llamatron Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 I take it all that has happened is the judge has allowed the relatives to sue. All that means is that they can take the child to court. The case may then get thrown out and maybe the relatives will have to pay court costs to the child. some of the cases on Judge Judy are just as ridiculous, there was a case the other day over who got the hoover in the divorce. She threw it out almost immediately Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Prime Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 Why do you constantly refer back to sierra's post? Sierra pointed out some legal facts and as of late no one has attempted to question those points..because those points are valid. The question is, not the points sierra was making but the validity from a moral standpoint legally via the op. It's you that's thrashing about in a kneejerk reaction because you feel that because something is legal it's automatically right. And stop insinuating that this is an American thing by using Sierra as your get out card...this applies to any country with absurd laws. My get out card? Is this a game? I have stated my opinions based on the facts available. Take them or leave them, I am not a politician and couldn't care less whether you agree or not. I am merely putting up an opposing view, I have also said I may be wrong but do not feel I am at present. I would like to see you and the others explain to the judge why he and the US legal system is corrupt and what improvements you would like to make to it. Obviously morality is an opinion and now it seems what constitutes corruption is too. Silly me thought it was the breaking of the established rules for personal gain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Prime Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 I'm 48 and I ride my bike on the pavement. And I don't pay 'road tax'. So there. Once, when skateboarding through a subway, I knocked an old man over, who came round a corner unexpectedly. I hit him really hard. He's almost certainly dead now, but nobody sued me. However, nor did I sue him, for walking without due care and attention. Accidents happen, and we should all accept that. Nobody should have to have due care and attention to idiots on bikes or anything else speeding along pavements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alien Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 My get out card? Is this a game? I have stated my opinions based on the facts available. Take them or leave them, I am not a politician and couldn't care less whether you agree or not. I am merely putting up an opposing view, I have also said I may be wrong but do not feel I am at present. I would like to see you and the others explain to the judge why he and the US legal system is corrupt and what improvements you would like to make to it. Obviously morality is an opinion and now it seems what constitutes corruption is too. Silly me thought it was the breaking of the established rules for personal gain. Well assumptions can get you into bother sometimes...especially when you get all emotional and protective over establishment rules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Prime Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 Well assumptions can get you into bother sometimes...especially when you get all emotional and protective over establishment rules More tabloidisms from the tap room. Where have I got emotional and protective? Simple answer I haven't. This case has no impact on my life, I just find tap room barristers tedious. "American system's corrupt int it", well no not really. If that judgement is wrong it will be overturned. If it was corrupt the judge would be a demagogue who can never be questioned. You in fact are the emotional one: "because I say so!" Who do you think you are? Yoda? The Pope? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindrift Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 the child could have been walking and bumped into the woman casuing her death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alien Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 More tabloidisms from the tap room. Where have I got emotional and protective? Simple answer I haven't. This case has no impact on my life, I just find tap room barristers tedious. "American system's corrupt int it", well no not really. If that judgement is wrong it will be overturned. If it was corrupt the judge would be a demagogue who can never be questioned. You in fact are the emotional one: "because I say so!" Who do you think you are? Yoda? The Pope? I'm as cool as a cucumber mate. Well it's not because someone else has 'said so'. If I feel it's corrupt I'll say so...duh! I never said the American system is corrupt...you just made that up. I said "sickeningly corrupt system". Without explaining that one to you I'll let you assume once again what I was implying...then again you probably already made your mind up. As i've said..no one is questioning the law, only you. Others are questioning the morality as applied to a 4yr old. You on the other hand base your superior knowledge on American law with " I know enough about judges" without qualifying what it is you do know. My issue isn't whether it's turned over or not but how much has been milked before that decision arrives. As for "tabloidisms from the tap room" whatever that is... I don't think I've read a rag in years unless I waiting for a bacon butty from the local sarni shop. You on the other hand do come over as a proponent for the tabloids cause. Calm down son you'll give yerself a hernia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alien Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 the child could have been walking and bumped into the woman casuing her death. And whooooooooosh! in kicks the system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yog Sothoth Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 Nobody should have to have due care and attention to idiots on bikes or anything else speeding along pavements. Pedestrians have a duty of care to other sidewalk users, such as skaters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Prime Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 I'm as cool as a cucumber mate. Well it's not because someone else has 'said so'. If I feel it's corrupt I'll say so...duh! I never said the American system is corrupt...you just made that up. I said "sickeningly corrupt system". Without explaining that one to you I'll let you assume once again what I was implying...then again you probably already made your mind up. As i've said..no one is questioning the law, only you. Others are questioning the morality as applied to a 4yr old. You on the other hand base your superior knowledge on American law with " I know enough about judges" without qualifying what it is you do know. My issue isn't whether it's turned over or not but how much has been milked before that decision arrives. As for "tabloidisms from the tap room" whatever that is... I don't think I've read a rag in years unless I waiting for a bacon butty from the local sarni shop. You on the other hand do come over as a proponent for the tabloids cause. Calm down son you'll give yerself a hernia. I can see how sickeningly corrupt system is entirely different from corrupt. I think it's quite obvious what someone would assume you are implying from that. You are projecting again, I am calm. I don't reply "because I say so!" to people who question my views o wise one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.