Supreme Court - Mall rape case should proceed

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. -- A 12-year-old girl who was raped at a Kansas City shopping center may seek damages from the mall security company and its former owner and management company, the Missouri Supreme Court has ruled.

The 4-2 ruling Tuesday by the state's highest court sends the case back to a Jackson County court. The ruling reverses an earlier court decision that determined the girl and her mother did not have grounds to sue.

The girl reported she was taken out of the Ward Parkway shopping center on March 15, 1997, and raped in an adjacent catwalk. Court records show a juvenile boy was found guilty of the attack.

The girl's mother sued the Ward Parkway Shopping Center Co., the former mall owner; General Growth, the former management company; and IPC International Corp., the security company.

In a decision written by Judge William Ray Price, the state's highest court said mall officials and security staff should have taken greater steps to protect customers because of previous incidents.

"The incident reports and the testimony of the defendant's employees clearly establish that they were aware of a significant number of violent crimes at the mall prior to this occurrence," the court said in reference to the mall owners. "Continued violent crime, such as the alleged rape of (the girl) was foreseeable. Defendants had a duty to take reasonable measures to protect mall customers, and specifically (the girl) from this type of violent activity."

Judges Michael Wolff, Laura Denvir Stith and Ronnie White agreed with Price while Chief Justice Stephen Limbaugh and Judge Duane Benton dissented. Judge Richard Teitelman did not participate.

The girl's attorney, Michael Ketchmark, had argued that in the 25 months before the attack, 20 violent crimes were reported inside the shopping center, including two sexual assaults.

Security officers were understaffed the night the girl was raped in a dark area without working lights, Ketchmark argued. The girl's attorney also contended that two security guards ignored a girlfriend of the victim who had told them a boy had abducted the victim.

In a dissenting opinion, Limbaugh wrote the previous crimes on Ward Parkway's premises are significantly different than abduction and rape, freeing the mall and security firm of liability in the case.

With regard to the owners of the mall, Limbaugh wrote: "I disagree with the majority's indiscriminate reliance on crimes of all categories in determining the existence of a duty to protect."