A former Justice Department lawyer and founder of Freedom Watch who in the past has sued the National Security Agency, Hugo Chavez on behalf of torture victims, journalists, Taliban and al-Qaida and more, now is bringing a case against Mexico and its police for allegedly deliberately gunning down a U.S. officer.
The case was filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Texas against the “free and sovereign state of Tamaulipos” and its police department.
It’s on behalf of Danny Shaw, a Texas state trooper, and his wife, Melissa Shaw, of Forney, Texas.
Two officers of the Tamaulipas state police “attempted to murder Plaintiff Shaw under the direction of defendants, and while acting within the scope of their employment as government officers,” the case alleges.
There were drug runners in the area, and they fled to the U.S. side of the Rio Grande, where Shaw and other American officers were, the case explains.
The defendants are accused of deliberately shooting and hitting Shaw at that time.
“This attack was not a discretionary function of the Mexican officers’ positions as state law enforcement officials, as the shooting as malicious and intentional – the result of defendant Mexico’s anti-American policy carried out by the Mexican officers,” the filing states.
Shaw suffered a gunshot wound in the leg and groin, and still carries around pain because of that. His wife is suing for loss of consortium.
It cites the authorities of several laws, including the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act.
The reason for the shooting?
“The United States and defendant Mexico have suffered strained relations since the election of President Trump, particularly in light of his decision to build a wall to protect the United States from illegal immigration and drug smuggling. In January 2017, Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto … canceled a meeting with President Trump because of his enmity toward President Trump, as well as increased tensions over plans to build the wall to protect the United States,” the filing explains.
“Nieto has been outspoken in his disapproval of President Trump and critical of his policies, even going as far as comparing President Trump to Adolf Hitler…”
“This position has gained popularity in Mexico, as Mexican presidential candidates for the upcoming election such as Lopez Obrador have attempted to garner support for their campaigns by adopting anti-Trump platforms to strengthen their candidacy.”
The former president, Vicente Fox Quesada, also has called Trump “a traitor to America and everything good it stands for,” as well as accusing him of having an “ugly gringo” attitude.
“What is Trump?” Fox has boasted. “He’s not a Republican. Absolutely not. Those are not the Republican principles. He is not a Democrat, he is just himself. He is egocentric.”
Klayman wrote in the complaint, “Fox’s position reflects a popular outlook in Mexico – one where criticizing and attacking the Trump administration has become the norm – and this damaging sentiment has fostered a hostile mindset toward the United States and its citizens.”
He said Fox “incited violence in retaliation of Trump’s policies, which has culminated in an attempt to kill a Texas Ranger to send a message of hostility to the United States.”
The shooting happened when three Mexican suspects, probably drug cartel members, were in a gunfight with both U.S. Border Patrol and officers of Tamaulipas state police.
During the fight, the suspects crossed the Rio Grande to the U.S. side, and a U.S. helicopter then notified Mexican police of those events.
Then “A barrage of gunfire rained down upon Shaw from the direction of the Mexican officers … the Mexican officers, under the direction of defendants and acting within the scope of their employment as officers of the state of Mexicao, shot both Shaw and a U.S. Border Patrol agent.”
The Mexican officers “knowingly” shot into the U.S. “with the intent to seriously harm and kill Plaintiff Shaw,” the case alleges.
There are claims for battery, assault, loss of consortium, and intentional infliction of emotional distress.
The filing from Klayman seeks general damages of more than $20 million, plus punitive damages of more than $100 million “against each and every defendant.”