IBJNews

Tyco: No proof Lilly thieves used security report

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A security company being sued over the theft of $60 million worth of pharmaceuticals from an Eli Lilly and Co. warehouse in Connecticut in 2010 insists there is no proof the thieves used a report it prepared detailing the building's security weaknesses.

Attorneys for Tyco Integrated Systems LLC denied the allegations Thursday in a motion to dismiss the lawsuit filed in federal court in Hartford by Eli Lilly's insurer, National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh. A spokesman for Tyco, based in Boca Raton, Fla., previously said the company doesn't comment on pending litigation.

"Instead of backing its grave allegations with factual support, National Union merely assumes that, because burglars circumvented and disabled a TycoIS alarm system ... they necessarily must have had confidential information about the facility's security system and that TycoIS must have failed to safeguard this information," Hartford attorney Amy Markim wrote in the motion.

Tyco also said National Union filed the lawsuit too late under Connecticut's statute of limitations and Lilly's contract with Tyco.

In what authorities called the biggest heist in Connecticut history, thieves cut through the roof of Indianapolis-based Eli Lilly's warehouse in Enfield, about 20 miles north of Hartford. They rappelled to the floor, disabled alarms, used a forklift to load pallets of antidepressants, antipsychotics and other drugs into a truck and drove off.

Two brothers from Miami, Amaury and Amed Villa, have pleaded not guilty to federal theft and conspiracy charges in connection with the March 2010 burglary.

Tyco, formerly known as ADT Security Services Inc., was sued last month by National Union, which is seeking $42 million in damages — the amount of the drug maker's insurance claim.

National Union said the thieves cut a small hole in the only safe point of entry in the roof above the master control room, which was identified in the ADT report as being inadequately monitored. The suspects rappelled to a precise location in the warehouse that was invisible to detectors and cameras, National Union said, adding that the getaway truck was parked in the only loading bay outside the view of surveillance cameras.

National Union also suggested that Tyco failed to safeguard its customers' security information before other burglaries in which thieves used confidential information about ADT's security systems. Tyco denies those allegations as well.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Typical ADT - Tyco
    If you have ever tried to do anything with these guys they live up to nothing, want the reoccurring revenue contract and bash you when there product doesn't do what it is supposed to, or in this case assist others in stealing 50Mil

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. How can any company that has the cash and other assets be allowed to simply foreclose and not pay the debt? Simon, pay the debt and sell the property yourself. Don't just stiff the bank with the loan and require them to find a buyer.

  2. If you only knew....

  3. The proposal is structured in such a way that a private company (who has competitors in the marketplace) has struck a deal to get "financing" through utility ratepayers via IPL. Competitors to BlueIndy are at disadvantage now. The story isn't "how green can we be" but how creative "financing" through captive ratepayers benefits a company whose proposal should sink or float in the competitive marketplace without customer funding. If it was a great idea there would be financing available. IBJ needs to be doing a story on the utility ratemaking piece of this (which is pretty complicated) but instead it suggests that folks are whining about paying for being green.

  4. The facts contained in your post make your position so much more credible than those based on sheer emotion. Thanks for enlightening us.

  5. Please consider a couple of economic realities: First, retail is more consolidated now than it was when malls like this were built. There used to be many department stores. Now, in essence, there is one--Macy's. Right off, you've eliminated the need for multiple anchor stores in malls. And in-line retailers have consolidated or folded or have stopped building new stores because so much of their business is now online. The Limited, for example, Next, malls are closing all over the country, even some of the former gems are now derelict.Times change. And finally, as the income level of any particular area declines, so do the retail offerings. Sad, but true.

ADVERTISEMENT