We've all seen some really dumb lawsuits... but here's another.

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/finan...e_down&chan=db

I'm sorry... what? Let's back that up... the kid's friend fell asleep. Ford gets sued? I think I'm missing something...

Whether you believe that they are unstable or not... that should not be relevant. The kid could have died in ANY OTHER VEHICLE if his friend fell asleep.

Seriously... I give up on people.

 

I think if I was on the jury, I would have done Ford a favor-and killed the other jurors for being idiots.

 

Shouldn't the friend be sued for manslaughter?

 

Not necessarily sued... but he should be charged for Involuntary Manslaughter... since it's his negligence that caused the accident.

 

Yeah, that's what I meant.. charged. It's been a while since I've taken a PoliSci class.

 

ack, sry clearing my throat.

i am surprised at you, you goll dern armchair quarterback. a freakin' jury of normal bright people heard all of the evidence and testimony that you did not hear and according to you, because they are freakin' idiots, awarded the money to the plaintiff.

it is people like you and me who hear the evidence in cases like this, not idiots. apparently you are smarter than they are to have a preconceived notion of the truth.

obviously, you have an opinion of who is right and who is wrong in this situation, whether or not you know the facts or the law in this case. we all generalize....and sometimes, f the facts, f the law....i feel it in my bones, right? you sir, cannot sit on a jury i try and seat....a jury of people who will listen to the facts and make a ruling.

apparently you have the answer whether or not the law is spelled out to you and virtually dictates the verdict. you and you alone are the arbiter of the truth.

juries are shown the facts of the case as interpreted by both sides of the issue: then they rule in favor of who presented the better truth.

"The Associated Press/MIAMI
By JENNIFER KAY
Associated Press Writer

"Ford agreed there was a problem but blamed defective Firestone tires for the Explorer's handling and stability problems.

Hall was reclining in the front passenger seat and wearing his seat belt when the Explorer rolled over four times on State Road 93 in Collier County on April 20, 1997. He was ejected from the vehicle and died at the scene. The driver of the 1996 Explorer, Melahn Parker, was charged with careless driving. Parker attempted to regain control of the vehicle, but a handling problem with the Explorer caused it to turn sideways, which triggered the roll-over, Kaster said.

"Ford vehicles are supposed to be designed to slide out in an emergency situation, not roll over, and that's according to Ford's own internal criteria," Kaster said. "But the Explorer is one of their vehicles that will not meet their own criteria. It will roll over."

The jury ordered Ford to pay the family $1.2 million in damages, and $60 million for the pain and suffering of Hall and his mother, Joan Hall-Edwards.

you surprise me by taking sides. it shows your lack of depth. (not in a bad way but a telling way)

 

People will sue over anything.

 

Well your assuming that the people on the jury were smart, when in fact they could be the dumbest people on the planet. Ive served on a jury once, and I'll tell you that there were some pretty dense people who didnt quite understand what "Without reasonable doubt" meant.

 

i don't want anyone on my jury not smart enough to get out of jury duty....(j/k).


btw, "Reasonable doubt" is the standard of proof used in a criminal trial, meaning a jury convicts because there is no other explanation for what happened. no reasonable person could believe it happened any other way. the other side of that is it is reasonable to assume someone else did it, the elements of the crime aren't there, etc.

in a civil court trial, meaning someone sues someone, a different standard of proof" is used to assess fault". it requires less proof. it changes the blame to something called a "Preponderance of evidence". the jury makes its ruling based only upon whether it is "more likely than not" that what the plaintiff alleged actually occurred.

there are two different "standards of proof" to prove a case. proof is 99.9999% certainty for criminal cases and only 50.0001% certainty for civil cases.

 

i understand the difference, although i was previously unaware that there were two different standards for a criminal and civil trial. Thanks for pointing that out. Im always up for learning something new.

The point however that I was trying to get to, was that you had also made an assumption. You stated that the jurors were just as smart as you or any other regular person, when in fact none of us have met any of them.

 

Whether Ford admits a problem or not... the other kid FELL ASLEEP. The Explorer didn't make him do that (unless the seats were really comfortable). But if someone falls asleep at the wheel, there's going to be an accident one way or another.

My opinion is just that this family is looking for some money now and want something out of this. Yes, it sucks their son is dead. But why is the friend not charged with anything? Why is no one doing anything about him? Ford is certainly not the only questionable thing in this "lawsuit".

Still a stupid lawsuit IMO. I would have laughed the people out of the courtroom... well, maybe not laughed cause they just lost their son. But I would have told them to sue the family of the driver. He's as much responsible as Ford.

Oh, wait... they probably don't have millions of dollars to give if they win...

 

amazing how everything revolves around money....they just lost a son and now to make things all better they want to see 8 digits in their bank account. people are stupid. i'm ashamed to be a person sometimes

what next?

 

I seriously doubt that after losing their son they cared wether or not they got one penny.

They probably wanted to raise awareness that the Explorer has a rollover problem.

Having 3 kids, I know that if one of them died in an accident that no amount of money would make it allright.

 

so why sue for 60 million? it clearly says

they just want money..

when they get that check, they will thank their son for dying and making them rich and able to live in luxury

 

holy crap give me a frickin cheeseburger so i can gain 200 pounds and sue McDonald's.

 

in a lot of trials the pain and suffering award is set by the jury not the person suing

 

which is usually influenced by a lawyer?

 

Nope cant do that anymore congress done ruled fast food chanis wont be held liable for stuff like that.

 

The driver of the 1996 Explorer, Melahn Parker, was charged with careless driving.

Well, as long as the driver was charged with something...... I am suprised he didn't sue as well.

 

they'll never see it....Ford will keep appealing until a Judge or a jury of actual human beings overturns it.