Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ledded" data-source="post: 2024702" data-attributes="member: 12744">Err... sorry.&nbsp; Folks that are used to me on these boards know that I sometimes... ramble, a bit.&nbsp;Short version:&nbsp;We can't prove or disprove harm incurred to the woman based on the facts we have:&nbsp; we dont have her medical records or even data that shows she had a &quot;reasonable expectation of harm&quot; from people knocking on her door at 10:30pm.&nbsp; All of the anecdotal evidence points to the contrary, but that isnt conclusive.&nbsp; The judge is incompetant if and only if he did not take into effect the two above points, which we do not know if he did or not.&nbsp;Lawsuits for negligence by a company more intent on making toys is far, far different from what we saw here, as you can start a negligence case for a toy company (etc) with the knowledge that they make money first, and safe product second.&nbsp;Lawyers often suck in the eyes of non-lawyers, in that many will point at the results of this debacle and say &quot;look, justice was done because the bad lady is getting her privacy violated to the point of her entire life being up-ended&quot; and think that is ok, while pocketing the large amounts of money they made by inflaming and pushing the whole affair along, while convincing themselves that is &quot;ethical&quot;.&nbsp; And then wonder why there are so many lawyer jokes.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ledded, post: 2024702, member: 12744"] Err... sorry. Folks that are used to me on these boards know that I sometimes... ramble, a bit. Short version: We can't prove or disprove harm incurred to the woman based on the facts we have: we dont have her medical records or even data that shows she had a "reasonable expectation of harm" from people knocking on her door at 10:30pm. All of the anecdotal evidence points to the contrary, but that isnt conclusive. The judge is incompetant if and only if he did not take into effect the two above points, which we do not know if he did or not. Lawsuits for negligence by a company more intent on making toys is far, far different from what we saw here, as you can start a negligence case for a toy company (etc) with the knowledge that they make money first, and safe product second. Lawyers often suck in the eyes of non-lawyers, in that many will point at the results of this debacle and say "look, justice was done because the bad lady is getting her privacy violated to the point of her entire life being up-ended" and think that is ok, while pocketing the large amounts of money they made by inflaming and pushing the whole affair along, while convincing themselves that is "ethical". And then wonder why there are so many lawyer jokes. [/QUOTE]

Verification