Page 67 of 111 FirstFirst ... 1757656667686977 ... LastLast
Results 661 to 670 of 1109

Thread: Burglar's family awarded $300,000 in wrongful death suit

  1. #661
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Burglar's family awarded $300,000 in wrongful death suit

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    A non-zero number of people win the lottery too...doesn't make it a good bet.
    It's a pretty safe bet if the wager is how many winning tickets there will be.

  2. #662
    Guru
    nonpareil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    07-04-15 @ 10:36 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,108

    Re: Burglar's family awarded $300,000 in wrongful death suit

    Quote Originally Posted by VanceMack View Post
    since none of us are involved in the jury process, and since there were no criminal proceedings, and since none of us had a relevant bearing on whether or not there WOULD be criminla charges, ALL that remains is opinion. My personal opinion is that a meth addict armed with three knives including one strapped to his leg is a dangerous human being. Meth addicts are not exactly famous for their mental stability and capacity for reasoned rational choices...especially when they are specifically on a mission to get money to score more meth. Id be a little interested in seeing the autopsy photos and just how much brain damage he had suffered. Wicked beastie, meth is.

    I disagree...it ISNT about whether or not laws were broken. The county prosecutor and grand jury spoke pretty clearly on that issue. Opinion on if the law should change...well...isnt that what everyone is expressing? their opinion? As to the civil award...its not really relevant to what the girl needs...what is relevant is what she was deprived of and what the father could reasonably be expected to provide. Anything over a jury award of say...12 bucks...Id say that was stretching things a bit.

    How do you not see the hypocrisy in your own post? On the one hand you think the fact that there was no grand jury proves the innocence of the killers, then the next paragraph you go on to say that the jury award was a stretch. The jury is only right when it suit your arguement, doesn't it?

    After noting that you yourself were not on the jury, and thus not privy to the information they do, you then go on to give your opinion as if it means anything.

    You claiming that they didn't break any law is part of the debate of whether or not law were broken - if someone were to disagree with the jury (which you do when the decision is not to your liking).

    If you think that what she was deprived is of more relevance than what she needs - that's good - it's a fact that she was deprived of a living father by the killers, whether she might want or need him or not, so I think that you at least, should stop using the argument that he was a meth-head dad anyway as a reason against the jury's decision.
    Quote Originally Posted by Free_Radical View Post

    And I wasn't making an appeal to authority, I was making an appeal to the philosophical body of work of the founders, the worth and content of which should be well-known to anyone with a cursory understanding of basic history and philosophy.

    Brian

  3. #663
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Burglar's family awarded $300,000 in wrongful death suit

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    It's a pretty safe bet if the wager is how many winning tickets there will be.
    That's never the wager though. It's a good bet that 3000+ people will die from driving each year too, but what's the chance you'll die.

    See if you skip the statistics, you skip information which is important. Now someone on this thread was raving about flimsy lids or whatever for McDonald's cups. But is 0.000007% really indicative of a design flaw? You can cite the absolute number and say 70/year, it would be a good idea to turn the temp down on that. Not unreasonable. But if you look at the 0.000007% you see that this was not a design failure on McDonald's part, but rather more indicative of operator error.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  4. #664
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Burglar's family awarded $300,000 in wrongful death suit

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    That's never the wager though. It's a good bet that 3000+ people will die from driving each year too, but what's the chance you'll die.

    See if you skip the statistics, you skip information which is important. Now someone on this thread was raving about flimsy lids or whatever for McDonald's cups. But is 0.000007% really indicative of a design flaw? You can cite the absolute number and say 70/year, it would be a good idea to turn the temp down on that. Not unreasonable. But if you look at the 0.000007% you see that this was not a design failure on McDonald's part, but rather more indicative of operator error.
    The chances that any individual will die driving are slim; does that mean that we shouldn't worry about traffic safety? Of course not.

  5. #665
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Burglar's family awarded $300,000 in wrongful death suit

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    The chances that any individual will die driving are slim; does that mean that we shouldn't worry about traffic safety? Of course not.
    And as I said (you were so smarmy against others when they didn't read things you wrote, maybe you should keep that in mind), lowering the temp of the coffee is fine. Taking them to court over the temp of the coffee is fine. But when you go to award a plaintiff, you should keep in mind the proper probabilities since there is information in those. Was it truly a problem is McDonald's cups? No. If they had a real problem, it wouldn't be a .000007% report rate. People in the end must understand a bit of math and statistics, these are important things when trying to quantify a system. You seem like you are most willing to skip over that and completely ignore it. It's unfortunate that one would advocate purposefully the denial of information in such a manner. It is a symptom of what I believe to be the big problem particularly in our judicial system. No one is thinking.

    We should be nominally concerned for traffic safety, but also because of the probabilities involved; I wouldn't freak out about it. It's relatively safe, even though cars kill more people in the US than terrorists.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  6. #666
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Theoretical Physics Lab
    Last Seen
    01-06-15 @ 11:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    25,120

    Re: Burglar's family awarded $300,000 in wrongful death suit

    I've known someone who was struck by lightning too. Does that mean we should force the populace to stay indoors on days even remotely overcast?

    Oh by the way, the chances of getting struck by lightning? Much higher than someone spilling hot McDonalds coffee on their dumb selves.

  7. #667
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Burglar's family awarded $300,000 in wrongful death suit

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    And as I said (you were so smarmy against others when they didn't read things you wrote, maybe you should keep that in mind), lowering the temp of the coffee is fine. Taking them to court over the temp of the coffee is fine. But when you go to award a plaintiff, you should keep in mind the proper probabilities since there is information in those. Was it truly a problem is McDonald's cups? No. If they had a real problem, it wouldn't be a .000007% report rate. People in the end must understand a bit of math and statistics, these are important things when trying to quantify a system. You seem like you are most willing to skip over that and completely ignore it. It's unfortunate that one would advocate purposefully the denial of information in such a manner. It is a symptom of what I believe to be the big problem particularly in our judicial system. No one is thinking.

    We should be nominally concerned for traffic safety, but also because of the probabilities involved; I wouldn't freak out about it. It's relatively safe, even though cars kill more people in the US than terrorists.
    I'm not ignoring it at all. I'm saying that it is beside the point when they knew that on average 70 people were getting seriously injured every year as a result of their too-high coffee temperature. That's the point that you are ignoring.

  8. #668
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Burglar's family awarded $300,000 in wrongful death suit

    Quote Originally Posted by Gipper View Post
    I've known someone who was struck by lightning too. Does that mean we should force the populace to stay indoors on days even remotely overcast?

    Oh by the way, the chances of getting struck by lightning? Much higher than someone spilling hot McDonalds coffee on their dumb selves.
    No, but it does mean that, e.g. public pools should not allow kids to swim in electrical storms. It's also a bit easier to lower the temperature of a coffee pot than it is to prevent lightning.

  9. #669
    Farts in Elevators
    OscarB63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Alabama
    Last Seen
    09-06-14 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,526

    Re: Burglar's family awarded $300,000 in wrongful death suit

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    It's also a bit easier to lower the temperature of a coffee pot than it is to prevent lightning.
    and then you'll get some retard suing for false advertizing because the coffee isn't "hot" and some jury of idiots will award them $$$$$$$
    The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.

    An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.

  10. #670
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Burglar's family awarded $300,000 in wrongful death suit

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    I'm not ignoring it at all. I'm saying that it is beside the point when they knew that on average 70 people were getting seriously injured every year as a result of their too-high coffee temperature. That's the point that you are ignoring.
    No, I'm NOT ignoring it. Are you reading what I write, or are you just cherry picking and then making up the rest? I have said, please read because this is getting annoying, the people is cause enough for concern. That it was grounds to bring lawsuit against McDonald's and that it is fine to take them to court because of it. The woman did have valid reason to go to court. I even previously state (near to when we got on this tangent) that I would not have absolved McDonald's completely of wrong doing. There would be no market response since the probability of this happening was in the noise, you can use the courts to force the response. That's not a bad thing. I need you to pay attention, to read, and to think because some of you more emotional type seem to believe I'm saying something I'm not.

    The absolute value is fine, it too has information and was pertinent to the court case as it demonstrated that McDonald's has known that at least on rare occasion their coffee was so hot that it could cause significant damage. I'm not ignoring that number. My contention was the initial award because that was completely out of line with the rest of the case. The judge had to in a sense "fix" it. That number was an emotional response, not a rational decision. A jury must above all be rational. And it is in this last and final stage in which that probability is really going to come into play. It does have information, and it does have information that is related to LIABILITY. And that's what these courts try to decide, yes? So it's not beside the point. Some people are spouting problem with flimsy lid or whatever. Is it a problem? Is it McDonald's fault? This is where that ratio is really becoming important because it can demonstrate fault. But what that ratio said is that there was no structural problem with the cup/lid and that the vast majority of people are able to consume McDonald's coffee unharmed. There were limited reports of people burning themselves, it's in the noise. So rationally, do you believe that McDonald's should have moved, that it should have had some form of market response to the noise? No, it's not reasonable to assume that. Therefore, while McDonald's does bear fault because they did now that on RARE occasion people burned themselves, it is unreasonable given the occurrence of that related to the amount of coffee sold that they would on their own change that behavior. Furthermore it demonstrates that the burn rate is dominated by operator, not equipment.

    See how both come in? See how I'm using both, not ignoring one? This is assimilation of data into a logical and reasonable argument process. This is what needs to go on. People need to think.

    I'm not ignoring those 70 a year. I'm saying that because of the injuries sustained, that there are multiple cases of this happening; there is more than enough reason to bring this case to court. I do not advocate legislating away a person's ability to access the courts, nor limits on awards from juries; I believe the woman had ever right and reason to bring this to court, that McDonald's seriously f'ed up on this one. I even agree that McDonald's shares fault. Now I think because of the probabilities as stake here, it should have been clear that they hold the minority fault; but whatever. But we need to keep juries rational, instruct them well, tell them to think. My contention is that we are losing rational thought in the process, and the original McDonald's award is proof positive of that. Damages were 10,500. McDonald's rationally should have had to share a fraction of that. What we got instead was emotional response by the jury to the tune of what was it like 2 million or something? It can't be excused. You can't get that value from 10,500.

    Do you understand what I am saying now? When Texas passed (was it Texas? I think so) the loser pays law; I spoke out against it. I think it is absurd and damaging to the system. I like the system, I like the jury standard. I want to maintain the system at the high standard it deserves. But it requires rational, logical, emotionless thought. That is essential to weigh fact and fiction and to quantify a case; even more so in criminal case when jury needs to weigh crime and law together. What makes me mad is that I do believe that lawyers currently monkey with the system to produce the exact opposite. It may be the procedure is the same as always, but I think the intent has most certainly changed on the behalf of lawyers. If I were to advocate anything, it would be in this dynamic to limit how much lawyers can engineer juries.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

Page 67 of 111 FirstFirst ... 1757656667686977 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •