Rudi Keller
| Missouri Independent
Three Republican Missouri state senators — including one running for secretary of state — are once again being sued by the man they incorrectly identified in social media posts as being the shooter at the Kansas City Chiefs’ Super Bowl victory celebration.
Denton Loudermill of Olathe, Kansas, filed lawsuits Thursday against state Sens. Denny Hoskins of Warrensburg, Rick Brattin of Harrisonville and Nick Schroer of Defiance. In the individual lawsuits, each is accused of violating Loudermill’s privacy and libeling him with their posts.
Hoskins is the GOP nominee for secretary of state. Brattin is seeking re-election in the 31st Senate District. Schroer, who won his seat in the Senate in 2022, is not on the ballot this year.
The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri. Similar lawsuits against all three men were dismissed Oct. 21 in Kansas federal court when U.S. District Judge John Broomes ruled he did not have jurisdiction over Brattin, Hoskins and Schroer.
In the more than nine months since the Feb. 14 victory parade and pep rally, people have not stopped making him feel uncomfortable, Loudermill said in a news conference with one of his attorneys, LaRonna Lassiter Saunders.
Loudermill works at a car wash.
“They come through looking at me, on video on their phone, saying ‘yeah, that’s him,” he said. “That worries me sometimes.”
In an interview with The Independent, Lassiter Saunders said she believes the jurisdictional issue is solved with the new filing. It was important to refile the cases quickly, she said, because the legal nuances could be missed by a public that has only heard the cases were dismissed.
“It’s reported that the case gets tossed, then they’re thinking, there’s some merit to the Missouri senators position,” Lassiter Saunders said.
Hoskins, reached via text message, declined to respond to the new filing.
“I have not been served and I have no comment at this time,” he said.
Brattin and Schroer did not respond to messages seeking comment.
Like thousands of other regional residents, Loudermill went to Union Station in Kansas City for the pep rally that followed the Chiefs’ victory parade after this year’s Super Bowl. As the crowd was departing, an argument in the crowd resulted in gunfire.
The shooting at the end of the victory celebration left one person dead and at least 24 people injured.
Loudermill, who was born in Kansas and lives there now, was detained briefly because he was too slow to leave the area of the shooting, he told The Independent earlier this year.
A photo of him, seated, with his hands restrained behind his back, was posted on X, formally known as Twitter, by an account with the name Deep Truth Intel. That post incorrectly identified him with a name associated with misinformation posted after other shootings and said he was an undocumented immigrant.
Soon after that initial social media post, the Missouri Freedom Caucus, Hoskins, Brattin, Schroer and U.S. Rep. Tim Burchett, a Tennessee Republican, posted their own versions, some with the photo, some without. Burchett’s post said he was one of the shooters and referred to him as an “illegal alien.”
Burchett later deleted the tweet but included a screenshot of it that is still visible in a separate post.
A lawsuit filed against Burchett in Kansas was also dismissed because of jurisdictional issues. Lassiter Saunders said Thursday that she is working with attorneys in the Washington, D.C., area to refile the case against Burchett.
“He is not off the hook,” she said.
Hoskins’ version on social media shared a screenshot of the initial anonymous post and blamed President Joe Biden and political leaders of Kansas City for making the shooting possible.
Brattin’s first post linking Loudermill to the shooting, since deleted, demanded “#POTUS CLOSE THE BORDER” and incorporated the deleted anonymous post that kicked everything off.
Schroer was the least certain post about the immigration and arrest status of Loudermill among the three.
Schroer’s post included a link to one from Burchett stating, over Loudermill’s photo, that “One of the Kansas City Chiefs victory parade shooters has been identified as an illegal Alien.”
“Can we get any confirmation or denial of this from local officials or law enforcement?” Schroer wrote. “I’ve been sent videos or stills showing at least 6 different people arrested from yesterday but officially told only 3 still in custody. The people deserve answers.”
In the complaint filed against Brattin, attorneys wrote that the lawmakers had no reason to make the comments directed at Loudermill.
“The publication of the false representation that plaintiff was an ‘illegal alien’ and a ‘shooter’ was not made in good faith nor was it made by (Brattin) with any legitimate interest in making or duty to make such assertions,” the filing states.
In the Kansas cases, the lawmakers were represented by Attorney General Andrew Bailey, who raised both the jurisdictional objections and claims that the senators were acting in their official capacity when they made their posts on social media. Therefore, the filings stated, they are protected by “legislative immunity.”
When the case was dismissed, Bailey put out a statement saying it was a victory for keeping “questions of Missouri law … in Missouri courts.”
Bailey’s office did not respond immediately to an email asking if the office would again provide representation. Lassiter Saunders said the attorney general should not take the case again.
“I would hope not, but given the track record of the attorney general doing as he pleases, it’s a possibility,” Lassiter Saunders said.
Bailey’s participation in the case generated its own dispute. In a May letter to the commissioner of the Office of Administration, the state agency that certifies payments from Missouri’s legal expense fund, Gov. Mike Parson wrote that no payments related to the lawsuits should be certified “without my approval or a court order.”
More: Chiefs fan suing Missouri senators for defamation pushes back on official business claims
Bailey’s claim of legislative immunity is based in the Missouri Constitution’s provisions on legislative privileges. Along with being immune from arrest for minor offenses while the General Assembly is in session, members also “shall not be questioned for any speech or debate in either house in any other place.”
Social media posts are not statements or speeches made during debates in the chambers, Lassiter Saunders said.
“It wasn’t legitimate legislative activity,” she said. “They were following this story like hundreds of thousands of other people seeing tweets, retweeting, and we don’t believe it was the same.”
The lawsuit seeks to vindicate a core American principle, the right to be let alone, Lassiter Saunders said.
“I would like to refocus the attention from politics to the principle of, private citizens should have the right to live their lives privately,” she said. “The elected officials need to be mindful and do a better job of not just speaking out because they have the authority to do so.”
The lawsuit states that because of the hostility of some people in the public, Loudermill has “injuries and actual damages including mental distress, sleeplessness, anxiety, and agitation.”
He rarely goes out, Loudermill said.
“I’m just getting all the attention still,” he said. “ I just want them to pay for that.”
This story was first published at missouriindependent.com.
