I swear I didn't see him coming!!

MyrtleBeachOnline.com | 12/09/2007 | Blind woman hit by car wins $500,000

What do you guys think of this? the guy was drunk, hit a blind woman and
killed her dog, injuring her in the process.

The guy was drunk, so fuck him. The woman lost her dog, which sucks, and was injured, which also sucks.

But $500,000?? That's an awful lot of money for a few injuries and a dead dog.
I assume the car insurance pays for the 433k that wasn't "punitive" funds.
I believe that the man should be punished, especially because he was drunk, but 4 months in jail and a 66k fine? That's a year salary, but well, he was drunk and I'm sure he'll pay it in segments.

What do you guys think about the suing system in the states? Do you think it's a bit ridiculous? I sure do, but maybe I'm wrong.

How ya doing, buddy?

At least she got a settlement. I had a friend who was severely injured by a drunk driver who rear-ended the car she was in. She went to court and watched the guy walk away without even a slap on the wrist.

I don't think money will solve the issue. Wouldn't an outrageous gouge on your personal finances drive you to become even more of a raging alcoholic? I just think people should have at least half a brain to not drive in advance if they know they're getting drunk out of their face.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

It's better than what my dad got. Drunk driver killed him, leaving a single mom and we didn't get any money.

However, that amount of money is outrageous. Maybe enough money for the hospital bills and the cost of a new dog would have been fine.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

You don't think that the victim deserves any sort of compensation for the interruption of normal life and inconvenience caused?

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

That's brutal. Is there no consequence for preventable tragedy?

I was speaking idiomatically.

wtf???

you guys are getting shit on over here, while this woman is getting 500k for a dead dog?

that is absolutely terrible. I guess that shows how fuked the legal system is.


btw, drunk drivers are idiots.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

These guys fabricate these sobs stories, that are complete bullshit, and suffer no consequence. My friend said this guy had absolutely no remorse. I was ready to go to lengths to track him down and curb stomp him. I'm no advocate of violence, but that kind of arrogance was just asking for a serious beating.

FELIPE NO

Originally Posted by Diversion

Tom Hanks didn't get jack shit when Wilson drowned in the ocean, and they were fucking soul mates!

If that was supposed to be a funny remark, it failed.

While I don't think that money can fix everything, I believe that in general, compensation is a good thing. It may help the victim, and it certainly hurts the person who has to pay it.

However, 500,000 dollars does seem like a lot of money for the injuries. I guess it depends on how much money the drunk driver has himself, and if he can pay that kind of money. Then again, maybe he should have thought about that before getting into his car drunk...I can't say I feel sorry for him.

What happened to you, Melomane, is awful. I'm very sorry.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

I don't feel sorry for him at all. Then again, I should mention that in the past, my grandfather has been in an accident twice.

The first time was when he was a firefighter. He was holding the rail on the back of the fire truck, and a guy suddenly swung out, causing the fire truck to suddenly have to stop, with such force it propelled my grandfather into a telephone pole. The result was that he injured his back (which is causing him problems, including breathing problems to this day). He also didn't remember that day for obvious reasons. Because of that, the judge said he couldn't press charges.

The other was about ten years back. My grandfather and grandmother were in their car. Another guy in one of those huge trailers backed up right into them and broke my grand father's ribs from impact. The guy got away from it too when he lied and said he didn't see them.

I find it more than appropiate for that type of settlement. If it will get people to actually use their brains, and also show people that they ARE responsible for their actions, and that some judges will actually punish a person when good logic and evidence shows that they should, then maybe it will cause some of the above tragedies to cease.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

It seems like a lot, but also what is the emotional connection between the lady and the dog? Okay, my comment was bad, but the idea behind it is the fact that taking someone out of the picture that a person cares about can actually cause a lot of emotional stress, and I don't know how much it costs to train a dog, but no doubt that factors into the decision as well.

What if it was a human life? If a human died, then I feel a lot of us would not see $500,000 as unreasonable, but a lot of people are more attached to their pets than others, especially one she was dependent on.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by Fenix

wtf???

you guys are getting shit on over here, while this woman is getting 500k for a dead dog?

Have you ever thought the dog would been like a family for her? Especially for her, her dog is one of those special trained dog for blinds no? So she could have been really close to her dog.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

That's true. And you never know how much other emotional damage just being run over by this guy did to her.

I understand your comment more now, Diversion.

How ya doing, buddy?

I imagine the reason it was only $50 for the dog was because of either insurance or some other agency that was footing the bill for the raising and training of the seeing eye dog. I imagine if she had to pay for the dog out of pocket they would have awarded her whatever the costs would have been for that (though I do feel it's a shame he only has to pay for her cost of the dog and not the actual cost of raising and training the dog).

I was speaking idiomatically.

I think $50 for the replacement of the dog was awfully low, considering.

But after reading the break down of what the jury gave her and why, I think $500k was justified. I also think $67k+ was a little overboard for the punitive damages for the drunkard, but hey. No sympathy on that one I guess.

Most amazing jew boots

It says there in the article that the dog was a seeing eye dog which is obviously very important to her and her lifestyle because of the fact that she is blind.

You know we can argue all day if $500,000 was a bit over the top in terms of it being compensated for her injuries and mental anghuish she had to endure because of this situation. Personally I think it is a bit too over the top. Hopefully with the money she has she will put it to good use to help with her all the physical and emotional pain she is dealing with.

The only thing I will agree with is that its good to see harsher punishments for drunk drivers because I've seen too many times in which drunk drivers will manage to escape the consequences of their actions.

I recall one news story that happened in Newfoundland. A drunk driver had pulled into a gas station to fill up his vehicle. The gas station attendant had noticed that the person was heavily under the influence of alcohol. He decided to notify the police that there was going to be a drunk driver on the road and gave the police the license plate # of that person's vehicle. The person eventually got arrested and charged for impaired driving.

At court the person that got arrested got out of court without any reprucusions whatsoever. I don't understand the full reasoning why but it was something along the lines that court couldn't count on the witnesses testimony because it was through his point of view that he thought the driver was drunk. The cop had pulled over the driver not because he was driving recklessly, but becuase of a tip from a witness that he was under the influence of alcohol. The judge threw that claim out saying that only the police have the authority to pull over somebody for impaired driving through their own observation and not through the observations of a witness.

I don't understand the all the laws that deal with impaired driving, its just what I remember from this incident despite it being a few years ago.

FELIPE NO

Good luck on collecting that half a mill. Tis all I'll say.

How ya doing, buddy?

Originally Posted by Fenix

MyrtleBeachOnline.com | 12/09/2007 | Blind woman hit by car wins $500,000

What do you guys think of this? the guy was drunk, hit a blind woman and
killed her dog, injuring her in the process.

The guy was drunk, so fuck him. The woman lost her dog, which sucks, and was injured, which also sucks.

But $500,000?? That's an awful lot of money for a few injuries and a dead dog.

The way I look at it he killed her dog which is far more valuable than any amount of money. And for what? Just because he felt like neglecting simple safe driving practices. I'm not usually one to support this kind of lawsuit, but pets are practically family members and in this case the dog was also very important to her daily life as well.
I say she earns the right to leave the guy hurting.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Listen here, buddy. If you think $500k for plowing a woman already fucked enough (since she is already blind for fuck's sake), then you must not get out much regarding lawsuits. Bear in mind several fucked up cases including a lady who sued McDonald's for millions simply because of a lap-burn from her coffee.

1) The guy was drunk. It's not like she stubbed her toe on the dude's table while visiting and went "OMG "
2) It's a seeing eye dog. The article itself mentioned that the dog's training costs OVER $50k. These aren't cheap dogs to train.
3) I've known two blind people within the course of my life, and they loved their dogs like family. I also come from a family wherein caring for pets like that is pretty normal in my opinion. She could very well see it like the fucker killed a family member and got off with only four months in jail.
4) He has the nerve to claim not guilty. That just rubs me wrong.
5) She broke a leg for starters which will be hard as fucking hell to rehab. Plus, can you imagine a blind person getting around using crutches or a wheelchair? Makes it kind of hard to use a cane or get guided by a dog, don't you think?
6) He pulled a hit and run. Come the fuck ON. The rat deserves this.

Considering the hospital bills, emotional stress, and extreme inconvenience that the bastard dealt out to this already inconvenienced woman, I don't cast it as an unfair amount. Hell, I'd question it if she DIDN'T sue him. If she sued him for even more, I wouldn't have a problem with it. And this is coming from someone who normally doesn't approve of lawsuits. This is a VERY just example of one from what I can tell.

It's hardly like this was an innocent man that got sued for $10 million over nothing. This guy genuinely inconvenienced this woman's life and deserves to get fucked up the ass with a bat over the whole thing.

Also, I figured you posted this topic seeking opinions, but you complained as soon as folks griped against your position on this. I suggest against seeking moral high fives over such a shitty stance on something like this.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by Gechmir

Bear in mind several fucked up cases including a lady who sued McDonald's for millions simply because of a lap-burn from her coffee.

punative damages are punative, no sense in suing mcdonalds for $50

mcdonalds being knowingly negligent - this has happened before like 700 times according to evidence

mcdonalds lawyers were disrespectful in court

third degree burns on her genitals jesus christ

appeals court talked the award down from something like $2.5 million to less than $500k, which apparently happens all the time

It's nothing against you, the rest of your post was fine, it's just that the McDonalds case is a really good soundbyte for people who didn't do their research and I'm sick of hearing about it.

As for the rest of you fucks who thinks a blind hit-and-run victim who suffered, among other things, a head injury doesn't deserve every penny she can get from the asshole - fuck you forever. Climb a wall of dicks. It's a fucking travesty that Melo's family didn't get a similar award but that doesn't mean other victims and their families shouldn't get every dime they can. What the hell is Fenix talking about here:

Quote:

wtf???

you guys are getting shit on over here, while this woman is getting 500k for a dead dog?

that is absolutely terrible. I guess that shows how fuked the legal system is.

differences in scenarios, differences in courts, in jurisdictions, in local law, in defenders and prosecution, bitches, 99 problems, etc

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Yeah, but the McDonald's lady brought it upon herself =o She had the HOT coffee between her legs, while driving, and on the cell phone if I remember the case. Stop me if I'm wrong. This blind woman was hit by a drunk driver, and I assume that he was the one at fault, given the inebriated status.

Not sayin' that third degree burns to the gal's dance-floor are pretty lol, but rather that she brought it upon herself entirely, as far as I know. But I've said my bit :O

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Originally Posted by Gechmir

She had the HOT coffee between her legs, while driving, and on the cell phone if I remember the case. Stop me if I'm wrong.

Sure. She was in a stationary car, using her legs to stabilize the coffee cup while she opened it, which is how it spilled. Her only mistake was presuming the coffee wasn't hot enough to cause third degree burns - coffee brewed at home and in many other resturaunts is a good 40 degrees cooler than the coffee that had burned her. It was neither safe to drink nor safe to spill, clearly.

cellphone is a new one on me. this was 1992 - if anyone had cell phones, they were not elderly women. Urban legends are crazy dude.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Originally Posted by The_Melomane

Maybe enough money for the hospital bills and the cost of a new dog would have been fine.

Restitution shouldn't be enough. How can the cost of a new dog be enough to make up for what someone feels after losing a dog. I don't know about some of you, but most every person I know that owns a dog treats them like family.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Any amount of punitive fines would be fine with me. As it is, drunk driving really ought to be prosecuted as attempted manslaughter, because that's what it is - attempted murder through negligence. There's too much of an attitude that DUI is a hand-wavey offense like speeding or littering.

FELIPE NO