Arguments heard in civil case over Hedingham mass shooting

RALEIGH, N.C. (WTVD) -- A court hearing was held Monday afternoon at the Wake County Courthouse in a civil case surrounding the Oct. 20, 2022, Hedingham mass shooting.

Five people were killed and two others injured in the shooting spree in the Raleigh neighborhood. A criminal trial is set to go next year.

The hearing essentially focused on whether there's standing to compel discovery and move this case forward to two groups of defendants or whether they could be ultimately dismissed from legal action.

The plaintiffs are the estates of Susan Karnatz, Mary Marshall, Nicole Connors-Howard and Gabriel Torres, four of the people killed in the shooting as well as the two survivors.

Austin Thompson, the teenager charged with the shootings, along with his parents, Alan and Elise Thompson, are listed as defendants.

Other defendants include the Hedingham Community Association, its property manager and the association's security team.

The complaint alleges there had been prior complaints made about crime in the community as well as about Austin Thompson's behavior before the shooting.

One point discussed Monday was case law surrounding the responsibilities of property managers.

"A community association has no legal duty nor can they control the act of a private citizen living at his home in an open community," said Elizabeth Martineau, attorney for Hedingham Community Association and H.R.W. Inc.

Steve Mickelsen, attorney for the plaintiffs, disagreed.

"In all of these cases that we've talked about in the last hour or so, they all involve property owners as well as property managers," he said. "So, the notion that it has to be a landowner in order to survive is not supported by North Carolina law."

Another point discussed Monday was the responsibilities of Capitol Special Police and its agents in responding.

"The shooting started in the home of the Thompsons, which is an area the security patrol would not have any jurisdiction to go into even if they heard shots," said Camilla DeBoard, who represents Capitol Special Police and its named staffers.

Claudia Barcelo, an attorney for the plaintiffs, countered with, "It's not that she was to stop Austin at the point of which he was at his house. I don't think we've made that argument. It's that there were 30 shots to respond to before (the security guard) actually responded."

Judge Bryan Collins noted the volume of arguments and case law to pour over, and he added that he may not get to a decision this week.