Daily Archives: September 29, 2011

Court: Silverstein Not Liable in 9/11 7 WTC Collapse

globest.com | Sep 27, 2011

By Mark Hamblett

NEW YORK CITY-A federal judge has dismissed negligence claims by utility company Con Edison over the destruction of the original 7 World Trade Center on 9/11. Southern District Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein, in In re September 11 Litigation, said the chain of events that led to the destruction of 7 World Trade was “much too improbable to be consistent with any duty” toward Con Edison by builder and developer Larry Silverstein and Citigroup, the successor-in-interest to the building’s primary tenant, Salomon Brothers.

The building caught fire from flaming debris after planes hijacked by terrorists slammed into the twin towers. The 47-story 7 World Trade collapsed at 5:21 p.m., destroying a Con Edison substation.

Two counts charged Silverstein’s 7WTCo. with negligence in the design and construction of the building and for permitting commercial tenants to install diesel-fueled backup generators. Two counts against Citigroup claimed an unreasonably dangerous design that incorporated “an unreasonable amount of diesel fuel” in two 6,000-gallon tanks. With so many firefighters dead from the collapse of the towers next door, and the water system destroyed, there was no way to stop the fire, which was made worse when the diesel tanks inside the building exploded.

Related

Judge Hellerstein quoted the famous 1928 ruling of Palsgraf vs. Long Island R.R. Co., where the New York Court of Appeals dismissed a negligence claim based on a sequence of events in which train guards allegedly pushed a man carrying a package of fireworks onto a train, he dropped the package and the fireworks exploded, causing a set of scales at the other end of the platform to fall over, strike and allegedly injure a passenger. The Palsgraf court said the “risk reasonably to be perceived defines the duty to be obeyed, and risk imports relation; it is risk to another or to others within the range of apprehension.”

Judge Hellerstein said, “It was not within 7WTCo.’s, or Citigroup’s, ‘range of apprehension’ that terrorists would slip through airport security, hijack an airplane, crash it suicidally into one of the two tallest skyscrapers in New York City, set off falling debris that would ignite a building several hundred feet away, cause structural damage to it, destroy water mains causing an internal sprinkler system to become inoperable, kill 343 firemen and paralyze the rest so that a fire within a building would not be put out and the building would be allowed to burn an entire day before it consumed itself and collapsed.”

. . .

Larry Silverstein Describes 9/11 WTC collapse

Where was Larry Silverstein on 9/11?

WeAreCHANGE confronts Larry Silverstein

Lucky Larry Silverstein EXPOSED

Larry Silverstein Makes 7 Billion from WTC 9-11 insurance policy

Building 7 Controlled Demolition

Danny Jowenko on WTC 7 controlled demolition

9/11 Memorial Gun Ban Outrages First Responders, Retired Cops


NYPD officers stood at attention during a ceremony at the 9/11 Memorial Sept. 20, 2011, one of the dedicated “first responder” days on which they were allowed to carry firearms at the memorial. PHOTO CREDIT DNAinfo/Julie Shapiro

“We all have permits to carry our weapons. We are not criminals. We are not terrorists.”

DNAinfo | Sep 27, 2011

By Julie Shapiro

LOWER MANHATTAN — Ten years and one week after Robert Reardon rushed to the fires at Ground Zero, the retired NYPD detective returned to the attack site and tried to visit the new 9/11 Memorial for the first time.

But Reardon, 54, a Staten Island resident, was turned away because, as many retired police officers do, he was carrying a gun.

“I still can not believe the disrespect I felt, and feel now,” Reardon wrote in an e-mail to DNAinfo after the Sept. 18 incident. “We are retired members of the NYPD. We all have permits to carry our weapons. We are not criminals. We are not terrorists.”

Reardon said he had reserved a memorial visitor pass in advance and traveled to lower Manhattan on Sept. 18 with friends and family members, planning to commemorate a woman they knew who was killed, and whose remains have never been recovered.

He said he was stunned to be barred from entering the site where he had unhesitatingly responded 10 years earlier.

The 9/11 Memorial referred questions about the firearm policy to the NYPD, which did not respond to requests for comment. The mayor’s office did not immediately return a call for comment.

But a source familiar with the policy said that retired or off-duty law-enforcement officers are not allowed to bring guns into the 9/11 Memorial, except on seven dedicated first responder days this fall.

That policy, which does not apply to on-duty officers, was determined by the NYPD, the source said.

As word about the rule spread among retired NYPD officers this week, many were surprised and upset.

“It’s one of the most asinine things I ever heard in my life,” said retired NYPD Lt. Commander Ed Day, 60, who lives in Rockland County.

“It’s as though law enforcement feels we’re more of a threat on some days and less on other days. It makes no sense.”

Day said he almost always carries a weapon with him because, after working at countless grisly crime scenes, he has seen how dangerous the world can be.

“If, God forbid, something happened, I would like to have the ability to intercede,” said Day, who retired in 2000 and responded to the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, but not to 9/11. “I want to have a level chance of protecting my family.”

Retired NYPD Lt. John Lincks, who also previously served in the U.S. Army and now lives in Florida, said he has earned the right to carry a weapon, and it is wrong for the NYPD to take that away.

“It is an insult to prohibit those of us who served from bearing arms when we are properly licensed to carry them,” Lincks said.

Reardon, who wrote a letter to Police Commissioner Ray Kelly and Mayor Michael Bloomberg detailing his experience, said he doesn’t understand why the NYPD feels that retired or off-duty officers are a threat.

“If anything, you would think it might just be a good idea to have us around,” Reardon said. “Most of us have not forgotten how to help.”