I have spent most of my adult life living in condominium complexes. I have used them for my residences because they were cheap and easy to maintain. As a struggling janitor, seeking to build a janitorial business, I did not have money to spend on a single family home. I was also unwilling to spend money on a fancy condominium so I spent the majority of my adult life living in two complexes in sections of the Denver metropolitan area that are usually considered to be less than desirable. I certainly never saw any Yuppies in my neighborhoods. While living in those complexes I witnessed gunfire, drug deals, fist fights, drug abuse, drunkenness and a whole host of criminal human behavior. In one unit that I lived in a crack-head had murdered a prostitute, spilling her blood all over the unit. While living in those complexes I also held positions on the Board of Directors, in a vain attempt to enforce the restrictive covenants upon the generally immoral, lying, thieving, low-life people living there. I still own one of my condos, keeping it after finally making the decision to purchase a small single family home in a better part of town. All of this is to say that I know something about what it means to manage a condominium complex and own a condominium unit.
In a story that is now almost a year old, but that just came to my attention, a condo complex in Albuquerque that I am familiar with just lost a lawsuit that will, if not overturned, effectively rob all of the owners of their property. The story can be found here. The Eagle's Nest Condominiums are exactly the sort of complex I have lived in during my life. It is filed with many pathetic single males, drug dealers, low-life human beings, the financially down and out and a minority percentage of thrifty people trying to make a good go at a successful life.
An immoral, but legal, lawsuit was filed against the condominium association and the property management company that helped manage the complex a couple of years ago after someone was shot and killed there. According to the article referenced above, "The lawsuit said that Andrae Davis was shot when four to five people
attacked one of his neighbors, who was a drug dealer living at the
complex under a fake name. During the fight, an unknown person fired a
gun and the bullet pierced Davis’ front door and killed him as he was
watching out of the door’s peep hole. His fiancee, Lorraine Calkin, and
children watched him get shot." After Mr. Davis' tragic death his family members decided to capitalize upon it by exploiting the immoral legal culpability laws that infest the Socialist Democracy of Amerika's legal system. You all know what I mean, they set out to win the litigation lottery. In the SDA the person who actually commits a crime is never responsible for it. It is all of the rich people surrounding that person, and the various businesses that can be dragged into it, that are held responsible for what happened. It is called the theory of "deep pockets" and that is precisely what happened at Eagle's Nest, despite the fact the complex is not for the wealthy.
Last March, according to the report, "A Santa Fe jury on Tuesday ordered an Albuquerque property management
company and condominium association to pay nearly $12 million to the
estate of a man accidentally shot in a crime-ridden complex." Ironically, "Police haven’t solved the shooting of Andrae Davis, 31, who was killed
in August 2011 at Eagle Nest Condominiums in Albuquerque. But the jury
found that Roger Cox & Associates Property Management LLC and
Eagle’s Nest Condominium Association were negligent and caused Davis’
death by letting crime run rampant." Fascinating, isn't it? Let's consider the arguments made here for a moment.
Andrae Davis is dead as a result of a gunshot wound he suffered while he watched, behind a closed door, a drug deal that went sour. The person who pulled the trigger on the gun that killed Mr. Davis is still at large. In other words, Mr. Davis' murderer has not been found. That, under normal circumstances, would be the end of it. Until the person responsible for his death is found there is little his survivors can do. But these are not normal circumstances. Attorneys who know they have nothing to lose and everything to gain by filing frivolous and immoral lawsuits quickly rushed in to assign moral culpability to anyone and anything associated with the location where the murder took place.
The attorneys for the plaintiffs argued that the condo association and the property management company working for the condo association were morally responsible and guilty for the murder of Mr. Davis because "their negligence...caused Davis' death by letting crime run rampant." Do you see the hidden presupposition in that argument? It is not hard to find. The hidden presupposition, upon which the entire argument turns, is that the condominium association and/or the property management company is responsible to act as a police force, just like the local Albuquerque Police Department does. Since when is it the case that a condo association and a property management company have the legal authority to enforce the law? Can you imagine the uproar that would result if members of the association and the property management company started patrolling the property carrying guns and attempting to arrest people for violations of the law? Can you imagine the outrage if, as a result of their actions, some upstanding drug dealer and career criminal happened to get shot and killed? I can imagine that scenario. It already happened in Florida. Can anyone say Trayvon Martin?
There is something seriously wrong with the law when it prosecutes both sides of a dispute. When the association does not act like a police force it is found guilty of not acting like a police force and held responsible for the crimes that are committed there. When an association does act like a police force it is found guilt for acting like a police force without the authority to do so. Such is the nature of the law in the Socialist Democracy of Amerika.
Let's be clear, the association is not responsible for Andrae's death. Neither did the association "cause" his death. He was killed by a bullet shot from a gun by a murderer who is yet to be caught. That is the end of the story. And it would have been the end of the story in any country in which biblical law was the law of the land. In a country where humanism reigns supreme and the law of the land is whatever the majority wants it to be today we end up with a condominium association being found guilty of causing the death of a man simply because he lived there. Has the entire world gone mad? Under similar reasoning every citizen in this envy-filled country can lawfully sue the owner of any property in which a person he know dies. Did Uncle Joe have a heart attack and die in the grocery store? The grocery store owner caused his death! Did Aunt Minnie have a stroke while walking around the mini-mall? The mini-mall caused her death! Did some drunk run into the tree in your front yard, stumble out of his car and die of alcohol intoxication on your front porch? You caused his death. Prepare to be sued and prepare to lose your home.
Imagine the fate of the owners of condominiums at Eagle's Nest if this ridiculous and immoral verdict is not overturned. I have seen Eagle's Nest and I seriously doubt that it could be sold for $12 million. If the association is forced to pay the judgement every single owner of that complex is going to lose his condo. Please explain to me the justice in that decision. Please explain why I, if I were living there, am morally responsible for the death of a fellow owner when he was shot and killed by someone who has not even been captured. These legal concepts are impossible to explain because they are wildly irrational and based almost exclusively upon envy. Lawyers know they can parade a line of grieving relatives in front of a jury and then inform the jury that some rich guy somewhere is responsible for their grief. Next think you know, presto/chango, the rich guy is guilty of a crime and his money is being stolen by the state and given to the grieving relatives. All those who profit from this system are guilty of theft at the very least. All of those who profit from this system, despite its legality, are behaving immorally. Make no mistake, God will not be mocked. A day of reckoning is coming and those who have enriched themselves exploiting an immoral legal system will one day be calling for the mountains to fall upon them to hide them from the wrath of God that is coming their way. I don't believe their stolen wealth will protect them on that day, do you?