The legal team representing family members of the slain civil rights leader Malcolm X claims to have “new corroborating testimony” and evidence related to his assassination 58 years ago. Attorney Ben Crump, who is one of the lawyers for Malcolm X’s family members in a planned $100 million wrongful death suit, spoke with TPM about the case.
In his conversation with TPM, Crump declined to elaborate on his theory of the case.
“I can’t show my hand like that, but it’s all going to come out,” he said.
Isn’t this the same argument proposed by the 2020 election deniers for all the rampant voter fraud they swear they have proof of, but has never materialized?
No…it’s not.
He ain’t got shit.
“Crump said it “will be up to a judge and a jury” to decide whether to give Malcolm X’s family a “day in court” on this basis”
To the extent he would have a court impose liability on the United States - as he has said he plans to do - the Federal Tort Claims Act is problematic since, generally, cases brought under it are tried to the court, not a jury. Also, the statute of limitations is interpreted strictly (there was a 5-4 SCOTUS decision in IIRC, 2015 holding that it is subject to an equitable tolling, but that may be addressed to a feature of the law not in play here).
To be clear: per an exchange with another Hiver a few days ago: I would say the Shabazz family has been treated horribly by one or more actors, but recent high-profile episodes should caution us to consider carefully whether there is a realistic pathway for redress.
Neither do you.
It will never be up to a jury to decide this case. He ain’t got shit, and the man’s been dead for six decades.
Correct, which is why I’m not claiming to file a transparently obvious publicity stunt of a lawsuit that would imperil my license to practice law.
“Imperil my license”
Ahh yes…the brass ring that turns the hand green can’t be jeopardized at all cost.
Fact is you don’t know what his case is.
Is there a particular reason why this specific case bothers you?
Fact is I read last week’s story about how Ben Crump has the shit on how the CIA and FBI and NYPD and whoever else did a shit job of investigating the murder and even railroaded innocent people into jail for it. That’s not a cause of action to any of the Shabbaz family survivors. It just isn’t. It’s a frivolous lawsuit, regardless of the accuracy of the claims.
“You were shitty investigators!” isn’t a legal claim.
Well then your beloved and ballyhood American system of Injustice should be able to deal with it, shouldn’t it?
This stuff happens all the time in our legal system. What I don’t understand is why it would leave you apoplectic when it is, in fact, a common occurrence.
Why not let it play out? If the system is robust and fair this shouldn’t be an issue to get hung up on.
IANAL
Isn’t the legit legal beef that of the two wrongfully convicted?
Is
Crump Suggesting that the gov’t was involved? Other than than totally botched aftermath?
Statute of limitations on murder?
It will deal with it! By dismissing it summarily as being some dumb and legally incognizable shit.
The merits of Malcolm’s assassination ain’t got nothing to do with the merits of a wrongful death suit against people and agencies who, after the fact, did a shitty job of investigating it.
Find me any example of anyone winning a lawsuit on a claim that the cops did a shitty job of investigating daddy’s murder. Just one example.
I’ll be waiting.
I didn’t say Ben Crump has a case. I just posited that you don’t know what he has.
If it can be shown that the FBI was actively persecuting Mr. X prior to his assassination then I think the Shabazz family has standing. No?
Why not just let the system proceed to depo and let’s see what the man has?
No.
Because he’s a showboating shyster who claims he’s got shit when he transparently ain’t got legally cognizable shit and I’m not obligated to take his bullshit silently.
He’s the one making dumb claims of some blockbuster lawsuit that ain’t never gonna go nowhere. I’m not apologizing for pointing that out.
I’m not in anyway expecting you to apologize for pointing it out. I’m just wondering why you feel you need to. You seem to lack standing.
I might be persuaded to take Crump seriously if he hadn’t spent years puffing himself up in front of cameras and reporters to make a national name for himself.
He’s arguably a decent attorney, but his showboating makes that harder to believe, so I take anything he says with a pound or two of salt.
Even a non-lawyer like me can smell legal bullshit through the tubes of the interwebs.
Murder isn’t a civil cause of action. Wrongful death is a civil cause of action. And the statute of limitations for it in New York is 2 years for private defendants or 90 days from appointment of a personal representative for a public entity defendant. I’m not bothering to look up what the SOL was in 1962 because, come on, this is a transparent publicity stunt.
All lawyers are showboating shysters. When will that sink in? People hate lawyers because they’re lying pieces of shit whose imaginary ethics come and go based on the size of the retainer.
Lawyers are sadly necessary to modern life. Like toilet paper, trash dumps and sewage treatment plants. But we’d rather not ever have to think about any of them.
Anyone can post stuff on the internet. Getting a frivolous publicity stunt into a courtroom is a higher bar.