Convicted Philadelphia Gay Basher Kathryn Knott Claims Self-Defense In Civil Suit

Like her two co-defendants, Kathryn Knott is contending she acted in self-defense during a high-profile attack on a gay couple in Center City. Knott made the claim in a June 23 court filing in a civil case brought by plaintiffs Andrew Haught and Zachary Hesse, who are seeking at least $500,000 in damages.

The couple is also suing Phillip Williams and Kevin Harrigan for the September 2014 attack at 16th and Chancellor streets; witnesses said the trio used antigay slurs during the incident, which began as a verbal altercation and escalated to a physical attack that left Haught with extensive facial fractures.

In last month’s filing, Wayne Maynard, an attorney for Knott, wrote that she “asserts the affirmative defense of self-defense, and to the extent plaintiffs sustained the injuries and damages as alleged in plaintiffs’ complaint, said injuries and/or damages were sustained while [Knott] was in the process of defending herself from the real and perceived threat of bodily injury arising from the actions of plaintiffs and their friends.” Both Williams and Harrigan raised the self-defense claim in their own filing last year. – PGN

Knott claims to have been in fear of the gay couple and “their friends” Andrew Haught and Zachary Hesse were im fact alone during the attack.

According to the original “Affidavit of Cause”  “words were exchanged” between the two groups of people, with suspect Kevin Harrigan allegedly calling the victims “faggots” several times before a “heated argument developed.” The affidavit also alleges that Knott screamed “faggots” at them and hit one of them in the face.

Read the affidavit below:


Affidavit of Probable Cause, Harrigan/Williams/Knott, 9/23/14

2 thoughts on “Convicted Philadelphia Gay Basher Kathryn Knott Claims Self-Defense In Civil Suit

  1. The gay victims should refuse to settle this case. Make that convicted criminal Knotts go to civil trial and just see what a jury thinks of her and her attorney’s B.S.

  2. Self defense? I guess they feared that being on the same sidewalk might cause them to feel the undue burden of possible “gay contamination,” like getting “cooties” when they were 6 yrs. old!
    There goes their claim (especially Knott) of not having a homophobic bone in their body (or is that “boner” on their bodies).
    They were so in fear that they admitted to restraining and beating one unconscious.

    Knott and her dad just could not let it go. They wanted revenge and through some reactionary detecting, dragging fellow law “enforcers” into the frey, they childishly caused someone to get fired. If they truly wanted to warn the girl to back off, they might have confronted her privately instead of getting her fired.
    It is true that a parody was made of her on the internet but before anyone gets all hot under the collar about that, remember that princess Knott had posted vile slurs on her FB page (ehich she deleted).

    I saw that page before it was taken down and it showed pics of Knott’s drunk out of her orb guzzling down a bottle of booze… oh yeah, that’s the same image that was parodied on the website in contention.

    This should be a slam dunk case and it will be. The atmosphere created by that “pillar of jjustice” from Alabama (otherwise known as the Attorney General) will cause this case to just go away.
    Hell, there might even be a counter suit; walking down the street while gay!

What do you think?

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.