America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Hell tailgator ; Is that all she got , I mean it wasn't like she was standing up waving her arms and daring the train to hit her . IMHO I think she should have received at least $17.00 more ,her lawyer must really suck. Well all in a days work. JonR

It was clearly Amtrak's fault. The wind had blown away the sign that read "WARNING: Lying on the railroad tracks may be hazardous to your health."

They should have attached it more firmly, like the jury members brains were attached to their asses.

about 8 or 9 years ago a son killed his parents and demanded their homeowners insurance pay his lawyers for his defense.
the insurance company told him to f off.

Charlie ... O.J.s case IS a good example of many things wrong with our system ... here's a guy who is clearly guilty of the crime, yet the police department felt the need to tamper with the evidence in order to really lock him in then the prosecution bungled their job, from first moment to last ...

two examples of their gross imcompetence which I've never yet seen mentioned are (1)the failure in the trial itself to introduce the topic of the Simpsons Akita even though it WAS the first topic during the preliminary hearing ... this is FAR more compelling than anything that was subsequently inroduced, but no one in the DAs office seemed to recognize the relevance and it was not brought out in the trial ... (2) "if it doesn't fit", etc.... take a pair of gloves that fit you well, and try them on ... note the ease with which the glove fits your hand ... then, put on some of those latex Dr exam gloves like they had O.J. put on ... now, try your glove again ... surprised? No one at the DA office even thought of that ... not enough mental candlepower ... a fundamental rule among trial attorneys is to not ask questions that you don't know the answer to, but none of them had tried the glove thing themselves ... they had no idea and STILL don't ... try this yourself and see what I mean.

all that said, he was pronounced "Not Guilty" by the jury ... whether we agree or not, he was not found guilty ... but in a twist of logic that I cannot and never will understand, he was brought up on civil charges and found liable for something he'd been found innocent in court of having done ...

bottom line is the system is badly broken, too little respect exists for the law, but sadly the law does not command sufficient respect ... examples of silliness, inequity, and stupidity abound and as long as they do, we've got a huge and all but unfixable problem.

Sorry about the new paragraph flub... this newbie is still learning the ropes.


-Ted

Makes me feel glad that I live in Kansas... while we don't have the glitz and glamour NYC has I take comfort that Democrats are an endangered species around here.

But then again if someone would award $10 mil to me for some equally insane reason I could be bought off and would switch parties LMAO!!

If you are all really so blindsided by party affiliation to assume that the only reason this woman was awarded $10 million was that the jury was all dem's then I've greatly misjudged your intelligence. There are stupid, irresponsible, and utterly flawed morons in both parties. These clear displays of judicial malfeasance are more closely tied to our society than to party affiliation. We have become a society of covetous drones that only look for ways to rape the system and increase our own wealth, and I guarantee that these behaviors are equally shared amongst both parties.

A related example would be all of the corporate fraud that’s been exposed as of late. One could say with good certainty that all of the exec’s are republicans, so are all republicans fraudulent money hungry pricks??? I would hope not!!



Party battles go both ways, but when you stereotype all of one or the other, you’ve already lost the fight.

LMFAO, nice response, but you're telling the truth, therefore no fraud... ;-P

CW, just answer the question. You know damn well that the jury was most certainly all liberals with the "Entitlement" mentality in full force. As for your astute correlation to the corporate fraud that has recently taken center stage, I believe you will find that both parties have received oodles of funds. Furthermore, the corupt individuals in question KNEW they were twisting the rules in their favor. They also KNEW it was illegal. The morons on the jury don't realize where "public" moneys come from, and they're probably hoping to get hit by a train on their way home so they too can collect. That, my friend, speaks volumes to the differences between the parties.