Woman who called police on black man in Central park sues ex-employer

ohioboy

Well-known Member
Location
Ohio
Amy Cooper, a white woman, who called the police on a birdwatcher in Central Park, a black man, alleging he was threatening her was terminated from her job. Now check this laugh out. She is suing for Race discrimination under 42 USC 1981. Race discrimination, c'mon now. Read the whole complaint if you have time, but the Counts (causes of action) start at paragraph 89, a 7 count complaint. She is also suing for Defamation. You've got to be kidding!!

https://legalinsurrection.com/wp-co...my-Cooper-v.-Franklin-Templeton-Complaint.pdf
 

I thought this happened awhile back, like maybe a year ago or longer. I kind of remember reading about it.
 
Amy Cooper, a white woman, who called the police on a birdwatcher in Central Park, a black man, alleging he was threatening her was terminated from her job. Now check this laugh out. She is suing for Race discrimination under 42 USC 1981. Race discrimination, c'mon now. Read the whole complaint if you have time, but the Counts (causes of action) start at paragraph 89, a 7 count complaint. She is also suing for Defamation. You've got to be kidding!!

https://legalinsurrection.com/wp-co...my-Cooper-v.-Franklin-Templeton-Complaint.pdf
The video told me all. I felt so sorry for the black man.

My guess is the case won't make it far in the system.
 
I am suing anyone, who reads this thread, as that constitutes a violation of my right to bark at the moon. Yes, anybody can sue anybody for anything. I doubt this suit is nothing more than a nuisance suit to get that illusive golden settlement. She does have a minor problem. She was all over TV apologizing for her actions. She was terminated after she admitted to the incident. She was charged, found guilty, and sentenced. Those admitted actions, and their adverse notoriety are surely a cause to terminate an employee in an investment firm, which could be harmed by the incident.
 
Last edited:
I, too, hope her suit makes it about as far as her big toe. She is a pathetic person, whose actions could have caused injury or death to her victim had the incident been handled differently by the responding officers. She was convicted of the offense. She admitted her wrongdoing.

Depending on the employment laws of that state, one cannot assume she won't prevail. Would like to know if she signed an employment contract and if there was anything in that contract about actions that would bring negativity to the firm. Also, was there an employee policy manual she was given access to at employment or while employed? Lots we don't know... and won't until the litigation hits the courts. I do hope the former employer doesn't offer some settlement that their liability insurance carrier feels is less expensive than riding it out in the courts. She and her attorney may have just filed the suit banking on a negotiated settlement and walk away with money in their pockets.
 
Her argument, it seems from reading the complaint, is that if she were Black, she wouldn't have gotten fired — thus, it's racism. While it's true that she might have gotten a break if she was Black, that doesn't mean they fired her because she's white. They fired her for all the negative publicity her actions were generating.

It seems like a more valid charge would be libel or slander for Franklin Templeton implying that she's a racist in interviews and in print media, and that's what's laid out in the complaint.

(It's fun to play lawyer. :) )
 
Glad she was fired. The few long term places I worked always had workers sign papers as part of their employment process. They always included termination causes and bringing negative behavior onto the company was one of them. They are standard to most employment. Most people don't bother to read all the paperwork they sign. They are just glad to get the job and sign what is put before them.

I know because I put employment packages together for anyone we hired and it did not matter for what position.
 
Patch, she is suing for "wrongful discharge" but not complained of as a specific averment. She is also suing under federal law, so she has more than state law to hitch her horse on. What she's claiming is "Reverse discrimination" as far as the race is concerned, like Irwin said, and Gender discrimination. RD is extremely difficult to prove to a Jury
 
I, for one, hope she wins. Being terminated for things waaay outside of her employment is going too far. It would be like me getting fired as an accountant (which I was) for a traffic violation.

And yes I understand "at will" employment...

Claiming Race discrimination abrogates the "at will" doctrine, if proven.
 
Buckeye said:
"I, for one, hope she wins. Being terminated for things waaay outside of her employment is going too far. It would be like me getting fired as an accountant (which I was) for a traffic violation."

The last time you had a traffic violation was it in all media all over globe for that nasty thing you said to that (black, female, gay) officer? Were you arrested, charged, unapologetic?

Didn't think so, you're too nice a guy. Aren't you?
 
Another episode of the Cancel Culture in pursuit of truth, justice and the tolitarian way. Screw them all!! Where are all the lawsuits against gun and ammo manufactures after black on black shootings every single day in America.
 


Back
Top