Some families of those killed and wounded in the Islamic terror attack on an Orlando (FL) nightclub are now filing a civil suit against both the attacker’s wife and the security company that employed him.

The lawsuit was filed in federal court in South Florida on behalf of more 57 survivors and family members of those killed, Romanucci said.

The group of attorneys behind the lawsuit said that G4S and Salman were both aware of M___’s mental instability and his intention to commit acts of violence.

“The evidence we’ve seen clearly shows there were multiple warning signs before the tragic Pulse nightclub shooting, and we believe those named in this complaint – the employer of O___ M___* and his wife — could have and should have taken steps to prevent this senseless act of violence,” Romanucci said.

The lawsuit alleges that the mental health validation issued by G4S was reviewed by Florida officials before M___ purchased the weapons used in the Pulse nightclub tragedy.

“We now know in 2013, M___ repeatedly threatened his colleagues while working for G4S,” Romanucci said. ” he bragged to coworkers about being associated with the Boston Marathon bombers.”

A former police officer and M___’s coworker repeatedly reported his behavior, including homophobic statements to his employers, Romanucci said.

G4S is the world’s largest security company, its headquarters are in Britain. G4S Secure Solutions, where M___ was employed is based in Jupiter, Florida.

“G4S continues to have the deepest sympathy for the victims, friends and families who were affected by the Pulse nightclub shooting,” read a statement from the security firm sent to News 6.

G4S media officials confirmed they did see the lawsuit filed Wednesday in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

“G4S intends to vigorously defend itself against the lawsuit which it considers to be wholly without merit,” the company said.

I suspect that the plaintiffs in this case are going to have a hard time convincing a jury that G4S is negligent. G4S appears to have throughly investigated complaints against the terrorist, and determined that based on the best information they had at the time, that he was merely lashing out verbally against other employees in a personal matter.

The FBI was called in to investigate him as well, and found claims against him to be without merit.

Florida does not register or require a permit to purchase firearms, and so it seems nonsensical that attorneys for the victims are attempting to claim G4S are somehow responsible for him acquiring the rifle, handgun, and ammunition used in the attack. Even if G4S had fired him immediately after his comments to other employees, he had not broken any laws, nor had he been committed to a mental health facility. He would have been able to purchases his firearms, no matter what G4S did in their internal review.

The case against the terrorist’s wife, Noor Salman, would seem to be more solid, if it can be proven that she had advance knowledge of the attack.

Salman, of course, doesn’t have the deep pockets of an international security company, so it isn’t worth the time of the plaintiff’s attorneys to bring suit against her alone.

I suspect that the goal of the lawsuit against G4S is an attempt to force the company into some sort of settlement instead of a long and costly civil trial.
* Bearing Arms does not publish the names of mass or spree killers.