CoastersRZ Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 Kings Island slapped with suit for $10M BY JESSICA BROWN | JLBROWN@ENQUIRER.COM An Illinois man has filed a $10 million federal lawsuit against Paramount's Kings Island and several park police stemming from his arrest last summer on sexual-imposition charges. Keith Bays, 44, says he was wrongfully arrested and "manhandled" by park police May 28 after two women complained about his behavior toward them. The charges were later dismissed in Mason Municipal Court for lack of probable cause, according to the lawsuit. Bays alleges civil rights violations, false and unlawful arrest, assault and battery, and malicious prosecution. His attorney was unavailable for comment. ADVERTISEMENT Kings Island officials refused comment on the lawsuit. Bays said park police arrested him without probable cause, assaulted him and cursed at him. He said he suffered bruises on his upper body, pain, and dizziness, according to the lawsuit. Authorities also left his young children unattended while they detained him for questioning, according to the lawsuit. He is suing the unnamed officers individually. According to a police report, the accusers, Kylie Groover, then 18, of Indiana, and an unnamed 14-year-old girl told police Bays struck up a conversation with them about a cell phone as he stood behind them in line at the Worlds Greatest Funnel Cakes. At one point, they said, Bays introduced himself, shook Groover's hand, then ran his hand down her side touching her breast, according to the report. He later made sexually suggestive gestures toward the two from across the room, they said. Bays disputed the allegations. He denied having any sexual contact with the girls. He was arrested and taken to the Warren County jail. Bays said he paid $5,000 for an attorney and to get out of jail. The case was dismissed July 18. Read the article in the Cincinnati Enquirer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon Bombay Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 I hope this moron loses the suit. I have a great deal of respect for the parks police officers and what they have to put up with. They helped me out many time while I worked as an employee at the park. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avatar Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 Everybody be careful here. If Keith Bays is in fact innocent and falsely accused, then roughed up by an Police force. Then he is well within his rights to file a Federal law suite to show evidence of his claims and possibly be compensated for his losses. Don’t get me wrong here I am not defending him, for no other reason than I have not heard or seen any evidence from either side that would allow me to come to any conclusions. Just so that everyone understands that anybody can make an allegation towards you to the police and you can find yourself trying to prove your innocents from a made up allegation. Example of this could have been the young ladies cut in front of Keith at the line of Worlds Greatest Funnel Cakes. Then Keith verbally confronted them, several verbal exchanges where exchanged from both parties until it escalated to the point where security was called out. At this point the young ladies make an allegation that Keith inappropriately touched them. Park Police then hears this and forcibly takes action and then Keith finds himself in a county jail charged with a crime. So with this example; it should warrant that Keith should be able to clear his name or to be compensated for his losses, then at minimum he should be allowed to be heard and to show evidence of his victimization. I noticed that the Mason County Court dismissed the charges filed against Keith Bays for lack of Probable Cause. That is the big Issue here "Probable Cause", the Police or Prosecutors must have that before they can make an arrests or file charges against a citizen. If no Probable Cause was present at the above mentioned case, then Keith was falsely arrested and charged with a crime. I must mention here that Probable Cause is extremely easy to obtain and takes virtually little to no evidence to establish. Having Probable Cause protects the police and prosecutors from being accused of falsely arrest/charging citizens of the community and gives them the just cause to do so if they have it. So before I can make any judgments about what happened at Paramount Kings Island on May 28, 2006 between Keith Bays, the two young ladies and Park Police. I must have more information in the form of evidence to make that call just like we will ask a jury to listen to the evidence in an impartial manor to judge for us to make a final conclusion to what happened that day. I am sure that all the above mentioned parties could find character witness to back them up. By the way if you don’t think that false allegations are regularly made and innocent citizens are then charged with a crime and then arrested. Then you need to open your eyes a little wider and look around and not be so naïve because that’s what false accusers are counting on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cory Butcher Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 I am basing this judgement purely on appearance of Greed...He is asking for $10 Million and even suing the Police separately! He could be innocent but it sounds quite ployish ,and also if he was roughed up a little, I hope the judgement is reduced quite a bit, cuz 10 Million seems excessive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RailRider Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 I dont know, but $10M seems a little much, especially seeing as he is charging both officers seperatley. Also hasnt it been awhile since May? Just kinda seems like he might have been convinced by an ambulance chaser to file suit. I dont know the details but this is just my initial thoughts on the situation from the report. Just smells funny. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PKIDelirium Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 "He later made sexually suggestive gestures toward the two from across the room, they said." Room? What? World's Greatest Funnel Cakes is an OUTDOOR stand, at the location that used to be Skyline Footlong Express. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avatar Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 Every state has different times that a law suit must be filed by after the initial incident and this one is a Federal Lawsuit which I believe he has seven years to do so. It may have taken several months for all the legal actions to have been resolved towards Keith, so they may had to wait till those were resolved. The Dollar figure is almost always established and encouraged from the legal team. They will base it off of what the current amount awarded to those with similar claims were awarded. They then take that amount and double it as a common practice and leave it to a jury to decide the final amount to be awarded. Also most legal teams will work pro bono for their clients and only accept compensation after they win an award and it is usually half of the award. I truly don’t know who is right or wrong here but I have got to say that if you were falsely accused of an sexual assault. You will have lost your reputation, your job and the community trust. Your kids friends may not be allowed to play with your kids any longer out of fear from other parents, Plus many more thing that I can’t think of. What is fair I don’t know but 10 million would not in any way be enough to compensate me for losing a lifetime of trust in the community, when I had done nothing wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cory Butcher Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 You do provide a very good point Avatar, and at first I was reading this article with a bias toward defending and protecting KI and punishing the plaitiff. But then, I understood that the charges against were thrown out of municipal court, so I could see how he does have a valid argument. What I dont like is that 10 Million dollars is what we were getting for a new ride, althought that wont be scrubbed, I cant help but think that when a park gets sued like this look how much of a strain it could put on operations. I want so badly for PKI not to have to pay out but, he may actually have a case, Its too bad that PKI and the officers had to get sued though, its not their fault they went off what they were told. If he is found to have been perfectly within his rights then it is the girls who cried wolf that should be sued! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PKIDelirium Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 There is no way in hell any judge or jury would award someone TEN MILLION for that. 5 at absolute MOST. I find it fishy that he's pushing $10 million just a couple weeks after the park announced that the capital would be $10 million... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avatar Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 Keep in mind that what I said in my first post was just an example of what could have taken place. Also keep in mind that he may halved filled a separate civil lawsuit towards the young ladies. When lawsuits are filled they are regularly filled on every one employees and the work force ect. The courts then will establish which one or ones should go forward. Something that I noticed is that Keith had his children with him at the time that this all happened, usually sexual predators don’t have their own children with them. I also noticed that nowhere in Keith’s lawsuit does he deny the charges but only goes after the Probable Cause issue. Which means that he could have done this but realizes that no Probable Cause was established which then gives him the right to file suit for civil rights violations, false and unlawful arrest, assault and battery, and malicious prosecution. Most sexual predators will not make issues about the events other than trying to wish it away. Keith is acting like a citizen who is not guilty and wants to clear his name. I also hope that Kings Island is exonerated in this case, but I believe that compensation would come from Paramount as they where the current owners when this incident happened. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WooferBearATL Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 IThe article simply does not provide a lot of information. I'm not certain how you can come to a conclusion either way based upon the information that we currently know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cewldre Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 There is no way in hell any judge or jury would award someone TEN MILLION for that. 5 at absolute MOST. I find it fishy that he's pushing $10 million just a couple weeks after the park announced that the capital would be $10 million... Please remember that Juries do award money to the most interesting cases. The lady that spilled coffee on her lap, millions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dane Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 Did anyone else read this and just start laughing? This is just the most ridiculas thing ever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fryler87 Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 Lawsuits like these are the reason that I cannot stand people in this country. Sure, there's a lot of gray in this lawsuit - many events leading to the arrest of this guy that weren't documented as they happened (no video evidence or the like), but you have to ask yourself...why would this guy be in trouble in the first place if 'Nothing happened at all,' as he claims? I doubt these girls went to security just for fun and made up a story about how this guy did this or said that. If the girls went to security, this guy MUST have done something that had a negative impact on them. I'd like to see a picture of this guy and stereotype him to see if he'd fit the child molester bill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOPGUN1993 Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 This is the Building Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KIfan73 Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 Ah, nice pic! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cory Butcher Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 i unlike the rest of you believe in innocent until proven guilty, but this isnt a criminal case. The criminal case got thrown out in municipal, basically saying although not in exact terms and certainly not even a judgement but that the man is innocent. When cases like this start in the criminal stage, you nearly never see them thrown out, because the public does not like possible sex offenders getting off easy, there is extreme pressure put on courts to find anything they can to continue sexual misconduct cases. Hence the Duke Lacrosse Case....although on a much more significant level it is an illustration of my point. You all are so quick to say that this guy should be dropped on his head, but the criminal courts have said there wasnt enough evidence, there is always enough evidence in these cases if they are true! I know several female acquaintenances (not friends, I dont hang with this type of person that gets a high out of making others suffer) that would have no problem at all doing something like this to garner attention or what have you. There are certainly a lot of holes and none of us have the right to declare that this man has done something wrong, especially if he has not done anything wrong at all! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snake Attack! Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 It is sad that the individual officers are getting sued for this, they have so many tough things to go through on a daily basis with all the different people (some troublemakers) in the park. I know if I had to deal with the risk of being sued just for performing my job incorrectly it would deter me from the job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avatar Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 I’m glad to hear a few members take this approach of giving all parties involved their day in court to present there evidence in a federal court. I would like to know were any of the park police officers disciplined in any way from this incident, because Kings Island could say that the officers were acting out of the scope of their duties. That may be way the lawsuit was issued in the manner that it was. Also just a note from other Civil Rights and police brutality cases; Often when a major egregious act was committed by a Police Force, the judicial side will drop all charges immediately. As you all in Cincinnati have seen in the past with other cases. So I wonder if that was the motive for dismissing the charges so quick. One more thought that I had about the amount of time between the incident and the federal filing of the lawsuit is that maybe Keith and his attorney tried to work with Kings Island to settle they’re differences before they felt it necessary to go publicly forward with a federal lawsuit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 First of all, only fools predict jury verdicts. Juries do what they do. And no one knows before they do. Second, juries hear EVIDENCE, not a press account, and not just pleadings (which are but claims made by one side in a lawsuit). We have seen and/or heard no evidence as of this point. Third, the burden of proof in a criminal case is much higher than in a civil case. Criminal defendants, in order to be found guilty, must be found guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt. In a civil case, the burden of proof is merely a preponderance of the evidence, which means only that it is more probable than not. NO criminal court has ever found anyone (including O. J. Simpson) to be innocent. That's not even a possible verdict. Instead, if it is found that the prosecution did not prove its case beyond a shadow of a doubt, the defendant is found "not guilty," but this does NOT mean the defendant is innocent, only that the State did not prove guilt beyond a shadow of a doubt. Fourth, the likelihood of this matter actually going to court is slim. It will almost certainly be settled out of court, and you will never hear another thing about it. And that's probably the way it should be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon Bombay Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 There is no way in hell any judge or jury would award someone TEN MILLION for that. 5 at absolute MOST. I find it fishy that he's pushing $10 million just a couple weeks after the park announced that the capital would be $10 million... Please remember that Juries do award money to the most interesting cases. The lady that spilled coffee on her lap, millions. And if you read into that case and not just assume she was a whiny stuck up snob like everyone does, that lady was severely burned and in awful pain, she even received permanent physical damage to her legs and inner thighs, the cofee was WAY too hot and seriously hurt her. Like Avatar said no one knows the exact circumstances of this mans case or what went down that day, thats for the judge to decide, and not us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avatar Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 Interprerter; I am so glad that you weighed in on this topic as you have made some great legal analogies. Just want to point out that Keith has yet to this day been able to present his evidence or accounts of what happened in the court of law. He has not even been found not guilty of the charges. The only thing that we do know is that the Mason Municipal Court has deemed the case not prosecutable because the of lack of Probable Cause, which you must have first and it is the easiest thing to get in any case. They don’t even haft to prove it, but just state that there is a probability of an unlawful act that has been committed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WooferBearATL Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 I'd like to see a picture of this guy and stereotype him to see if he'd fit the child molester bill. I'm facinated by this comment. Can you tell what a child molester looks like? I worked for human services for 7 years. Now danged if I don't think we were ever able to tell if someone had molested simply by looks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upstop Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 Women don't lie.........Example Duke University case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 Women don't lie.........Example Duke University case. Another case that, so far, has been tried only in the media. Prosecution of this matter, if any, has been taken over by the state. The former prosecutor is no longer handling the case... It has not been established that the women lied, nor that the players who were at one time accused were innocent of the charges... One of the biggest problems in that case is that the prosecutor apparently tried to try his case in the media. Courts (and juries) are supposed to hear cases and render verdicts, not the press. And defendants are entitled to fair trials, with juries untainted by pre-trial publicity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cody Posted January 18, 2007 Share Posted January 18, 2007 I'd like to see a picture of this guy and stereotype him to see if he'd fit the child molester bill. I'm facinated by this comment. Can you tell what a child molester looks like? I worked for human services for 7 years. Now danged if I don't think we were ever able to tell if someone had molested simply by looks. Man I would hate to be your kids(not you wooferbear) O I would hope that you know you cant tell bad people from good people. I always try to teach my older brother kids, that you cant tell a diffrence between bad and good people, Just because some one looks good and wearing nice clothes doesnt mean they're not bad. lets look at an example, Bill Clinton, He did drugs and slept with other women when he was in the white house, and he look like a fairly good man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted January 18, 2007 Share Posted January 18, 2007 This is not a political forum, but where was it ever proven that he "did drugs and slept with other women when he was in the white house?" Sheesh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WooferBearATL Posted January 18, 2007 Share Posted January 18, 2007 I know many good men that sleep with women and have done drugs. Next Point? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon Bombay Posted January 18, 2007 Share Posted January 18, 2007 I can lean very strongly to the right sometimes on some issues, as woofer and interp very well know, but Rumor smasher you are a walking contradiction, here you are telling someone not to judge by the clothes someone wears or the actions you believe hes taken, yet your judging that fryler (although his comment was stupid too) is bad father by one post he made. I've had it, I think its the general concensus of this board that you stop posting and I can guarantee you, your profane, ignorant, and un called for posts have been reported. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WooferBearATL Posted January 18, 2007 Share Posted January 18, 2007 I can lean very strongly to the right sometimes on some issues, as woofer and interp very well know, but Rumor smasher you are a walking contradiction, here you are telling someone not to judge by the clothes someone wears or the actions you believe hes taken, yet your judging that fryler (although his comment was stupid too) is bad father by one post he made. I've had it, I think its the general concensus of this board that you stop posting and I can guarantee you, your profane, ignorant, and un called for posts have been reported. You're not as far right leaning as ya like to think man. <G> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.