Well the details of what transpired between him and the dad aren't clear so i cant comment but a rape victim going sex toy shopping the day after the alleged event is very suspicious to me.
YES!
- Thread starter Lord Vutulaki
- Start date
Well the details of what transpired between him and the dad aren't clear so i cant comment but a rape victim going sex toy shopping the day after the alleged event is very suspicious to me.
If he isn't going after the father for the rape, but going after him for defamation that's two seperate cases. Its far from the most frivilous lawsuit ever filed.
Definitely not. The most frivolous lawsuit I can ever remember was the guy who was drunk, and high driving while talking on the phone. He hit a tow truck driver on the side of the road and died, wasn't wearing his seatbelt either. His family then attempted to sue the bartender form the restaurant he was drinking in, the manager of the restaurant, the owner of the restaurant, the tow truck driver for being on the side of the road, and the woman whom the tow truck driver was stopped to help. Yes, I'm serious.
That's the problem with todays society, everyone wants to blame someone else for their fuckups.
Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk
Can you imagine the basis for a lawsuit being "Well, if your car hadn't broken down, the tow truck wouldn't have stopped there. So that's your fault and we're suing you."
The fact they were even allowed to file a suit like that is ridiculous. That family deserves to have a countersuit where they lose everything.
My work involves a lot of tort law and negligence, worst ive seen is a burglar successfully suing a commercial property owner fir injuries sustained by falling through the roof.
Judge ruled that a reasonable person should have assed someone would try to break in and maybe via the roof so the structural integrity of the roof should have been tested.
The law is meant to stop people setting booby traps not this kind of shit.
Judge ruled that a reasonable person should have assed someone would try to break in and maybe via the roof so the structural integrity of the roof should have been tested.
The law is meant to stop people setting booby traps not this kind of shit.
How'd they know the guy was a burglar?
He admitted to it, dude fell through a roof with a bag containing house breaking implements at 03:00 in an industrial estate, he appeared in court via video link from prison.
Another fucktard got half a million for falling out of his prison bed haha
Fuck our legal system
Oh, so he was found guilty of breaking and entering?
Yeah he admitted to it, he got paid cause admittedly our client's roof was fucked, had rusted through and he was aware of it and had been served an OH&S breach notice and hadnt done the repairs within the allotted time.
We have had some major tort law reform since but some cases still slip through. The reforms came to be because of a case that involved a kid diving into a sandbar at the beach and a local council get sued the fuck out of dodge even though they had signs up asking swimmers to self check conditions before diving in..
In that case it's kind of legit. Could've been an HVAC guy on the roof working legit and fallen through onto a customer.
HVAC guy would have had to sign in at reception and been given a minder who would have told him about the roof issues, purely speculating here which obviously didnt happen in court.
Again it was 0300 and in an industrial estate, dont know if you have them in your part of the world but people go to industrial estates at that time for a couple of reasons i) Bang in the car ii) smoke weed in the car iii) drag race (wide roads for all the trucks) iv) steal shit
I'm not debating what he was there for, he's also serving his time. Don't get me wrong, it's fucked up, but it's somewhat understandable given the circumstances.
Here's what I think should have happened; the property owner should have been fined as a strict liability matter and the crim should have been happy that he lived and got free room, board and medical treatment courtesy of Her Majesty haha
I get what youre saying though in that the owner should have complied with the order hence me wanting to see him fined and the money going into Government coffers and not for the crim to have drinking money when he gets out
Was he sued for injuries, or was he sued for some absurd amount of miscellaneous damages?
Injuries and loss of earnings, I shit you not, he was unemployed and went to jail from the hospital and didnt even have to pay for medical treatment as its all paid for here in the first world.
Even back then we didnt have provisions for "pain and suffering" but he got a couple hundred grand for "mental anguish"
Oh and then we went toe to toe with the client because we tried denying indemnity on the basis that he'd breached the terms of his policy by failing to comply with all government and statutory body requirements, we lost that one haha
Was the deceased in that case a professional athlete? If not, I recall another almost identical case where the players family sued the owner of the broken down car with that exact line of reasoning- if they had not allowed their car to be in such disrepair that it broke down in the side of the road our drunk, speeding son would not have hit the tow truck you had to call
Yes. I believe he was an obscure major league, or possibly minor league pitcher. If memory serves, the sheriff tried to do them a solid and kind of told the family "It was just as accident" and didn't really disclose all the details to them. They eventually demanded to know all the details, and then didn't like the reality of what had happened and began trying to sue everyone under the sun.
Gotta feel for the old man though, as a father of an 8 year old daughter the thought of losing her under any circumstances rips my heart apart.
Parents surviving their kids is just sad.
Parents surviving their kids is just sad.