Skip to comments.Sues Wal-Mart for $1 million after 'all black people must leave' announcement made over P.A system
Posted on 05/16/2012 6:24:07 AM PDT by dennisw
A Winslow, New Jersey man, is suing Wal-Mart for $1 million because he claims he was traumatised by a public address announcement directed at black shoppers. Donnell Battie claims that the intercom system at the Wal-Mart on the Black Horse Pike in Washington Township was hijacked and someone announced, 'Attention, Wal-Mart customers. All black people must leave the store.' In his lawsuit, Battie says that Wal-Mart was negligent, careless, reckless and showed deliberate indifference in not controlling access to the P.A system.
Filed at the U.S District Court in Camden this week, the lawsuit dates from a March 14, 2010 incidence at the supermarket giant according to MSNBC
Even though a manager at the superstore quickly apologised for the remark, the police arrived and a 16-year-old boy was arrested on harassment and bias intimidation charges. Since that date, Battie alleges that the announcement caused him to suffer depression, anxiety, anger, loss of sleep, loss of appetite, paranoia and to suffer from anti-social tendencies.
'Mr Battie is an individual who has been under care of a doctor for various disabilities dealing with his psychological makeup,' said John Klamo, Battie's attorney.
'He's in Wal-Mart and something of this nature presents its ugly head and brings up past situations in his life that affected him.' He added that Battie had already been seeking help for previous incidents that had caused him social unease. 'We were appalled by this incident and are amazed that anyone could be so backward and mean-spirited in this day and age,' said Greg Rossiter, a spokesman for Wal-Mart.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Well,I guess everybody has got to make a living?????????????
I am traumatzed by the race baiters, especially Jesse Jackson. Where is MY money?
Guess the 16 year old who did the deed didn’t have any money.
I’m owed billions then. I’m “traumatised” 24/7/365 by what I have to deal with as a middle aged honkey.
His idiot lawyer is trying to score a quick 50 thousand out of court because Wal Mart will want to avoid further publicity on this. Only problem is Wal Mart has lawyers and will use them plus WalMart knows that black customers will never stage any kind of boycott. They are addicted to that place I call EBT card central at least where I live. I shop there too and have the EBT card peoples in line w me
Oh for God’s sake!
I guess ya can’t make this stuff up.
He’ll probably come out of this as a rich man......
Why not sue for 5 or 10 or 50 million and hope for an OJ jury? One million is chump change
Yes that was wrong, but we need to stop these money-grabbing suits.
This frivolous case underscores the need for “loser pays” law to discourage lawsuits looking to win the lottery against deep pocket businesses
It is time to pass laws making filing a frivolous lawsuit a felony, with a minimum 2 years in prison for the plaintiffs their attorneys.
“I shop there too and have the EBT card peoples in line w me”
Same here. You have no clue how many times these losers talk in downtown and they even argue that McDonald’s doesn’t allow EBT’s. And people ask why we have a low opinion of the homeys..
Is Mr. Battie of African decent? I didnt read that he was in the article.
The new civil right - the right to be shielded from bad jokes.
I was tramatized, too, just reading the story about the announcement on the Web.
Where’s my check?
[I’d just settle for $1/2 a million, since I hyperventilating didn’t last too long.]
:: I guess ya cant make this stuff up. ::
I think “Seinfeld” already did.
Battie alleges that the announcement caused him to suffer depression, anxiety, anger, loss of sleep, loss of appetite, paranoia and to suffer from anti-social tendencies.
‘Mr Battie is an individual who has been under care of a doctor for various disabilities dealing with his psychological makeup,’ said John Klamo, Battie’s attorney.
Think how much he could sue K-Mart for because he was traumatized by a blue light special since we all know the police are biased towards blacks.
John Klamo is just one more reason why lawyers are generalized as lowlifes.
Sometimes EBT cards can be used at MacDonald’s. All depends what state you live in. Seems that in Massachusetts you can use EBT card at MacDonald’s
Some states allow EBT to be used for fast food purchases. I can’t see any state will prevent you from using your EBT card to buy an Italian hero or 8 piece fried chicken at a supermarket. So your EBT card may not be good at Subway or KFC but you can buy the equivalents in a supermarket and be done with it. Where I live supermarkets do make sub sandwiches and have boxes of fried chicken
Just out of curiosity, how many disability checks is Mr. Battie (a more appropriate name there has nevder been) collecting?
They apparently can’t use here in SoCal, as I hear the conversations on the train between homey A with homey B, and they were basically bitching why they can use EBT at the 99 c store but not McDo. The 2nd time I heard it was some crack dude was yelling at another guy on a bike that McD’s on so-so did not allow EBT..
Straight from the horses mouth, and that is what I call irrefutable proof my FRiend. Could be the California health nazis put the kibosh on any EBT use at McDonald’s
It never fails that I get stuck behind one buying a poopload of groceries with welfare checks or cards and it never fails there is some big problem and delay.
Mr. Battie and his lawyer should be thrown in jail.
Battie, indeed...suck it up, dude!
Yeah. Sure, pal.
Homey be wantin' a payday 'n' s**t.
You owe me a new keyboard! My double shot was spewed when I read dblshot’s post!
LOL! That’s bad but you’re good!
This story is actually pretty funny. This guy is a wuss.
I used to love making announcements over an unattended mic when I was a yute.
That is because there can be 2 types of benefits on the EBT cards. SNAP (food stamp) benefits can not be used for prepared meals such as subs or fried chicken. However some people who are on SNAP are also on other assistance which is cash (in Viginia it is TANF - temporary assistance for needy families) and can be used for any purchase.
So SNAP cannot be used to buy prepared food (such as a sandwich) in a supermarket? Is this really enforced? I’ll bet it is ignored in barrios and ghettos and perhaps enforced or obeyed in middle class areas
Is this really enforced?
It's enforced electronically once the card is swiped and the PIN entered. The cashier is notified how much of the total bill is covered by the card and how much isn't.
Ill bet it is ignored in barrios and ghettos and perhaps enforced or obeyed in middle class areas
I don't see how it possibly could be.
Personally I think the switch to the electronic card has probably cut fraud drastically. There is still fraud, don't get me wrong, but it is a whole heck of a lot harder now than in the past with the coupons.
You could evade it in the barrios/ghettos. Lets say a prepared sandwich goes for $4 and bucket of fried chicken goes for $6 in a little supermercado or bodega. The cashier takes out a piece of cardboard with the bar code for steel wool scrubbing pads that cost $4. So the sandwich purchase gets rung up as steel wool scrubbing pads which is SNAP eligible
Let me guess, another no_ limit_ nigga with his hand out.
Since when are steel wool scrubbing pads SNAP eligible? They aren’t here. Heck even pectin for jelly making is no longer eligible.
I don’t see the benefit to the store - to chance doing such a thing. And what’s the benefit to the person making such a purchase? The SNAP card lets them buy all the Banquet frozen fried chicken they want.
BTW - there are lots of supermercados and bodegas in this county - most of them don’t even take the EBT cards.
OK what do I know
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.