I looked for this story on UrbanLegends.com, but couldn't find anything on it.
What are you doing, reitz?
I go to court day in and day out for my job, and this story sounds so fishy.
This bit about a lawyer telling a potential client that they are fvcked?
Maybe this person told you that, but that would be her version after not getting the answer she wanted.
The person is getting attacked verbally and physically, and needing to be told that it would be a good idea to report it? Who is this person you describe? Jerry Springer fodder?
Either you are baiting the forum, or you are so emotionally wound up that your thoughts are clouded and you don't see the real picture.
When people come to court with stories like this, they get made fools of by judges, with a bombardment of "why didn't you........?" and "didn't you think to........?" questions.
What are you doing, reitz?
I go to court day in and day out for my job, and this story sounds so fishy.
This bit about a lawyer telling a potential client that they are fvcked?
Maybe this person told you that, but that would be her version after not getting the answer she wanted.
The person is getting attacked verbally and physically, and needing to be told that it would be a good idea to report it? Who is this person you describe? Jerry Springer fodder?
Either you are baiting the forum, or you are so emotionally wound up that your thoughts are clouded and you don't see the real picture.
When people come to court with stories like this, they get made fools of by judges, with a bombardment of "why didn't you........?" and "didn't you think to........?" questions.
Spikesoldier
Diamond Member
- Oct 15, 2001
- 6,766
- 0
- 0
I don't think she's in trouble... Isn't suicide illegal? You can't be sharged with wrongful death unless you were the reason that the person died. You can't blame the object of an obvious obsession for the suicide! And the mother is really skrewed. If there are actual bruises, then charge her with assault and get her in jail.
Sounds like the amily was pretty messed up. I bet the mother or father is abusive. I wouldn't worry about the court case, except it'll cost the 23 yr old victim a lot of money.
Why are parents so damn irresponsible?
Sounds like the amily was pretty messed up. I bet the mother or father is abusive. I wouldn't worry about the court case, except it'll cost the 23 yr old victim a lot of money.
Why are parents so damn irresponsible?
ThePresence
Elite Member
- Nov 19, 2001
- 27,727
- 16
- 81
<< isn't it also true that when most people tried to kill themselves that guys would use more deadly technique such as a gun, and girls would use pills? >>
Not everyone has a gun. Pills are easier to get your hands on.
<< First of all, he would have had to eat many many pills to destroy his liver to the point of failing like you say it is. It is possible to destroy the liver to the point where it will fail in the future, >>
Tylenol is a major liver poisoner, exceed the maximum of 4000mg a day (8 extra strength) and you will damage your liver. It's not unbelievable for someone to take a whole bottle of tylenol and chase it with a bottle of alcohol. Alcohol is also a liver toxin, leave a bottle of tylenol and a 1/5 of alchohol in your stomach long enough to digest a chunk of it (4+ hours) and you will probably end up in a coma with impending liver failure.
This in and of itself is not unbelievable.
<< She cannot be prosecuted or sued for spurning his advances. If he off's himself that's his tough luck. She had nothing to do with it unless she handed him the drugs. >>
OK, I'm just getting in on this (been off ATOT for a while). While I'm interested in an update as well on all this, I do have one comment.
When I was in college, getting my journalism degree (meaning I'm not a lawyer, so this is NOT legal advice), we had to deal with the tape recording issue all the time. It's a state-by-state law on the issue, whether participants have to be informed of the tape recording or not. In Oregon, only one party has to be informed (and that party can be the person making the recording, so the person on the other end doesn't have to know). However, that varies state-to-state.
This was in Pennsylvania, correct? According to http://www.rcfp.org/taping/, it's a FELONY (18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5703 (1999)) to "to intercept any wire, oral or electronic communication without the consent of all participants, and it also is a felony to disclose the contents of a communication when there is reason to know those contents were obtained through an illegal interception." The site above comes from The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, though I could probably confirm this elsewhere, if need be (my journalistic background is telling me to confirm it twice, but I'm too lazy and I'm at work). If the lawyer is worth their salt, that tape would be deemed inadmissable, and wouldn't be able to be used as evidence.
Just my two cents...keep us posted on this.
When I was in college, getting my journalism degree (meaning I'm not a lawyer, so this is NOT legal advice), we had to deal with the tape recording issue all the time. It's a state-by-state law on the issue, whether participants have to be informed of the tape recording or not. In Oregon, only one party has to be informed (and that party can be the person making the recording, so the person on the other end doesn't have to know). However, that varies state-to-state.
This was in Pennsylvania, correct? According to http://www.rcfp.org/taping/, it's a FELONY (18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5703 (1999)) to "to intercept any wire, oral or electronic communication without the consent of all participants, and it also is a felony to disclose the contents of a communication when there is reason to know those contents were obtained through an illegal interception." The site above comes from The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, though I could probably confirm this elsewhere, if need be (my journalistic background is telling me to confirm it twice, but I'm too lazy and I'm at work). If the lawyer is worth their salt, that tape would be deemed inadmissable, and wouldn't be able to be used as evidence.
Just my two cents...keep us posted on this.
The tape recording is irrelevant, really.
And there is VERY, VERY, VERY little chance that a claim of IIED (Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress) is going to survive summary judgement (here, being a dismissal for lack of establishing the elements of the claim).
See this is how it works. In regular terms, someone files a complaint alleging that a tort (a civil wrong) has occured, and a demand for relief. The defendant then submits an answer either denying the claim, or putting forth an affirmative defense (yes I did it, but I should be excused because). Throughout this point (and afterwards), the defendant can make a motion to dismiss the case on various grounds. The relevant dismissal would be summary judgement - that, the plaintiff can not/has not established the elements of the crime.
For IIED, Plaintiff has to sufficiently show the court that:
1. Defendant desired to inflict severe emoitonal distress, knew that his/her aciton would almost certainly result in severe emotional distress, or acted in reckless disregard of a high risk that severe emotional distress would come about from such actions.
2. Plaintiff has indeed suffered severe emotional distress (and I mean severe)
3. That Defendants action caused the plaintiffs severe emotional distress
It should be obvious that elements 2 and 3 are not provable despite tape recording. There is NO DUTY TO ACT in America's law even when you can help someone. That is, if you saw a baby crawling off a cliff, and all it would take was for you to get up, walk over, and pick it up, you wouldn't be legally bound to do so...you could laugh as it fell off and died. No duty, neither criminal nor civil. There are exceptiions however, and one exception is when the plaintiff and defendant share a special relationship. But have no fear, the law's definition of relationship is not simply some highschool love, but traditionally recognized ones - employer/employee, husband-wife, mother-daughter, etc. Girl - Crazy Ex-Boyfriend isn't one of them.
But back to the procedural explanation....
Now, if the plaintiff can sufficiently show evidence of each of the element, then the court will allow the claim to continue, and THEN the normal trial (as you see on TV) with jury, and witnesses and all that cr*p start. See, what most don't know is that there is the preliminary "sufficiency" test that has to be passed.
Now, this is all in simple terms and there are alot of conditions/exceptions/and strategic motions that can be done, but for our purposes are irrelevent.
The main problem is that, your friend will need a lawyer even for the preliminary "Stuff" and despite dismissal of the claim, it might cost some bucks.
Hope this helps.
(This isn't a lawyer's advice, merely a law students. That said I'm confident that it is correct. )
And there is VERY, VERY, VERY little chance that a claim of IIED (Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress) is going to survive summary judgement (here, being a dismissal for lack of establishing the elements of the claim).
See this is how it works. In regular terms, someone files a complaint alleging that a tort (a civil wrong) has occured, and a demand for relief. The defendant then submits an answer either denying the claim, or putting forth an affirmative defense (yes I did it, but I should be excused because). Throughout this point (and afterwards), the defendant can make a motion to dismiss the case on various grounds. The relevant dismissal would be summary judgement - that, the plaintiff can not/has not established the elements of the crime.
For IIED, Plaintiff has to sufficiently show the court that:
1. Defendant desired to inflict severe emoitonal distress, knew that his/her aciton would almost certainly result in severe emotional distress, or acted in reckless disregard of a high risk that severe emotional distress would come about from such actions.
2. Plaintiff has indeed suffered severe emotional distress (and I mean severe)
3. That Defendants action caused the plaintiffs severe emotional distress
It should be obvious that elements 2 and 3 are not provable despite tape recording. There is NO DUTY TO ACT in America's law even when you can help someone. That is, if you saw a baby crawling off a cliff, and all it would take was for you to get up, walk over, and pick it up, you wouldn't be legally bound to do so...you could laugh as it fell off and died. No duty, neither criminal nor civil. There are exceptiions however, and one exception is when the plaintiff and defendant share a special relationship. But have no fear, the law's definition of relationship is not simply some highschool love, but traditionally recognized ones - employer/employee, husband-wife, mother-daughter, etc. Girl - Crazy Ex-Boyfriend isn't one of them.
But back to the procedural explanation....
Now, if the plaintiff can sufficiently show evidence of each of the element, then the court will allow the claim to continue, and THEN the normal trial (as you see on TV) with jury, and witnesses and all that cr*p start. See, what most don't know is that there is the preliminary "sufficiency" test that has to be passed.
Now, this is all in simple terms and there are alot of conditions/exceptions/and strategic motions that can be done, but for our purposes are irrelevent.
The main problem is that, your friend will need a lawyer even for the preliminary "Stuff" and despite dismissal of the claim, it might cost some bucks.
Hope this helps.
(This isn't a lawyer's advice, merely a law students. That said I'm confident that it is correct.
)I smell premeditated malicious intent veiled by the "infliction of mental anguish..." charge. Sounds like the basketcase's family orchestrated this for monetary gain.
I do not know how the US legal system works, but I find this absurd that anybody could indiscriminately charge anyone. How could the would-be plaintiff party can even afford legal fees for this civil suit + jury? Doesn't sound like their wealthy by any stretch of the imagination.
:frown: Plus this thread sounds fishy too. Hmmm
I do not know how the US legal system works, but I find this absurd that anybody could indiscriminately charge anyone. How could the would-be plaintiff party can even afford legal fees for this civil suit + jury? Doesn't sound like their wealthy by any stretch of the imagination.
:frown: Plus this thread sounds fishy too. Hmmm
This sounds like BS to me. If it were true, it'd be on the news. It's way beyond the McDonald's coffee thing, and that was in the news for a while.
Anyway, if it were true, and the guy dies, there's no witnesses to anything. If he doesn't die, there's no wrongful death suit.
Anyway, if it were true, and the guy dies, there's no witnesses to anything. If he doesn't die, there's no wrongful death suit.
<< There are plenty of stories that receive little or no "airplay", as it were. >>
Very true. Whether or not the thread is actually true (I'm beginning to doubt it), it is certain that this very kind of case has happened before to others; that is the sad part.
Son of a b!tch! I had responses typed up for some of the recent comments until I hit the back button. I'm heading out in a few minutes, but I'll try again when I get back.
See the first post for an update.
See the first post for an update.
<< And how exactly could it be that a guy makes a statement as claimed on the same date with another statement contradicting it? I don't get it. >>
Neither do I. It shows exactly how much of a nutjob this guy turned out to be. I wouldn't exactly classify him as an abuser, but he's definitely a creep.
<< I have to be honest with you and tell you that I don't believe you for a second. >>
Thanks
<< First of all, he would have had to eat many many pills to destroy his liver to the point of failing like you say it is. It is possible to destroy the liver to the point where it will fail in the future, but usually it just makes the liver less functionate, not totally functionate to where you will die immediately. >>
It really depends on what you take. I'm not sure what type of pills this guy swallowed, but I know that tylenol and alcohol can easily destroy the liver.
<< I have a brother who tried to kill himself with pills and his liver is totally fine, >>
That's good. I'm betting he took a different combination of chemicals.
<< not to mention the fact that I have hepatitis c, and you make it sound as if I have no chance to survive with a compromised liver. >>
I never said anything about your liver, just that this guy is in a coma with a failing liver. In no way does that relate to your situation.
<< You my friend are full of crap. >>
Thanks, that means a lot coming from someone who knows nothing about me
<< It wouldn't hurt if you could prove it by showing the newspaper clipping that would have been printed about the attempted suicide. >>
Umm...attempted suicides rarely make the newspaper. I suppose I could try to "prove" my story better, but I'd rather not take the chance that one of the kiddies here would be able to identify any of the participants. Plus, I really don't care if you believe me or not...everyone who knows anything about me knows exactly what to believe.
<< Call me a skeptic, but I don't believe much that I read on the net because i've seen so many people proved wrong it's not even funny. People just feel the need to lie needlessly on the internet >>
Ditto. The anonymity makes it impossible to verify every story, so you have to take everything at face value. That's why I'm not here to win everyone's respect and admiration.
<< I looked for this story on UrbanLegends.com, but couldn't find anything on it. >>
There's a reason for that
<< This sounds like BS to me. If it were true, it'd be on the news. It's way beyond the McDonald's coffee thing, and that was in the news for a while. >>
You need to remember that this case involves three private individuals in small towns in PA and West Virginia. This isn't some old lady suing one of the largest corporations in the world for a massive multimillion dollar sum. I'm not sure what damages they're seeking, but it's pretty tough to recover several million dollars from an unemployed graduate student. When's the last time a $40k or $60k lawsuit made the national news?
Thanks much for the update, reitz. I'm glad it's looking better for her now, and hopefully the situation will continue to improve.
Edit: I mananged to f*ck up the formatting codes again, as usual.
Edit: I mananged to f*ck up the formatting codes again, as usual.
Wow, I'm glad things have started to look more optimistic. How much are the legal fees for something like this?
HomeBrewerDude
Lifer
- Jan 18, 2001
- 14,465
- 1
- 0
good update. good news.
<< Once that's taken care of, Amanda is looking to possibly file a suit of her own to recover her legal fees. >>
I would suggest she just cut her ties completely and forget about the money. In this case, I don't believe there is anything wrong with just walking away from the situation even if there is a chance to recoups a few dollars. Of course, if she has ten of thousands in legal fees I might reconsider. Anything under 5k, though I say just forget it.
<< Once that's taken care of, Amanda is looking to possibly file a suit of her own to recover her legal fees. >>
I would suggest she just cut her ties completely and forget about the money. In this case, I don't believe there is anything wrong with just walking away from the situation even if there is a chance to recoups a few dollars. Of course, if she has ten of thousands in legal fees I might reconsider. Anything under 5k, though I say just forget it.
<< How much are the legal fees for something like this? >>
I have no idea, and I'm somewhat afraid to ask
<< I would suggest she just cut her ties completely and forget about the money. In this case, I don't believe there is anything wrong with just walking away from the situation even if there is a chance to recoups a few dollars. Of course, if she has ten of thousands in legal fees I might reconsider. Anything under 5k, though I say just forget it. >>
I kinda feel the same way. If it were me, I think I'd just eat the loss and be done with it.
SociallyChallenged
Elite
- Mar 22, 2002
- 10,483
- 32
- 81
It seemed related. I hope your friend is doing ok.
<a target=new class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=517&u=/ap/20020326/ap_on_re_ca/canada_suicide_conviction_1">Teen Convicted in Suicide Case
</a>
Mon Mar 25, 8:43 PM ET
VANCOUVER, Canada - A Canadian court convicted a 16-year-old girl Monday of criminal harassment in connection with the suicide of a classmate.
Prosecutors accused the girl of bullying Dawn-Marie Wesley, 14, who hanged herself in November 2000. In her suicide note, Wesley named some former friends who prosecutors said taunted and bullied her in the days before her death.
The 16-year-old, who name was not released because she is a minor, faces up to six months in custody or two years probation. Officials did not say when she would be sentenced.
A second 16-year-old was acquitted. Youth Court Judge Jill Rounthwaite said prosecutors failed to prove their case. A third girl has yet to go to trial.
Prosecutors said the other teens had accused Dawn-Marie of spreading lies, prosecutors said.
Cindy Wesley said she was satisfied with the judge's verdict in her daughter's death, saying it will alert teen-agers that they must think before they issue threats.
"I believe that from Dawn-Marie's experience in her short little life that there has to be a learning," she said.
>>
Be nice to people.
<a target=new class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=517&u=/ap/20020326/ap_on_re_ca/canada_suicide_conviction_1">Teen Convicted in Suicide Case
</a>
Mon Mar 25, 8:43 PM ET
VANCOUVER, Canada - A Canadian court convicted a 16-year-old girl Monday of criminal harassment in connection with the suicide of a classmate.
Prosecutors accused the girl of bullying Dawn-Marie Wesley, 14, who hanged herself in November 2000. In her suicide note, Wesley named some former friends who prosecutors said taunted and bullied her in the days before her death.
The 16-year-old, who name was not released because she is a minor, faces up to six months in custody or two years probation. Officials did not say when she would be sentenced.
A second 16-year-old was acquitted. Youth Court Judge Jill Rounthwaite said prosecutors failed to prove their case. A third girl has yet to go to trial.
Prosecutors said the other teens had accused Dawn-Marie of spreading lies, prosecutors said.
Cindy Wesley said she was satisfied with the judge's verdict in her daughter's death, saying it will alert teen-agers that they must think before they issue threats.
"I believe that from Dawn-Marie's experience in her short little life that there has to be a learning," she said.
>>
Be nice to people.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter