Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 5, 2016, 5:30 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Good days and bad days

Topic closed. 19 replies. Last post 12 years ago by acronym007.

Page 2 of 2
PrintE-mailLink
MillionsWanted's avatar - 24Qa6LT

Norway
Member #9517
December 10, 2004
1272 Posts
Offline
Posted: March 15, 2005, 8:27 am - IP Logged

I think he had this one coming.

If he wasn't a lottery winner he would probably not have been sued.



The case is of course more complicated than that since it's his money which supposedly is to blame for the drug overdose.

    Avatar
    New Mexico
    United States
    Member #12305
    March 10, 2005
    2984 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: March 15, 2005, 8:59 am - IP Logged

    It says a lot about the parents of the young man, trying to cash in on the death of their son to win their own lottery.  Those people know full well the rich man had nothing to do with what the youth did to himself.  They know, must know, that if anyone's culpable in the death, it's as much themselves as anyone else, because they did have considerable influence in helping him become what he chose to be.

    Reminds me of a joke from the 1970s.  A guy had a great insurance policy that included a 2 week mourning trip to Hawaii and a lot of cash if he cashed in, which he did. 

    When the widow got back from Hawaii she told her friends, "Fred died, but I got brown as a berry!"

    On another thread someone was bemoaning the sins of some super-rich female, Martha somebodyorother, I think, obviously feeling a lot of anger and involvement in her problems.  This fetish we have these days with knowing the intimate details of the lives of the famous and wealthy, examining them, judging them, expecting a higher standard of honesty and behavior from them than we can reasonably expect from ourselves, from our families, from our neighbors and local government, is a matter that causes me considerable puzzlement.

    What this Jack guy did, or didn't do is between himself, his conscience and the law.  How'd we come to care anything about him, about what he does in his life, what happens to him, or his?  He's a nobody for all of us unless he's a personal friend or acquaintance.  Same with all those other richies.

    We'd all like to be wealthy or we wouldn't be playing the lottery.  I wonder how we'll like it if we win and find there are a lot of people we've never heard of who are mostgawdawfully concerned whether we let the toilet seat down after we finish, leave it up.  People who know nothing but what they read in the papers or see on television, but consider themselves qualified to pass judgements on our every step, or misstep.

    I'd guess if it happens to us we won't like it much, at all.  But we'll have earned what we get.

    Jack

      Avatar
      Oregon
      United States
      Member #11764
      February 23, 2005
      46 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: March 15, 2005, 9:08 pm - IP Logged

      If Jack knew that Brandi was using drugs, giving her access to all that money was tantamount to handing her a needle and saying "shoot up." Depending on what he was aware of he might bear some responsibility for this.

      I disagree with much of the anti-lawsuit here. I know a pile of money isn't going to bring anybody back from the dead, but sometimes money is the only thing people understand and they need a blow to their wallets to be deterred.

        RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
        mid-Ohio
        United States
        Member #9
        March 24, 2001
        19824 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: March 15, 2005, 9:20 pm - IP Logged
        Quote: Originally posted by Blalron on March 15, 2005


        I disagree with much of the anti-lawsuit here. I know a pile of money isn't going to bring anybody back from the dead, but sometimes money is the only thing people understand and they need a blow to their wallets to be deterred.



        I see your point, if the parents of the sdventeen year old get a pile of Jack's money, it will help them to understand their responsibilities to know where their under age kids are spending their nights and what they are doing.

        RJOh 

         * you don't need to buy more tickets, just buy a winning ticket * 
           
                     Evil Looking       

          Avatar
          USA
          United States
          Member #1849
          July 15, 2003
          265 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: March 15, 2005, 10:13 pm - IP Logged

          While most of us are agreement on this topic and of not suing. There is one point I want to bring that Jack is or couold be responsible for and that is where the dvent(s) took place. While he is wealthy, regardless of his wealth if an indiviual allows knowingly or otherwise criminal acts(drug use) to take place on their property they may be hald liable in some form civil or criminal. We all know that these people know Jakc is rich like the rest of the world but despite his weath he coould have been sued for this regardless. I'm a Real Estate professional and believe me, you are can be responsible for happens on your property. Ignorance of the law is no reason for breaking the law. Not knowing the speed limit does not mean you travel at any speed you want to. Jack's ignorance of the drug use doesn't forgo his obligation to "know" these drug parties were occuring on his property. Make sense? There is plenty of case law that will put Jack in the corner on this one. We agree the 17 year was responsible for his own actions and Jack too was responsible for his.