• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

02/11/UPDATE: DOG IS RESCUED, 7-YEAR OLD SMILING 7-year old crying over dog

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: Pacfanweb
That lawyer needs his ass kicked, repeatedly. I don't care is the kid's father is a pain in the ass.....all he wants is his dog back. There is absolutely NO reason the idiot lawyer flew the dog back to Chicago.
Click to expand...

Anyone with a kid or with a sense of common decency knows that you don't step between a crying son and his father and then laugh at the man's attempt to make things right for his child. You just don't do that. Hell, most cops I know (because nearly every cop has a soft spot for dogs, that's a fact) would probably give you 5 minutes alone with the damn lawyer after hearing the story anyway.
 
Before this forum goes all vigilante on the lawyer, please explain to me what the lawyer is really doing wrong?

First, he finds the dog and tries to make contact with the owners.
He gets the vet. The vet is in Alaska (they are in Florida!) and probably did not return his call immediately (the article doesn't bother to point out how long he had the dog). After holding on to the dog for a few days, one would logically assume that the family in Alaska wasn't going to come back for him. He doesn't know how long the dog has been roaming the streets.
He has the option to drop the dog off at a shelter, where there is a good chance that he'll get gassed, or he can take the dog in.
He pays $300 for vet care for the dog.
The lawyer doesn't respond for a week. Perhaps he never got around to listening to his messages. <sarcasm>It's not like he has a job or anything.</sarcasm>
And after trying to do the right thing, he finds out the owner of the dog files a police report against him.

From the lawyer's point of view, he did everything RIGHT! If I were him, I'd ask for $300 to cover the vet costs and return the dog.... but then some biased reporter will say I'm holding the dog for ransom.

So before you guys start bashing this lawyer, think beyond the scope of the one-sided article. Granted, the lawyer might be acting like a jerk at this point, but how would any of you react to a police report against you and everyone accusing you of dognapping?

And let's face it, this isn't a story about Lawyer vs. 7-year old. It's about a guy who found a dog, paid for the dog's well-being, then had a police report filed against him by a second guy. The second guy just so happens to have a kid that would make a news report sound juicier.
 
:frown::thumbsdown:
Originally posted by: ghostman
Before this forum goes all vigilante on the lawyer, please explain to me what the lawyer is really doing wrong?

First, he finds the dog and tries to make contact with the owners.
He gets the vet. The vet is in Alaska (they are in Florida!) and probably did not return his call immediately (the article doesn't bother to point out how long he had the dog). After holding on to the dog for a few days, one would logically assume that the family in Alaska wasn't going to come back for him. He doesn't know how long the dog has been roaming the streets.
He has the option to drop the dog off at a shelter, where there is a good chance that he'll get gassed, or he can take the dog in.
He pays $300 for vet care for the dog.
The lawyer doesn't respond for a week. Perhaps he never got around to listening to his messages. <sarcasm>It's not like he has a job or anything.</sarcasm>
And after trying to do the right thing, he finds out the owner of the dog files a police report against him.

From the lawyer's point of view, he did everything RIGHT! If I were him, I'd ask for $300 to cover the vet costs and return the dog.... but then some biased reporter will say I'm holding the dog for ransom.

So before you guys start bashing this lawyer, think beyond the scope of the one-sided article. Granted, the lawyer might be acting like a jerk at this point, but how would any of you react to a police report against you and everyone accusing you of dognapping?

And let's face it, this isn't a story about Lawyer vs. 7-year old. It's about a guy who found a dog, paid for the dog's well-being, then had a police report filed against him by a second guy. The second guy just so happens to have a kid that would make a news report sound juicier.
Click to expand...



 
Originally posted by: ghostman
Before this forum goes all vigilante on the lawyer, please explain to me what the lawyer is really doing wrong?

First, he finds the dog and tries to make contact with the owners.
He gets the vet. The vet is in Alaska (they are in Florida!) and probably did not return his call immediately (the article doesn't bother to point out how long he had the dog). After holding on to the dog for a few days, one would logically assume that the family in Alaska wasn't going to come back for him. He doesn't know how long the dog has been roaming the streets.
He has the option to drop the dog off at a shelter, where there is a good chance that he'll get gassed, or he can take the dog in.
He pays $300 for vet care for the dog.
The lawyer doesn't respond for a week. Perhaps he never got around to listening to his messages. <sarcasm>It's not like he has a job or anything.</sarcasm>
And after trying to do the right thing, he finds out the owner of the dog files a police report against him.

From the lawyer's point of view, he did everything RIGHT! If I were him, I'd ask for $300 to cover the vet costs and return the dog.... but then some biased reporter will say I'm holding the dog for ransom.

So before you guys start bashing this lawyer, think beyond the scope of the one-sided article. Granted, the lawyer might be acting like a jerk at this point, but how would any of you react to a police report against you and everyone accusing you of dognapping?

And let's face it, this isn't a story about Lawyer vs. 7-year old. It's about a guy who found a dog, paid for the dog's well-being, then had a police report filed against him by a second guy. The second guy just so happens to have a kid that would make a news report sound juicier.
Click to expand...

<southern twang>'yer wun uh dem damned law-yer luvers, aincha?</southern twang>😉
 
My thoughts exactly ghostman.

He should give the dog back there is no doubt but I can find no fault in his initial actions of caring for and taking the dog back with him.

This whole mystery nun thing is bs and now he is just too proud or something, but initially he did nothing wrong and it should have been handled differently by both parties.
 
Originally posted by: Maleficus
My thoughts exactly ghostman.

He should give the dog back there is no doubt but I can find no fault in his initial actions of caring for and taking the dog back with him.

This whole mystery nun thing is bs and now he is just too proud or something, but initially he did nothing wrong and it should have been handled differently by both parties.
Click to expand...

That and I'd prefer at least an article that at least PRETENDS to be non-biased to get some actual facts rather than actually describing him as "whining" something.
 
filing a police report should be a non-issue. I mean this is a lawyer after all ! He of all people should know that filing a police report doesn't mean anything; as long as once he knows about it he acts responsibly.

a week to a 7 year old is a very long time, I can completely understand why a Father isn't going to wait around to get a response.



 
Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire
Who wants to make a road trip?

I'm generally an insensitive uncaring prick, but I have a soft spot for little kids, puppies, and kittens.

Oh, and I wager if he can spent a couple hundred bucks on caring for a stray dog, he's got a bitchin' car I can steal.

- M4H
Click to expand...

I'm not doing anything this weekend, I game. Need to dig my Easton out of the closet and I'm good to go.
 
little boy wants his dog back. wheres the issue? this guys an a-hole. whether or not he was at first, he sure as hell is now.
 
wow, that article was INCREDIBLY biased. I mean, I don't like lawyers, but I try to be more fair than THAT.

Also, their website SUCKS, I can't believe I went to the trouble to sign up with a fake email address for that crap. Every time I clicked on the link it wanted me to sign in AGAIN.
 
Originally posted by: jagec
wow, that article was INCREDIBLY biased. I mean, I don't like lawyers, but I try to be more fair than THAT.

Also, their website SUCKS, I can't believe I went to the trouble to sign up with a fake email address for that crap. Every time I clicked on the link it wanted me to sign in AGAIN.
Click to expand...

Sucker! 😀😉
 
🙂:thumbsup:

Originally posted by: ghostman
Before this forum goes all vigilante on the lawyer, please explain to me what the lawyer is really doing wrong?

First, he finds the dog and tries to make contact with the owners.
He gets the vet. The vet is in Alaska (they are in Florida!) and probably did not return his call immediately (the article doesn't bother to point out how long he had the dog). After holding on to the dog for a few days, one would logically assume that the family in Alaska wasn't going to come back for him. He doesn't know how long the dog has been roaming the streets.
He has the option to drop the dog off at a shelter, where there is a good chance that he'll get gassed, or he can take the dog in.
He pays $300 for vet care for the dog.
The lawyer doesn't respond for a week. Perhaps he never got around to listening to his messages. <sarcasm>It's not like he has a job or anything.</sarcasm>
And after trying to do the right thing, he finds out the owner of the dog files a police report against him.

From the lawyer's point of view, he did everything RIGHT! If I were him, I'd ask for $300 to cover the vet costs and return the dog.... but then some biased reporter will say I'm holding the dog for ransom.

So before you guys start bashing this lawyer, think beyond the scope of the one-sided article. Granted, the lawyer might be acting like a jerk at this point, but how would any of you react to a police report against you and everyone accusing you of dognapping?

And let's face it, this isn't a story about Lawyer vs. 7-year old. It's about a guy who found a dog, paid for the dog's well-being, then had a police report filed against him by a second guy. The second guy just so happens to have a kid that would make a news report sound juicier.
Click to expand...

 
Originally posted by: Rogue
Originally posted by: jagec
wow, that article was INCREDIBLY biased. I mean, I don't like lawyers, but I try to be more fair than THAT.

Also, their website SUCKS, I can't believe I went to the trouble to sign up with a fake email address for that crap. Every time I clicked on the link it wanted me to sign in AGAIN.
Click to expand...

Sucker! 😀😉
Click to expand...

heh, yeah, I used a mailinator account for sure...didn't think to check bugmenot.com, though.

The problem is that their incompetent net admin doesn't know how cookies work. Every time I tried to log in it wouldn't redirect me to the article.
 
Looks like there was a bunch of details left out (mainly what went on in the conversations between lawyer and father).

I bet they're both just acting like jackasses at this point. More than willing to bet the father said some choice words to the lawyer to piss him off. I know they want their dog back, but hey, I'd do the same goddamn thing if some jackass started bitching at me after I took care of his pet.
 
Originally posted by: edfcmc
Originally posted by: ghostman
Before this forum goes all vigilante on the lawyer, please explain to me what the lawyer is really doing wrong?

First, he finds the dog and tries to make contact with the owners.
He gets the vet. The vet is in Alaska (they are in Florida!) and probably did not return his call immediately (the article doesn't bother to point out how long he had the dog). After holding on to the dog for a few days, one would logically assume that the family in Alaska wasn't going to come back for him. He doesn't know how long the dog has been roaming the streets.
He has the option to drop the dog off at a shelter, where there is a good chance that he'll get gassed, or he can take the dog in.
He pays $300 for vet care for the dog.
The lawyer doesn't respond for a week. Perhaps he never got around to listening to his messages. <sarcasm>It's not like he has a job or anything.</sarcasm>
And after trying to do the right thing, he finds out the owner of the dog files a police report against him.

From the lawyer's point of view, he did everything RIGHT! If I were him, I'd ask for $300 to cover the vet costs and return the dog.... but then some biased reporter will say I'm holding the dog for ransom.

So before you guys start bashing this lawyer, think beyond the scope of the one-sided article. Granted, the lawyer might be acting like a jerk at this point, but how would any of you react to a police report against you and everyone accusing you of dognapping?

And let's face it, this isn't a story about Lawyer vs. 7-year old. It's about a guy who found a dog, paid for the dog's well-being, then had a police report filed against him by a second guy. The second guy just so happens to have a kid that would make a news report sound juicier.
Click to expand...




What if the story was this?

Finds a briefcase with $1 million dollar negotiable bearer bond with the name of the owner and the name of a securities financial advisor in Alaska. (So, lawyer knows the briefcase is not "abandoned, but lost).

Lawyer calls financial adivisor in Alaska and leaves contact info.

Unable to wait, assumes "custody" of briefcase and arranges for its secured transport at a cost of $300

Owner contacts attorney to arrange for pickup.

Lawyer does not return call until 1 week later.

Frustated owner reaches attorney.
The attorney is reluctant to return the briefcase.
Frustrated owner's only viable option is to file a police report.

Lawyer who assumed responsibility for the million dollar briefcase, intentionally gives it "away" to charity despite having full knowledge that the briefcase 's true owner has been found and is awaiting to take posession.
Click to expand...



good analogy- only this is a pet. i think that little boy cares about his dog just a little bit more than a briefcase with a couple bucks in it.:thumbsup:
 
It's funny that judging by the posts here, the lawyer would've been better off just flat out stealing the dog and not contacting the vet in Alaska. No good deed goes unpunished I guess.
 
Just submitted a news tip to CNN citing the Chicago tribune's article on this. Let's see if a little NATIONAL heat over this can make something happen.
 
chances are that mr foley's boss has convinced foley to take care of the problem already

i bet 95% of that firms' clients read the chicago trib
 
I can't believe so many people are flaming on without even knowing the entire story.

Oh a little boy is crying. FRY TEH LAWYERS THAY R EVIL!!!!1
 
Originally posted by: Rent
Originally posted by: MrCodeDude
Anyone read the author's email address? I thought it said jackass@whatever.com 😉
Click to expand...

:laugh:

I thought that at first too
Click to expand...

AHHAHAHA ya me 2!!! i thought i was the only one ahahhaa.

as for the lawyer, I can't say he's being an arse though. I'm sure there's more things to this story that we don't know hehehe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top