims or their families are willing to attend the theater reopening.
"It was a killing field. It was a place of carnage and they've not once told us what their plans are for the theater other than that they're reopening it," said Sandy Phillips. She would like the theater where her daughter was killed to be demolished, though she acknowledged that it was unrealistic to expect Cinemark to give up the rest of the building.
The families of some victims have sued Cinemark. The father of the youngest person killed in the shooting, 6-year-old Veronica Moser-Sullivan, is among them. He didn't sign the letter but the girl's grandparents did. The Phillipses have not decided whether they will sue.
Also Wednesday, prosecutors and defense lawyers said they are ready for a crucial hearing next week in which prosecutors will outline their case against James Holmes, who is charged with killing 12 people and wounding 70 during the midnight showing of the Batman movie "The Dark Night Rises" on July 20.
It starts Monday and is scheduled to run all week. At its conclusion, state District Judge William B. Sylvester will decide if the evidence is sufficient to put Holmes on trial.
The defense could waive the hearing but legal analysts said defense lawyers sometimes go ahead with the hearing to get an idea of how strong the prosecution's case is.
Laurie Levenson, a professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles and a former federal prosecutor, said preliminary hearings sometimes set the stage for a plea agreement as each side gets to assess the strength of the other.
Holmes is charged with multiple counts of first-degree murder and attempted murder and hasn't been asked to enter a plea yet. His lawyers have said he suffers from mental illness.
Next week's hearing will give the public its first officially sanctioned look at much of the evidence against Holmes.
A judge imposed a gag order shortly after Holmes' arrest barring attorneys and investigators from speaking publicly about the case, and many documents have been sealed.
The University of Colorado, where Holmes was enrolled in a Ph. D. neuroscience program, has also been tight-lipped about the case. Investigators said he began stockpiling firearms and ammunition while taking classes in the spring.
In June, he made threats to a professor and on June 10 filed withdrawal papers after failing a year-end exam, prosecutors said. The next day he saw his school psychiatrist who tried to report him to a campus security committee, according to Holmes' lawyers.
The parents, grandparents, cousins and widow of nine of the 12 people killed said they were asked to attend an "evening of remembrance" followed by a movie when the Aurora theater reopens on Jan. 17. They released a letter sent to the theater's owner, Cinemark, in which they criticized the Plano, Texas-based company for not previously reaching out to them to offer condolences and refusing to meet with them without lawyers.
"Our family members will never be on this earth with us again and a movie ticket and some token words from people who didn't care enough to reach out to us, nor respond when we reached out to them to talk, is appalling," the letter said.
Cinemark had no immediate comment.
The company announced last month that it would reopen the theater on Jan. 17 and invite people affected by the attack and other guests, a move that Aurora officials said has strong support in the community. Gov. John Hickenlooper plans to attend.
The Aurora Sentinel reported that plans filed with the city call for turning the theater into one of the company's "extreme digital cinema" sites that feature massive screens. It's not clear from the plans whether there will be a memorial to the victims.
The invitation was emailed to families by the Colorado Organization for Victim Assistance, which said the offer was being sent on behalf of Cinemark.
It arrived two days after Christmas as Sandy and Lonnie Phillips, the mother and stepfather of Jessica Ghawi, one of the 12 people killed, were housesitting in Denver.
They had left their home in San Antonio, Texas, on the advice of their grief counselor to avoid being where they typically would have celebrated Christmas with Jessica. Sandy Phillips said they picked Denver on purpose because her daughter, a 24-year-old aspiring sportscaster, had been happy there.
The Phillipses said the invitation could be a public relations ploy to help show the public that some victims or their families are willing to attend the theater reopening.
"It was a killing field. It was a place of carnage and they've not once told us what their plans are for the theater other than that they're reopening it," said Sandy Phillips. She would like the theater where her daughter was killed to be demolished, though she acknowledged that it was unrealistic to expect Cinemark to give up the rest of the building.
The families of some victims have sued Cinemark. The father of the youngest person killed in the shooting, 6-year-old Veronica Moser-Sullivan, is among them. He didn't sign the letter but the girl's grandparents did. The Phillipses have not decided whether they will sue.
Also Wednesday, prosecutors and defense lawyers said they are ready for a crucial hearing next week in which prosecutors will outline their case against James Holmes, who is charged with killing 12 people and wounding 70 during the midnight showing of the Batman movie "The Dark Night Rises" on July 20.
It starts Monday and is scheduled to run all week. At its conclusion, state District Judge William B. Sylvester will decide if the evidence is sufficient to put Holmes on trial.
The defense could waive the hearing but legal analysts said defense lawyers sometimes go ahead with the hearing to get an idea of how strong the prosecution's case is.
Laurie Levenson, a professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles and a former federal prosecutor, said preliminary hearings sometimes set the stage for a plea agreement as each side gets to assess the strength of the other.
Holmes is charged with multiple counts of first-degree murder and attempted murder and hasn't been asked to enter a plea yet. His lawyers have said he suffers from mental illness.
Next week's hearing will give the public its first officially sanctioned look at much of the evidence against Holmes.
A judge imposed a gag order shortly after Holmes' arrest barring attorneys and investigators from speaking publicly about the case, and many documents have been sealed.
The University of Colorado, where Holmes was enrolled in a Ph. D. neuroscience program, has also been tight-lipped about the case. Investigators said he began stockpiling firearms and ammunition while taking classes in the spring.
In June, he made threats to a professor and on June 10 filed withdrawal papers after failing a year-end exam, prosecutors said. The next day he saw his school psychiatrist who tried to report him to a campus security committee, according to Holmes' lawyers.
Hmmm...I wonder what movie they are planning to show. Something tasteless, no doubt. Let's see..January openings are: "22 Bullets" (no kidding), "Texas Chainsaw 3D", "A Dark Truth", "Crawlspace", "Gangster Squad", "The Baytown Outlaws", "Officer Down", "Broken City", among others.
Â
Nevertheless, as upsetting as it might be to the families of the victims, life must go on. It HAS to go on or the bad guys (yeah, even those suffering from that catch-all "mentally ill" status) win.
Â
We've already taken a big hit on 9/11 (one from which the nation is STILL reeling) and incidents like what happened in Colorado and Newtown only serve to keep us as a nation from getting our feet firmly planted on the ground again. But we'll get there.
Â
You'll know it's started when they wake out of their stupor in Washington DC and repeal the PATRIOT ACT.
I have a very hard time even imagining the grief and pain that the families of those victims felt - still feel - and WILL feel for a long- long time... Â But tearing down the theater won't restore the dead to life, just as it won't heal the injured... Â As much as I am sure that Cinemark would like to, there is nothing they can ever do that will reverse the losses caused by the shooter.
In re reopening the theater, why should they NOT be allowed to re-open..? Â Â Did they break some law that night..? Seems to me that the SHOOTER was the one that violated the laws... Let's keep the blame where it belongs..!
In re inviting the families of the victims to the re-opening, I suppose some might say that this is in poor taste or something... but even if a family feels that way, what is wrong with a simple "No, thank you "..? Â Â
An acknowledgment or some in recognition of the victims of the event that night would be fitting... but there again, if an individual or family did not want to attend or participate, that would be their choice... People have very, very different ways of grieving, and they take comfort in very different things...Â
Given our highly litigious society, I can't help but feel that there is some "backstage emotional stirring up" happening here, and if that is the case, then THAT is the part that I find "disgusting", because it is taking advantage of people who are in an emotionally vulnernable state. Â Â
That building has been tainted by a dark, evil, act. Â Lives were lost in the same rooms they expect you to sit down, relax, grab some popcorn and ENJOY a movie. Â
Â
Have some respect for the dead........ Â That theater died the moment that massacre took place. Â Tear it down and move on. Â Making a buck isn't a good reason to leave it there constantly reminding those of what took place behind those doors.
Â
So much blood, loss of life..... Â The death wails and screams that echoed off those walls...... Â You can never wash that off. Â Replace the carpets, seats, and all the crap you want. Â But innocent WOMEN and CHILDREN were slaughtered behind those doors.
Â
Â
Â
Enjoy your movie.....
Â
Â
 @Silver Surfer For some reason, it wouldn't bother me a bit.Â
I'm just wondering, wouldn't it be more "disgusting" if the theater just opened up for business as usual without making a remembrance or something of the sort? I cannot imagine the pain of losing a loved one that way, but I can comment on how it is not the theater's fault, lawyers are ever-present  because of our sue-happy society and I think it would have been awful if the theater would have just opened the  doors without any sort of effort to have remembering and closure to a tragedy. If it is too offensive, don't go. But is it disgusting?Â
It wasn't the theaters fault.. but I am sure an event like this will have traumatized people in such a way that they would have PTSD.. unfortunately, this theater will for ever be marked with the tragedy.
but people need to understand.. The building is an object, it did no wrong. But we humans when traumatized associate guns and buildings with the trauma.. How do you think people felt about when the school with the shootings happened re-opened. Why does the theater get the bad rap and the school doesn't?
This comment has been deleted
 @SerenityWowz  @lee986321 I could certainly be wrong but I believe that while both shootings are absolutely awful and a complete nightmare with so much pain for the families, it is generally perceived that the sandy Hook shooting carries different connotations than the movie theater or the Mall shooting the same week as the school shooting. Of course everyone's life is equal and it is a tragedy no matter where the shootings occurred, but there is something fundamentally wrong on a different level to send your elementary school aged child to public school and have this happen versus in another public setting. However I do have to agree that destroying the theater wouldn't be entirely a bad idea, but if our society were sensitive enough to expect that, I don't think these shootings would be happening more and more. Sadly, people are just not that sensitive.
So sad that people who lost loved ones are now trying to cash in but that is the world we live in today. There were 7 closer theaters that allowed CHL holders closer to the killers home but he choose this one likely because it did not. So in the biggest of ironies are they going to sue because people were not allowed to be armed for self defense?
It's pretty weird that they would ask these victims to return to a disarmament zone...I wonder if they mentioned that the security would be better or not in the letter?
 @portlandborn83 ~ I think that's a very good question...
This story has some weird elements...
Â
 A grief counselor told people to be somewhere else during Christmas so it wouldn't remind them....so they pick.......Colorado (brilliant).
Â
Who would bring a 6 yr old to see the Dark Knight Rises? (a little late on this I know).
Â
I'd expect Cinemark to have a lawyer present when they met with victims families.
Â
Not sure how Cinemark can be liable for anything but people will ALWAYS sue, and no, it's not always about the money, some people don't know what else to do with their grief and/or anger.
Â
And as always...@Playanekes wants to arm everyone and everywhere...
 @deejm2112  @Playanekes ~  I think you hit the nail on the head with your statement: "Not sure how Cinemark can be liable for anything but people will ALWAYS sue, and no, it's not always about the money, some people don't know what else to do with their grief and/or anger."
Â
With some people, anyway, it's being able to "blame" someone, but more importantly, being able to blame someone that they can take on "face-to-face" (eg: Cinemark)... They can't do a face-to-face with the shooter, so Cinemark is the next-best choice... and to some extent, it allows them to vent some of their anger and frustration...Â
If the theater is at fault for the shooting, then it's because they didn't have armed security guards in every theater. And, if that's the world people want to live in--lawyers and theater guards--then I recommend the LWRC piston AR-15, which would be a fantastic rifle for the projectionist, who has nothing better to do because it's all digital now anyway. Does that sound any more absurd than suing the theater for a crime of which it too was a victim?
Â
If you're watching movies at home during a robbery, do you sue Comcast, or yourself, and how much of a cut do the lawyers get?
Â
I think we should sue the Associated Press and the state of Colorado for victimizing us by forcing us to give a damn who people in Colorado want to sue. When lawyers are required for human beings to express condolences to each other, it's no wonder people revolt against society and devalue life.
Â
Why are people suing the theater?
Â
And I was looking at a lawsuit, why would I meet with people WITHOUT my lawyer? That would be stupid.
Â
I understand these folks are a little disgusted that the theater will be re-opened, and that they were invited to a gathering in a PR effort. But that's business.
Â
The theater did nothing wrong. Should they have alarms on propped doors? Maybe. Should pat people down who enter the theater? That would not have stopped this situation.
Â
So in essence, they are suing the theater because it has bigger pockets than the monster that killed their loved one.
Â
It's about money.
Â
@Repoman --- They should sue the theater because it was and probably still is a gun free zone. The theater assumed responsibility for the safety of their patrons. I don't know if there will ever be a good time to approach the victims family's for an evening of remembrance. The theater tried and now it's lawyers, guns and money.
@Repoman Fully agree, but then again, this has turned into a sue happy world. Doesnt matter who is at fault, if money can be made at the expense of life, why not, sue the crap out everyone with a pocket book. I was as shocked and saddened by what happened that day, as well as the "other" events that happend in 2012, but come on people.