Jump to content
×
×
  • Create New...

Security Guard hired by KUSA Shoots, Kills Man During Protests


Message added by Weeters

Please keep the following site guideline in mind when posting in this thread:

Quote

Content must be verifiable. - Claims presented as fact must be supported by evidence. If you cannot back up your claims, do not post them.

 

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, dman748 said:

I also think that since were talking about a TV station here (in this case, KUSA) I would suspect that the FCC and perhaps the Administrative Law Judge could get involved here

Until there's FCC regulations about TV stations hiring outside security guards, the FCC has no jurisdiction here and no reason to get involved.

 

Let's summarize things here:

  1. KUSA/Tegna contracted with Pinkerton to provide a security guard.
  2. The vast majority of security guards, whether they be at TV stations, your local mall, a defense contractor, a technology company, or wherever, are outsourced from contractors. The bigger names in this field are companies like Securitas (which owns Pinkerton) and Allied Universal.
  3. These contracts typically require some sort of background check, but generally only by the service provider (i.e. Pinkerton.) The company getting services, in this case Tegna, relies on the contractor to follow the contract. No company really has any interest in doing a background check on the security guards and janitors their contractors bring in. That's why they're contracting in the first place.
  4. In certain situations, the security guards do identify with the particular company to which they are assigned (A security guard contracted to a Google office may wear a Google uniform.) In this specific case, it is highly unlikely the security guard was decked out in KUSA swag (TV stations are already stingy enough with swag for actual employees.)
  5. In many states, security guards must be licensed. In this case, it appears the "guard" was somehow allowed to be hired without a license. Again, a Pinkerton problem.
  6. It's not uncommon for a contractor to contract out work, especially one-off jobs, such as this one.
  7. Pinkerton has a long history of scandals, to the point that they are often antagonists (or at least referenced) in video games set in the past.

It's highly unlikely any of this will come back to be blamed on KUSA/Tegna in court. This is 100% on Pinkerton.

  • Like 9
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 78
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Until there's FCC regulations about TV stations hiring outside security guards, the FCC has no jurisdiction here and no reason to get involved.   Let's summarize things here: KUSA/Te

Can you please provide a source for these "indications"? All I see is that Tegna became aware of the licensing issue after the shooting happened.   Per the KUSA statement:   And

Not sure why I feel the need to waste my time chiming in here, but just want to add onto the "you're wrong" group of folks in this thread.   Will someone try to throw KUSA/TEGNA into some so

Posted Images

9 minutes ago, Weeters said:

Until there's FCC regulations about TV stations hiring outside security guards, the FCC has no jurisdiction here and no reason to get involved.

 

Let's summarize things here:

  1. KUSA/Tegna contracted with Pinkerton to provide a security guard.
  2. The vast majority of security guards, whether they be at TV stations, your local mall, a defense contractor, a technology company, or wherever, are outsourced from contractors. The bigger names in this field are companies like Securitas (which owns Pinkerton) and Allied Universal.
  3. These contracts typically require some sort of background check, but generally only by the service provider (i.e. Pinkerton.) The company getting services, in this case Tegna, relies on the contractor to follow the contract. No company really has any interest in doing a background check on the security guards and janitors their contractors bring in. That's why they're contracting in the first place.
  4. In certain situations, the security guards do identify with the particular company to which they are assigned (A security guard contracted to a Google office may wear a Google uniform.) In this specific case, it is highly unlikely the security guard was decked out in KUSA swag (TV stations are already stingy enough with swag for actual employees.)
  5. In many states, security guards must be licensed. In this case, it appears the "guard" was somehow allowed to be hired without a license. Again, a Pinkerton problem.
  6. It's not uncommon for a contractor to contract out work, especially one-off jobs, such as this one.
  7. Pinkerton has a long history of scandals, to the point that they are often antagonists (or at least referenced) in video games set in the past.

It's highly unlikely any of this will come back to be blamed on KUSA/Tegna in court. This is 100% on Pinkerton.

 

Exactly what I've been saying! Thank you for distilling this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, ABC 7 Denver said:

 

Oy vey. It's like you people don't read the news, which is ironic and alarming.

 

 

This isn't TEGNA's fault. They contracted Pinkerton who was responsible for vetting their own subcontractors. Pinkerton didn't do it's due diligence. Don't blame TEGNA. 

Thank you for the information on Pinkerton.  That clearly makes them liable, and KUSA should pursue legal action against them for failing to do their due diligence and providing them with an unqualified and unlicensed security guard, and any damages  that come about as a result of this incident.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shannon Ogden (Denver 7) said on the 6pm newscast yesterday that KMGH also hired Pinkerton security for the recent Senate Debate, and that Dolloff was present. He went on to say that they asked him to be unarmed and that no weapon was visible during his time working the debate.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Weeters said:

Until there's FCC regulations about TV stations hiring outside security guards, the FCC has no jurisdiction here and no reason to get involved.

 

Let's summarize things here:

  1. KUSA/Tegna contracted with Pinkerton to provide a security guard.
  2. The vast majority of security guards, whether they be at TV stations, your local mall, a defense contractor, a technology company, or wherever, are outsourced from contractors. The bigger names in this field are companies like Securitas (which owns Pinkerton) and Allied Universal.
  3. These contracts typically require some sort of background check, but generally only by the service provider (i.e. Pinkerton.) The company getting services, in this case Tegna, relies on the contractor to follow the contract. No company really has any interest in doing a background check on the security guards and janitors their contractors bring in. That's why they're contracting in the first place.
  4. In certain situations, the security guards do identify with the particular company to which they are assigned (A security guard contracted to a Google office may wear a Google uniform.) In this specific case, it is highly unlikely the security guard was decked out in KUSA swag (TV stations are already stingy enough with swag for actual employees.)
  5. In many states, security guards must be licensed. In this case, it appears the "guard" was somehow allowed to be hired without a license. Again, a Pinkerton problem.
  6. It's not uncommon for a contractor to contract out work, especially one-off jobs, such as this one.
  7. Pinkerton has a long history of scandals, to the point that they are often antagonists (or at least referenced) in video games set in the past.

It's highly unlikely any of this will come back to be blamed on KUSA/Tegna in court. This is 100% on Pinkerton.

 

I'm sure KUSA/Tegna will get some sort of fine and civil penalties. But let's be honest, the people demanding that KUSA's license be stripped are the same people demanding that NBC's license be stripped because they think the news coverage is biased in a way they don't like.

 

They have no clue about the business at all (at least compared to people in this thread) and shouldn't be taken all that seriously. 

Edited by Mrtraveler01
  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Weeters said:

Until there's FCC regulations about TV stations hiring outside security guards, the FCC has no jurisdiction here and no reason to get involved.

 

Let's summarize things here:

  1. KUSA/Tegna contracted with Pinkerton to provide a security guard.
  2. The vast majority of security guards, whether they be at TV stations, your local mall, a defense contractor, a technology company, or wherever, are outsourced from contractors. The bigger names in this field are companies like Securitas (which owns Pinkerton) and Allied Universal.
  3. These contracts typically require some sort of background check, but generally only by the service provider (i.e. Pinkerton.) The company getting services, in this case Tegna, relies on the contractor to follow the contract. No company really has any interest in doing a background check on the security guards and janitors their contractors bring in. That's why they're contracting in the first place.
  4. In certain situations, the security guards do identify with the particular company to which they are assigned (A security guard contracted to a Google office may wear a Google uniform.) In this specific case, it is highly unlikely the security guard was decked out in KUSA swag (TV stations are already stingy enough with swag for actual employees.)
  5. In many states, security guards must be licensed. In this case, it appears the "guard" was somehow allowed to be hired without a license. Again, a Pinkerton problem.
  6. It's not uncommon for a contractor to contract out work, especially one-off jobs, such as this one.
  7. Pinkerton has a long history of scandals, to the point that they are often antagonists (or at least referenced) in video games set in the past.

It's highly unlikely any of this will come back to be blamed on KUSA/Tegna in court. This is 100% on Pinkerton.

I respectfully disagree, this isn't 100% on Pinkerton, KUSA/Tegna deserves just as much of the blame as Pinkerton does both of them knew about Dohloff and knew that he wasn't licensed and yet both of them were the ones that hired him in the first place.

 

I think the FCC is going to have to get involved at some point during the case, heck even on KUSA's own website @Greggo shared last night they admitted that potential charges could be levied against KUSA/Tegna whether its Civil or Criminal is too early to say for them at this point.

 

But regardless of the penality at minimum KUSA isn't going to lose its license, could they be sold? That's a different conversation for a different thread but no way KUSA is going to lose its license, that doesn't mean the FCC couldn't threaten that KUSA's license could be taken away but in the end KUSA will keep its license.

Edited by dman748
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, dman748 said:

I respectfully disagree, this isn't 100% on Pinkerton, KUSA/Tegna deserves just as much of the blame as Pinkerton does both of them knew about Dohloff and knew that he wasn't licensed and yet both of them were the ones that hired him in the first place.

 

I think the FCC is going to have to get involved at some point during the case, heck even on KUSA's own website @Greggo shared last night they admitted that potential charges could be levied against KUSA/Tegna whether its Civil or Criminal is too early to say for them at this point.

 

But regardless of the penality at minimum KUSA isn't going to lose its license, could they be sold? That's a different conversation for a different thread but no way KUSA is going to lose its license, that doesn't mean the FCC couldn't threaten that KUSA's license could be taken away but in the end KUSA will keep its license.


In an FCC run by the Trump administration, assume nothing - even in its potential final months.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, dman748 said:

I respectfully disagree, this isn't 100% on Pinkerton, KUSA/Tegna deserves just as much of the blame as Pinkerton does both of them knew about Dohloff and knew that he wasn't licensed and yet both of them were the ones that hired him in the first place.

 

I think the FCC is going to have to get involved at some point during the case, heck even on KUSA's own website @Greggo shared last night they admitted that potential charges could be levied against KUSA/Tegna whether its Civil or Criminal is too early to say for them at this point.

 

But regardless of the penality at minimum KUSA isn't going to lose its license, could they be sold? That's a different conversation for a different thread but no way KUSA is going to lose its license, that doesn't mean the FCC couldn't threaten that KUSA's license could be taken away but in the end KUSA will keep its license.

 

A. Pinkerton is on Dohloff's paycheck, not 9News or TEGNA.

B. The FCC is only responsible for broadcast issues, not television staffing issues. You'll notice no FCC ruling has ever been handed down specifying how stations are allowed to conduct hiring processes.

Edited by ABC 7 Denver
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, dman748 said:

I would suspect that the FCC and perhaps the Administrative Law Judge could get involved here.

please show me the fcc regulation that covers a hired goon shooting someone...

 

i'll wait...

 

please... research what you are talking about before you come on here spouting off crazy stuff like this...

 

the FCC won't touch this... nobody is going to get sold...

 

you people really hate TEGNA don't you???

  • Like 5
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ABC 7 Denver said:

 

A. Pinkerton is on Dohloff's paycheck, not 9News or TEGNA.

B. The FCC is only responsible for broadcast issues, not television staffing issues. You'll notice no FCC ruling has even been handed down specifying how stations are allowed to conduct hiring processes.

Look, I've already made my point. You, @Weeters and everybody else except a few semingly wants to defend KUSA/Tegna's actions when its clear in the tapes and images I've seen from that day they were the ones that were partly responsible for what happened here.

 

Yes its agreeable that Pinkerton is liable for this and yes Tegna/KUSA can sue them for it because they deserve to be sued, that's not the issue.

 

My issue is that most of y'all want to lovingly defend KUSA/Tegna at all costs when its clear in the tape and the images I've already seen that its clear that both partied were just as guilty as the other.

 

To quote part of The Great Gatsby book, it takes two to make an accident and unfortunately both of them were the ones that perputrated the whole thing and unfortunately somebody died as a result.

 

But go on ahead and continue to defend your stances while I'll continue to defend mine.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, dman748 said:

But go on ahead and continue to defend your stances while I'll continue to defend mine.

 

Not sure why I feel the need to waste my time chiming in here, but just want to add onto the "you're wrong" group of folks in this thread.

 

Will someone try to throw KUSA/TEGNA into some sort of litigation? Sure, probably. Will a judge immediately throw it out? Of course.

  • Thanks 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, noggi said:

 

Not sure why I feel the need to waste my time chiming in here, but just want to add onto the "you're wrong" group of folks in this thread.

Actually I believe that I'm right and everybody else is wrong, but go on.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, noggi said:

 

Not sure why I feel the need to waste my time chiming in here, but just want to add onto the "you're wrong" group of folks in this thread.

 

Will someone try to throw KUSA/TEGNA into some sort of litigation? Sure, probably. Will a judge immediately throw it out? Of course.

 

Tegna and Pinkerton's legal teams will probably settle out of court.

 

The only liability Tegna has is if they knew he wasn't properly licensed and didn't properly notify Denver PD. If anything, that would result in a fine that Tegna can easily manage.

 

The notion that they're going to lose their license over this is absurd and shows absolute ignorance about how all of this stuff works.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Mrtraveler01 said:

The only liability Tegna has is if they knew he wasn't properly licensed and didn't properly notify Denver PD.

Which from all indications Tegna knew just as much as Pinkerton knew that he wasn't properly licensed and didn't let law enforcement know about it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, dman748 said:

Which from all indications Tegna knew just as much as Pinkerton knew that he wasn't properly licensed and didn't let law enforcement know about it.

Can you please provide a source for these "indications"? All I see is that Tegna became aware of the licensing issue after the shooting happened.

 

Per the KUSA statement:

Quote

“For the past few months, it has been the practice of 9NEWS to contract private security, through an outside firm, to accompany our personnel covering protests. Pinkerton, the private security firm, is responsible for ensuring its guards or those it contracts with are appropriately licensed. 9News does not contract directly with individual security personnel.”

 

And per the TVNT site guidelines:

Quote

 

  • Thanks 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Greggo said:

This quote from the Denver City Attorney — taken directly from the KUSA website — indicates that the station could indeed be criminally charged. It certainly wouldn’t be the first time a corporation has been criminally charged, but it is hard to prove. Look at the Arkema case in Houston. 
 

“Licensed security guard employers that hire unlicensed security guards could face disciplinary actions against their licenses ranging from a fine, to suspension, to revocation.  Businesses could also face criminal charges for permitting or directing an unlicensed person to perform security services.  Regarding Matthew Dolloff, there could be civil or criminal actions taken, or both, against Mr. Dolloff, Pinkerton, 9News, and/or any other entity that hired and deployed Dolloff in an unlicensed security guard capacity."

 

https://www.9news.com/article/news/crime/security-guard-held-denver-shooting-wasnt-licensed-officials-say/73-648ca0f2-cc71-4fa7-b145-cbd710b87f5f

There's the proof right there @Weeters

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, dman748 said:

There's the proof right there @Weeters

 

No one is suggesting that KUSA will not/cannot/should not be subject to any legal action, but we're largely rejecting the notion that the station is an equal partner in blame. If you take that as us "defending" KUSA, then that's on you.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, 24994J said:

 

No one is suggesting that KUSA will not/cannot/should not be subject to any legal action, but we're largely rejecting the notion that the station is an equal partner in blame. If you take that as us "defending" KUSA, then that's on you.

Actually that ain't on me that's actually on you because I ain't defending KUSA for what they did. They knew what they were doing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, dman748 said:

Actually that ain't on me that's actually on you because I ain't defending KUSA for what they did. They knew what they were doing.


You’re saying KUSA conspired to murder the protestor?

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, noggi said:


You’re saying KUSA conspired to murder the protestor?

Yep, there is evidence of it seen here from this interview last night on Tucker Carlson Tonight https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNkeZOjAnFw

 

It starts about 26 almost 27 minutes in the video (26:40 to be exact)

 

Also more proof and additional tweet of the same thing but a slowed down version. (WARNING IT'S GRAPHIC) 

 
Edited by 24994J
Link to post
Share on other sites

KUSA has just released more video of the incident. (Viewer Discretion advised)

 

https://www.9news.com/mobile/article/news/crime/unlicensed-security-guard-matthew-dolloff-shooting-probable-cause-statement-video/73-a5a0a0e9-11b1-4d7d-972d-7b2a25fd1173

 

Denver Post also reporting that KUSA did not know that the security guard that was contracted was armed. He was also a security guard for a televised debate for US Senate.

 

https://www.denverpost.com/2020/10/13/9news-protest-shooting-matthew-dolloff/

 

KMGH has a nice summary of everything. 

 

https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/police-release-affidavit-for-suspect-in-deadly-denver-shooting-outside-of-rallies

Edited by Mrtraveler01
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dman748 said:

Yep, there is evidence of it seen here from this interview last night on Tucker Carlson Tonight https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNkeZOjAnFw

 

I'm sorry. You want me to do wha!? Take the word of a political commentary talking head!? You must be batsh*t insane. You DO realize that this is a NEWS forum, right? Political punditry is not news and just because FOX News Channel has 'News' in it's name, doesn't mean that it magically passes muster as objective journalism. Jesus.

Edited by ABC 7 Denver
  • Thanks 2
  • Confused 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, ABC 7 Denver said:

 

I'm sorry. You want me to do wha!? Take the word of a political commentary talking head!? You must be batsh*t insane. You DO realize that this is a NEWS forum, right? Political punditry is not news and just because FOX News Channel has 'News' in it's name, doesn't mean that it magically passes muster as objective journalism. Jesus.

 

Thank you. And its worthy noting that one should have a skeptical view of a source that has a clear bias on what kind of story they want to create.

 

KUSA released more video and we have the arrest affidavit. Both of those carry a lot more weight in comparison. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mrtraveler01 said:

 

Thank you. And its worthy noting that one should have a skeptical view of a source that has a clear bias on what kind of story they want to create.

 

KUSA released more video and we have the arrest affidavit. Both of those carry a lot more weight in comparison. 

Actually the Fox News one carries a bit more weight than the KUSA one because they're not implicated by this than what KUSA itself is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using TVNewsTalk you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.