The Outrage: Miss Mercy, how do you feel about the fact that in November of 1990 Sammy Lee Cloud was released from prison after serving only two years of a 20 year sentence for burglary?
Miss Mercy: I was delighted! After all, it was probably society’s fault that Mr. Cloud ever engaged in burglary. If he had received more affection as a child he probably would have grown into a worthy member of society.
The Outrage: And how do you feel about the fact that within a week of his release he had raped and robbed a woman in her apartment. And that he raped and robbed two more women, until finally being arrested during another rape and robbery in February of 1991?
Do you feel mercy for the women, sitting innocently in their homes, who were brutally attacked? Do you feel any personal responsibility for the fact that people like you are responsible for sending people like Sammy Lee Cloud back into society, where they ruin countless lives?
Miss Mercy: Well…we all have to learn to forgive and forget.
The Outrage: Probably hoping that, this time, he could put him away for good, the judge sentenced Cloud very harshly in 1991:
- 2 life sentences for sexual assault
- 60 years for burglary with intent to commit rape
- 25 years for possession of a firearm by a parolee
In fact, these were the maximum allowable sentences. However, after 8 years in prison, amazingly enough, Cloud is eligible for parole. How do you feel about that?
Miss Mercy: Everyone deserves a second chance. Sometimes even a third or fourth chance.
The Outrage: Miss Mercy, let’s change the topic a little. We’ve been talking about the criminal justice system, and your general point of view that the world needs more compassion, more sympathy with those who err, more understanding, and less punishment. Have we fairly stated your point of view?
Miss Mercy: Absolutely.
The Outrage: Then we know you’re shocked by what’s happening in the world of civil law. Greedy lawyers are constantly seeking the equivalent of the death sentence for minor offenses committed by large corporations. Of course, some cynics believe that the lawyers are motivated by nothing more the 30-40% contingency fees.
Miss Mercy: I’m not sure exactly what you’re talking about.
The Outrage: It’s simple: Brutal murderers and rapists like Sammy Lee Cloud are routinely paroled, or otherwise allowed back into society. Their victims almost never receive any restitution. On the other hand, the court system imposes mind-numbingly large fines on corporations for things that would not even have been considered wrong a very short time ago. The “victims” of these civil “crimes” routinely become rich.
Miss Mercy: Give me an example.
The Outrage: Sure, sit back and listen for a moment to the story of how Bob Bellott became the richest insurance agent in Alaska.
A jury in Alaska recently awarded $150 million to Bellott as the result of a disagreement with State Farm Insurance over the company’s marketing materials.
Bob Bellott had operated an insurance agency in Anchorage, Alaska for 21 years. He thought that the marketing materials which State Farm required its agents to use were misleading. However, he signed an agreement with State Farm saying that he would use the materials they provided. When he refused to do this State Farm terminated his contract. Seems fair enough to us; Bellott wasn’t willing to honor his agreement so State Farm ended their relationship.
Of course it wasn’t difficult for Bellott to find a criminally sleazy lawyer, in this case Rick Friedman, who could convince the requisite number of Anchorage jurors to give up watching Oprah for a few days in order to take some money from a big company and give it to him and his client.
(In fact, Friedman has made a profession of this sort of thing; winning $16.5 million, $8.4 million, and $9.6 million in previous cases against insurance companies. Like fishing in a barrel. And there are some real efficiencies involved in suing the same companies over and over again; Friedman can probably just keep using the same “send them a message” closing arguments. But all of this pales compared to the $238 million settlement that another group of lawyers recently extorted from State Farm in a class action case.)
We should also note that, according to State Farm, Bellott’s issue about the “fairness” of marketing materials was a complete ruse. State Farm says the real reason Bellott was fired was because he was running a securities business out of the same office as his insurance agency.
That’s the story Miss Mercy, how do you feel about it?
Miss Mercy: Well, I’m all for giving murderers, thieves and rapists a break, but I draw the line at big corporations. With them you have to just utterly attack, destroy, and annihilate. Take no prisoners – leave no CEO alive. I think Bellott and Friedman are heroes.
The Outrage summary:
- Sammy Lee Cloud – convicted of multiple counts of rape and burglary. Now eligible for parole.
- Four of Sammy Lee Cloud’s rape victims – No restitution, but they may get to meet up with Cloud again if he’s released.
- Bob Bellott – May become one of Alaska’s richest men as a result of violating his contract with State Farm.
- Rick Friedman – Stands to make approximately $50 million from the Bellott case, in addition to his continuing booty from similar cases. Friedman, and the scores of other litigators like him, will make far more money than any employee of the insurance companies that they sue.
There is a general misunderstanding of the judicial system
in this country. This misunderstanding extends to the news
media as well. Both are big businesses. Like all businesses
they exist to make a profit. It is profitable to release “real”
criminal because these people help generate legal fees.
Since these real criminals are defended by Public
Defenders for the most part their defense is paid for out of
public funds in amounts authorized by Judges who are also
lawyers by training and inclination. From this point of view it
only makes sense to repeatedly release real criminals. It
also makes sense to severely prosecute those individuals
like Bernhard Getze who in defending himself from real
criminals killed some of them and therby eliminated a
small number of future profit producers for the legal system.
This profit motive also explains the motives behind the
plundering of America’s corporations by the third branch of
the government. A plundering that in no meaningful way is
any different from good old time piracy. The recent action
against the tobacco companies with billions of dollars in
legal fees is a de facto issuance of Letters of Marque by the
various states. Newspapers too are big business. They profit
by selling ink. The biggest customers of newspapers are
the various lawyer organizations who compose the “news”
we read in print and that we see on T.V. For most of the
history of this nation it was a crime for lawyers to “advertise”
but that law was changed by the judicial brance of government
some years ago.
I am not trying to criticize the profit motive for either lawyers
or newspapers. I am trying to make two points. First,
allowing lawyers to “advertise” is bad law. Secondly, lawyers
are agents of the government and as such they must be
motivated by something other than greed and their numbers
ought to be restricted by law.
let’s have public executions of these criminals. we obviously need more vigilantes because our legal system is $hit. you may say i’m extreme but look at the choice. 1. unsuccsessfully rehabilitate the criminal to do what he does better(at our expense)so he can go out and commit
rape,burglary,murder,drug crimes, and many more offenses. 2. kill them, one quick “tragedy” and it’s over and done. those of you liberals who pity these people think about these things. 1. think because some nice person gave a warm hearted criminal another chance your daughter/wife/niece 1 of 2
2 of 2 gets raped and killed (now imagine the whole scenario and how you and your family would deal with it , sick? yes but it’s something real people really deal with for thier whole life not ten minutes of pondering)2. you can’t fix the psychpathic/sociopathic mind.it may be societys fault, but guess what it’s to late to fix the criminal. this is one thing i tend to respect arab countries for. by the way my hypothetical scenario comes true more often than not, and usually not just one victom. then suing corpoations. mcdonalds got sued for something like ten million dollars, why? cause some stupid person spills coffe 2of 3
3 of 3 spills coffee on herself. what are we paying people to be stupid?! dear god if you can’t face the consequences of your stupidity don’t even leave your house. these people that make careers out of suing people should be thrown into work camps. yes if you have a legitimate reason to sue a company go ahead but don’t rob them of their’s because you’re to fu(^ing stupid to make your own! yes i am extreme in my beliefs, no i’m not a nazi, i’ve just kind of fallen off the right wing.
The so called legal system in this country is completely out of control.
I have in the past used some of the information from this web site to write letters to the threee newspapers in my county. I average a letter a week to the newspapers and normally get one publish in at least one of the papers.
Right now I am raising hell about the low pay of public safety personnel in this county.
Keep them coming.
This is why its called the Criminal Justice System/
“JUSTICE FOR THE CRIMINAL”
Only in America !!!!!!!!
Since the Supreme Court of Canada’s controversial “No means No” decision, many have “weighed in” to the debate. In Calgary, major women’s organizations are trying to shut their members up. I was not allowed ths piece on several forum sites because I used the eff word, which is really what this case is all about!
I’ve just about ODed on outrage over all of this. Sometimes we just want to throw up our hands and say Who gives a S**t?
<b>injusticebusters</b>first posted the decision accompanied by applause for its logic and simplicity. We stand by that.
Wrapped around this debate is discussion about whether Supreme Court Justice L’Heureux-Dubé should have characterized the ignorant remarks of Alberta Judge McClung and whether he should have accused her of driving men to kill themselves and then when he publicly apologized, whether she should have publicly accepted his apology. And on top of all of this the Alberta Crown is seeking to have Ewanchuk declared a dangerous sex offender and defense lawyer Brian Beresh is trying to say his client doesn’t fit the description?
How could I not respond?
These are my observations on the Ewanchuk case
Ewanchuk is a convicted 47 year old rapist who sexually assaulted a 17 year old unemployed woman. She was prepared to pose in scanty costumes to attract customers to his woodworking display and even to give him a massage. She wasn’t prepared to f**k him. Nor did he ask her to. Nonetheless, he threw his body on top of hers and ground his groin against her, threatening to excite her against her will. I call that
violent. And I hope he gets fair due process before they lock him up and
throw away the key.
This encounter might have happened differently if the sex trade was
legal. Ewanchuk might have even got his hundred bucks worth after paying
in advance for clearly stated services.
The Supreme Court made the right decision because they knew very well
that Ewanchuk was a convicted sex criminal. They are experienced jurists
who read the papers and between the lines of court transcripts. The fact
that the phrase “first offence” does not come up in his defence is the
tip-off. While encouraging the citizenry to say what it means in clear
language, the judges should really do the same. Skirting the fact that
the decision was influenced by knowledge or educated speculation about
the defendant’s past adds troubling ambiguity. While claiming to stand
for clarification in the realm of sexual relations, the Court is not yet
prepared to show that the law could also benefit from precision and
truth in its expression.
The debate about this has come down to a suggestion that the choice is
between “seduction” (persuading a person to do something they think is
wrong) and signed binding contracts between partners before the first
touch. Gosh. What happened to all those choices in between?
Is speaking the words before doing the act such a difficult and
unreasonable thing to expect? I’d even suggest full eye contact should
occur at some point in the striking of the agreement. The word sex
should probably come up, if only for educational purposes since the U.S.
President actually believes that receiving a blow-job is not having sex.
It always has stuck me as a good idea when doing anything with another
person, whether fixing a car, cooking spaghetti or any other joint
project, that we have some clear idea of what we are doing. Words are
usually the most efficient way of establishing this.
I grew up in a family where “it” wasn’t discussed and I was very
grateful to the straightforward man who shook me out of the crippling
self-consciousness that comes with such an upbringing. Dumb-striking
shyness often comes from hesitation to discuss birth control and
prevention of disease. This is 1999, folks. Time to get over it.
The Christian coalition says “Just say no” to drugs and to sex outside
of marriage. Good for them. At least they are talking, if only in
monosyllables. I presume than no means no in their lexicon. This is a
brave stance in a world full of of economies based on temptations.
Logically, if no means no, yes means yes. A nice word with a nice ring
to it. A word which is not too difficult to pronounce, by adults who
have attained the age of consent., especially if it follows congenial
conversation. It could turn out to be the sexiest word in the
dictionary! Let the coyness fade away with the hi fidelity record-player
and the typewriter. This is the age of communication, I’m told. So why
don’t we all learn how to do it?
You Outrage writers are funny most of the time but I feel that you have missed your mark on this latest rage. What about when the Exxon Valdez oil tanker spilled oil all over Alaska 5 years ago. The jury awarded punitives of 5 Billion dollars. Now, 5-years later, Exxon has yet to shell out a penny of the 5 Billion dollars. Instead, they have been busy filing appeal after appeal. In fact, a Federal judge recently imposed a larger fine for them impeding the judicial process and failing to pay. I agree, the sentences handed out to people who murder and steal are very lax, but the United States as a country always allow big-business to get away with stuff that is awful.
Rape is, by all accounts, a crime of anger and violence. What made Sammy Lee so angry? Could it have been spending most of his adult life in a cage, at risk of buggery, for property and drug offenses (see the JFA site), at the behest of the self-righteous and self-assured throw-away-the-key crowd you speak for? JFA and its ilk say they want to reform “a criminal justice system that is inadequate in protecting the lives and property of law abiding citizens.” Guess what? It never has and it never will! It exists solely as the modern day equivalent of the Roman gladiatorial games (Lions 1, Christians 0), so that the good, law-abiding citizens can be made to FEEL morally and materially better off by giving the thumbs down sign. You should have named Miss Mercy’s interviewer Miss Fairy Tale. It is morally reprehensible to find psychic gratification at the expense of another human being’s life. Sammy Lee did that, too, and you would have us do the same, all in a vicious circle of catharsis.
So what is my affirmative view? Once you abandon responsibility for your own safety, trusting it to the tender mercies of the police, the courts, the prosecutors, and the turn-keys, you are bound to be as disappointed and psychically needy as the JFA members. Talk softly, but carry a big stick.
Anytime we allow lawyers pervert the legal system, it is our fault because we must legislatively change things.
People have the mistaken idea that to extract high penalities or taxes is a “Robin Hood” mentality. Stick it to the big boys as it won’t cost you but do you think that any company doesn’t pass the extra cost on to its customers is an idiot.
The legal aristocracy must be allowed to contine uabated,as we all owe our freedom and livelihood to this stalwart band of society’s elite.Without judges telling juries exactly what and what is not true or false,or evidence or not evidence,we could no longer be able to distinguish right from wrong.We must continue to make harsher and more severe penalties for infractions like wasting your hard earned money on gambling,or prostitution,or that most henious of crimes-DRUGS.Without these crimes to occupy our police,the prison population would dwindle to the abysmaly low numbers that plague the misguided countrys like Holland.If drugs were legal here,the police would lose most of their incentive to work,as they might be forced to live on their government salries,without the aid of drug lord payoffs.We would be forced to find some other way to compensate them,as their income would be so sharply reduced that violent crime would be their only avenue for arrest opportunity’s.Since violent criminals are dangerous,police could get hurt,so it’s easy to understand why they would just quit making arrests.What would happen to our elaborate prison system if the courts had fewer criminals to prosecute.Obviously,this could create unemployment and rancor amongst those who hold our lives in their hands.Our economic system would falter,as the courts might be forced to incarcerate dangerous criminals who were actually vicious rather than merely self indulgent.Without an expanding base of criminals,we would have to parole even more violent felons,to insure the jobs of the parole authority,and the army of social workers,necessary to insure proper rehabilitation into our great society.The legal nobility must be protected from the scrutiny of the media,who only frustrate their attempts to keep our society pure and chaste,and free from crimes against ourselves.The government would have to find some other place to put the zillions of dollars we need to protect ourselves from self indulgence.To summarize-Experts agree,everything is peachy.Don’t worry-be happy.Your betters are taking good care of you.
I’m outraged about a justice system that allows the wealthy to avoid justice, the killers to walk and the innocent to become the scapegoats for the actions of the evil ones in society. Fifty years of perverse liberalism in our ‘public schools’ is starting to payoff big for our society. Big Business is Bad to these idiots unless it’s a Liberal Big Business, then it’s ok. Example: Tyson Foods, Northwest Airlines, Ted Turner too but they’re Liberal Big Business! Maybe that’s the message – EXTORTION! – if you want to be a “good” Big Business make sure you’re liberal
The legal system is a joke. I could not even find a lawyer to try my personal injury case. Why? Because the buck would not have been fast enough. I had to sue on my own and get clobbered by a legal GROUP. My winnings? Zero. My faith in the legal system? Zilch. The law was set up by lawyers so only lawyers could try cases. If you sue on your own, be prepared to be stripped bare naked in front of the world. What a crock for the crocodiles.
What do you expect from the legal system of toady? Have you not realized that the legal system of the USA does not use the word “justice” at all in its vocabulary?
What kind of idiot jurors hear this cases? Isn’t that the problem? I believe I know when a case ought to be put in a Glad bag and sat on the curb and one that’s geniune, but then I’m rarely ever called for jury duty…You are right to be outraged…what a country!!!
We’r All Mearly Puppetz
Saying z true “Learn the Law to break the Law.”
Murphyz Law—-
Smile….tommorow could be worse.
OUTRAGE IS RIGHT!!! Doesn’t this also coincide with the
lawsuits against the gun manufacturers of America. The sleaze
ball lawyers who are trying to destroy the tobacco companies,
are going for the same result on the firearm industry. Is it the
manufacturers fault that some dirt bag used their product
to commit a murder, robbery, rape, etc. etc.? The whole govt.
needs to put itself aflame, and start over with people who
have slightest amount of brain left to make the right decision.
VOTE FOR 2nd AMENDMENT RIGHTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Right on you are correct
This all makes perfect sence. But it’s not just big dirtbag litigaters and so- called victims who rake in the dough. Cities like my Atlanta make up for their lack of creativity in raising and sheperding capital by suing gun companies for making a legal product. You see, if you can’t abridge someones constitutional rights under the criminal system, then make money off of them in the civil system.
But if you think that’s outrageous, My brother pays child support for a child concieved by someone else during an adulterous affair. During the conception time, he was in deployed oversees. Still, the state of Washington refuses to let him pay for a DNA test to allow him to stop paying for what his dirtbag ex-wife did to him. The child looks so different than he does, that I’m am sure a simple medellian table would prove it can’t be his, but again, the State of Washington doesn’t care. Layers who take retainers from him spend them to tell him that unless huge publicity occurs, he’s screwed. Very fair, huh? Make a guy pay monthly for his wifes affair, and deny him the right to pay to have a test to prove he isn’t the father, and call that due process. Somedays I think we are in fact worse of than many communist countries. Our first ammendment rights have been stretched so that crapping on the flag is a form of speach, and our second ammendment rights to bear arms are under attack every day. Meanwhile, as the government taxes smokers for smoking, no one is being punished for overeating, drug abuse or any other more popular sin. And thanks to the courts, if you are a moron, and scald yourself with a cup of coffe, you will be rewarded for your stupidity and lack of judgement with millions. People who know full well the consequences of smoking whine and cry that they have cancer now, and that tabacco companies are to blame, as if they held a gun to their heads and said “smoke or else”. Next faties who undergo heart surgery will sue Mc Donnalds and other fast food companies because they not only know full well that the colors red, orange and yellow make you overeat, but they contantly try to sell more. So the it will be ronalds fault that someone coudn’t stay away from French fries. The saddest thing that liberalism has brought America is the erosion of rugged individualism and personal responsibilty. People now refuse to be accountable. Honestly, we must hold our politicians responsible for appointing these nitwit judges who fail to throw junk like this right out in the streets. When will people stop defending dirtbags and championing the causes of the moronic, and start looking once again for those conscience driven tools such as right and wrong or common sence and logic. It is truly sad.
The legal community is, as a whole decent. Unfortunately there
are bad apples among us. We have a sleezy DA and a couple
of great criminal attorneys who regularly beat her. Nothing
is better.
I too believe in second chances. I don’t believe in three strikes.
It distresses me greatly that a man who steals a bottle of milk.
is imprisoned. The next year, where things are again difficult
is imprisoned for stealing a little baby food and the third year
he is imprisoned for life for something just as small.
Only things seem to count. People dont.
The miscarriage of justice in the O.J. Simpson criminal trial was my “quickening” into the reality that something is terribly wrong with the modern American justice system. The most recent example being the concurrent Senatorial agreement that President Clinton was indeed guilty of some actions which would send an ordinary citizen to jail…however, “let’s acquit”, exemplifies we exist under the rule of the expedient; the rule of what’s cool at the moment and not the Rule of Law. Thanks to the termites in the woodwork of our justice system, justice is now arbitrary and by that same precedent we all are at risk, Liberal, Conservative and anything in between. It is according to whose philosophy is in power at the moment. By definition: that is anarchy.
Unfortunately the lawyers run the legal system & the Judicial
system and therefore they run us as we are powerless in an adversarial
world.
I believe that we have made a grievous error in according corporations (mostly) the same legal status as we do individuals. A corporation has no morals, no conscience – nor should we expect it to. With such status the only legal recourse is what I refer to as the A-bomb recourse – nuke ‘um into oblivion or leave them be. Nuking them into oblivion (a judgment so large as to cause the corporation to disappear) is a disservice to both the share holders and the recipients of the goods/services that the corporation afforded. Lesser penalties are generally passed on to the consumer (higher prices) or the shareholders (less profitability) or both.
The prevailing theory seems to be that if one nibbles at them enough, then they’ll straighten up and fly right. I believe that they will fly in a different direction if the initial tack has proven unprofitable – but that ain’t necessarily a “right” direction.
In the meantime (usually) – no individual clearly stands accountable – and large, exceeding wealthy corporations become targets for the symbiots/parasites (lawyers and their clients) that can adapt to the corporate biosphere. Whether the charge is with, or without, merit – despicable or commendable – has little to do with any moral standard, only how the game is played. Asking what I think of any given case – without a lot more detail – is like asking what I think about the smell of an some strangers outhouse in August – of course it has an odor, but the odor doesn’t tell me whether the situation is harmful or beneficial.
About 10 years ago we had an unfortunate industrial accident in Alaska. The Exxon Valdez grounded on a reef and spilled several million gallons of crude oil into Prince William Sound. The corporation (Exxon) was held liable and fined appropriately. The captain of the vessel – Joe Hazelwood – was eventually convicted of what amounts to drunk driving and sentenced to some penalties – among which was a large number of hours of community service.. It is my firm belief that the damages paid by Exxon may have served to make some victims whole (more or less) while the purpose (prevention) of all the legal hassle would have been far better served had every officer of Exxon, and every director of Exxon, been sentenced to pick up highway trash along with Joe Hazelwood – day for day.
So far I’ve seen little about corporate lawsuits that impresses me – except for the skill the practitioners. Some suits have, no doubt, done some good for the plaintiffs – and some have left plaintiffs suffering in the dirt (just or unjust). Almost all have enriched attorneys.
If I don’t pay my taxes, they come after everything I own. Yet, the major oil and mining companies pull oil and minerals off federal land, land owned by all of us, and pay only pennies, thanks to the Congressmen they own.
Corporations put out shoddy products that hurt and maim consumers, and the corporate bleeding hearts scream when the corporation has to pay for the damage it has done. It is cheaper for the corporations to pay lawsuits than to correct the problems, since their mega-lawyers and judgements are tax deductible. Just like the limo’s and corporate jets, all tax deductible, but normal Americans can’t deduct bus fare or the cost of the commute to work.
Corporations pay top executives millions and hundreds of millions of dollars a year in salaries and bonuses, Disney pays Eisner $500+ million a year. Every cent of that is tax deductible, so it reduces the corporate tax by a percentage of when they pay him and the other multi-million dollar salary “executives.” Yet, when the citizens ask the
government to force a corporation to clean up an environmental mess they’ve created, the corporate shyster lawyers whine that it will cost millions and that will force it to raise its prices. BULL! [Cut Eisener’s salary in half and the price of tickets at Disney world would be cut in half!!!]
Shedding a tear for corporations that receive all of the benefits of American citizenship and then try to get out of every single responsibility of being an American citizen is absurd. Corporations have worked the tax game to reduce the taxes that they should pay as American businesses, they have worked the legal system — delaying court cases until the citizens involved run out of money. Corporations run the PR game about how the “shyster” lawyers handle cases against them, but the same corporations hire their own shyster lawyers with millions of tax deductible dollars. It is easier to battle the IRS than it is to try to make a major corporation accountable for its wrong doing!
No, very little pity for the poor corporations. Check out the oil industry. The price per barrel of oil plumments to one third of its prior cost, and months later we see a drop in the price of gasoline. The “reason” it takes so long, is that the higher priced oil was still in the “pipeline.” Rumors start about a reduction in the production of oil, and prices go up the next week. The reason that prices go up is that the cost of oil they are buying to replace what they’ve sold is so much more expensive.
American citizens get screwed, American corporate executives make millions in salaries, American corporate taxes go down, and American citizens get to pay and pay and pay.
The legal system is obviously under the total control oa greedy, grasping ammoral lawyers. They are totally uncerned with any notions of fairness, equity, presonal responsibility or anything else, except how many $$ they can extract from someone, something, anybody, anything. Just look at the two moral beacons of the legal proffession, Bill & Hillary C. to see what slime lawyers really are.
Typical liberal pin head thinking and it’s just the beginning.
the justice system SUCKS!
Hello folks
Just read the Outrage about Miss Mercy and her friend.As far as I am concerned everyone is entitled to there opinion,but in this case her and people like her as far as I am concerned are just as guilty of the crimes.These same people are the ones that want gun control so no has any protection against them.As far as lawyers go they have become the scum of the earth in my book.Protect the guilty and the hell with the rest.There my feelings in brief.
Litiagtors, like doctors, are a necessity. Hell, lawyers made most all of the rules in the first place. What I wonder is where did Bob Bellott get his “seed” money from in the first place to pay for Rick Friedman’s initial services (I mean, the whole case did not come to a verdict overnight)? When you need one, you want a good lawyer, and a good lawyers do not come cheap! You get what you pay for in lawyers! So the system stinks. OK. I don’t have a clue what system to replace it with. In the mean time, play the lottery or go to Vegas because that is about as close as any of us will ever get to starting/winning a pot of money with the aid of a slick lawyer.
Using one injustice (an emotional one at that) to condemn or to justify another unrelated injustice is ridiculous, disgusting and irresponsible. You have done it again!
We feel that William Shakespeare was right when he said, “Kill all the Lawyers”
We think that this is an outrage that lawyers can get away with stealing other peoples money.
The version you learned as a kid:
The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter. The grasshopper thinks he’s a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away. Come winter, the ant is warm and well fed. The grasshopper has no food or shelter so he dies out in the cold. Moral: Hard work and thrift pays off.
The modern American version:
The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter. The grasshopper thinks he’s a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away. Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the ant should be allowed to be warm and well fed while others are cold and starving. CBS, NBC and ABC show up to provide pictures of the shivering grasshopper next to video of the ant in his comfortable home with a table filled with food. America is stunned by the sharp contrast.
How can it be that, in a country of such wealth, this poor grasshopper is allowed to suffer so? Then a representative of the NAGB (The National Association of Green Bugs) shows up on Nightline and charges the ant with green bias, and makes the case that the grasshopper is the victim of 30 million years of greenism. Kermit the Frog appears on Oprah with the grasshopper, and everybody cries when he sings “It’s not easy being green.” Bill and Hillary Clinton make a special guest appearance on the CBS Evening News to tell a concerned Dan Rather that they will do everything they can for the grasshopper who has been denied the prosperity he deserves by those who benefited unfairly during the Reagan summers. Richard Gephardt exclaims in an interview with Peter Jennings that the ant has gotten rich off the back of the grasshopper, and calls for an immediate tax hike on the ant to make him pay his “fair share.”
Finally, the EEOC drafts the “Economic Equity and Anti-Greenism Act,” retroactive to the beginning of the summer. The ant is fined for failing to hire a proportionate number of green bugs and, having nothing left to pay his retroactive taxes, his home is confiscated by the government. Hillary gets her old law firm to represent the grasshopper in a defamation suit against the ant, and the case is tried before a panel of federal hearing officers that Bill appointed from a list of single-parent welfare moms who can only hear cases on Thursdays between 1:30 and 3 PM. The ant loses the case.
The story ends as we see the grasshopper finishing up the last bits of the ant’s food while the government house he’s in, which just happens to be the ant’s old house, crumbles around him since he doesn’t know how to maintain it. The ant has disappeared in the snow. And on the TV, which the grasshopper bought by selling most of the ant’s food, they are showing Bill Clinton standing before a wildly applauding group of Democrats announcing that a new era of “fairness” has dawned in America.
The legal system simply stinks.
There needs to be a cap of 1 Million Dollars on ALL judgements, no matter
personal or corporate.
What a crock! I am sick and tired of civil suits from every
Tom, Dick and Harry that wants a little money from their own stupidity!
It all boils down to greedy people and greedier lawyers. Ans as for
the criminals that just get a slap on the wrist, send ’em back to do their time!
Hell, throw them under the jail and leave them there!!! They are a much
bigger menace to society that big business. If criminals knew that there
were no second chances, many of them would not commit crimes
in the first place. And to all those out there who do stupid things
and then look for a civil setlement, HERE’S YOUR SIGN!!!
The legal system is run by a bunch of liberals that want to blame everything
but the true cause of the problem. Look at what states have the fastest
diminishing crime stats, they are states that are run by
conservitives that are pushing and punishing those convicted.
Arkansas as an example, Since the election of Gov. Mike Hukabee
more death row inmates have been put to death than
in the intire Klinton regime as gov.
Of course, the legal system is an outrage. What can we
expect when we let lawyers make and then interpret the
laws? And the system is so complex now that only they
can understand how to do any of it, which is the overall
plan, anyway. It is incomprehensible that the intelligentsia
of this country continues to not only allow this, but support
those lawyers by huge contributions. We, as the consumer
are the ones that really truly pay.
Yes, I agree that there is a major problem with our legal system. Anyone that doesn’t see it as such is not living in this universe. But there is one major reason that this exist today. In my mind this reason could be none other than the blatent refusal and indiffrentism to the fact Jesus Christ Reigns as Christ our King over our judicial system. When we agree to this the other problems will resolve on their own.
thanks
I appreciate your concern for the
the multi-billion dollar
corporations who should not be
find $150,000,000 dollars out
of there $50,000,000,000
pockets for minor crimes such
as dumping toxic waste unsafely
to save some money that they don’t
need and having unsafe working
conditions that cuase people
to be killed. Know the Union Carbide
Corporation? They were found guilty
IN INTERNATIONAL COURT of negligence that cost over ONE
THOUSAND PEOPLE THEIR LIVES in
a HUGE chemical plant explosion.
Where is your pity to these people,
huh? What about their families
who had to watch Union Carbide get off
with a minor fine, and no one went
to prison. Trust me, $150 MILLION
is CHICKEN FEED to these people.
I can not really get across how little
money this is, relative to the size of
their pockets. The Justice System is incredibly corrupt,
but it is because the corporations own it.
Aim your anger at the real criminals, the people
that are willing to sacrifice the lives of innocent people
cause they just CAN’T GET ENOUGH MONEY. These
jerks own the polititions and the courts, and as for that
psyco Bob, do you really want a vigilante to blow you away
because he thinks (without even making an investigation)
that you have commited a crime. OBVIOUSLY that freak Sam should
be in a mental instituion for life. However, he can only kill
so many. Corporations in the Untited States get away with
murder EVERY DAY and no one cares, not even the media, cause they are
owned by the corporations. Stop talking about INNOCENT CORPORATIONS, you
idiot. THEY’RE the murderers!
Excuse me, Barry Dentler. I totally
agree with your discription of the
media and the legal system. However,
when I read about “plundering” of
American corporations, I was shocked.
Don’t you relise that the corporations
make more money on the crimes they commit
than they are fined by the system. This
is because the Corps OWN the system. After
all, they pay for the polititions who make
the laws. They also own the Media almost
entirely. Don’t you know that he who pays
the piper calls the tune?
TO ZACH B FROM CRAZY BOB. I’M SAYING VIGILANTES ARE GOOD A THING AND AM IN NO WAY SUPPORTING CRIMINALS, EXCEPT FOR VIGILANTES (THOSE WHO TAKE THE LAW INTO THIER OWN HANDS) BECAUSE OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM DOES NOT WORK. I REALLY ONLY BELIEVE IN VIGILANTES UNDER A COUPLE OF CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH ARE MURDER AND RAPE WHICH IS THE ONLY WAY I COULD TRULY SEE IT JUSTIFIED. RAPISTS AND MURDERERS DON’T DESERVE TO LIVE.
I think the legal system is out of control. They are taking our rights away without paying attention to our constitution. Most lawyers are blood suckers. Anything to make money and to hell with our rights.
What’s really sad is that none of the above respondents seem to even understand, much less have addressed, the real issues. The above shouting and pouting is all emotion and no reason.
Here’s the trouble: the plaintiff gets both compensatory AND punitive damages from the losing defendant. Punitive damages are supposed to be calculated based on how much money the defendant has — the idea is to make it enough that the defendant is hurt by it, so that he’ll be sure it doesn’t happen again.
In the case of a large corporation, this can mean hundreds of millions, or billions of dollars. In the case of a mom & pop store, it could be a hundred dollars. The inequitable result is that the amount of money the plaintiff gets in punitive damages has NOTHING to do with how much the plaintiff “deserves” for being wronged or injured.
Solution: the maximum of the punitive damages that the plaintiff gets should be limited to three times the “real” (compensatory) damages, plus reasonable legal costs — the balance of the punitive damage penalty should go to the state (and thus to the taxpayers who pay for the courts and the rest of the justice system).
http://www.blueagle.com/
The plug on expecting the right thing to occur
was pulled long ago. So, be ye not surprised
at injustice, but be ye surprised
when the right thing is done.
The first step to reforming the justice system AND reducing crime is to take the men convicted in the dragging death in Texas, chain them up to a pickup, and drag them to their deaths..LIVE on network television. Immediately after the dragging, with cameras focused on the criminals battered, lifeless bodies we inform the rest of the slimy criminals watching that from this day forward, justice will be inflicted on them in precicely the same exact manner in which they terrorized their victims. Their punishment will be chosen by them the minute they commit the crime. What could be fairer then being able to choose your punishment (are you listening ACLU?). I guarantee after watching a few of these, those snot nosed, up and coming young delinquents will stop cold in their tracks. This policy will inflict the notion of consequences for ones actions that their parents obviously couldn’t bring themselves to introduce into their childs lives (we don’t wan’t to damage their self-esteem, you know). The “do what feels good, ignore authority, flower children of the 60’s have growwn up, procreated, and are passing their lack of personal responsibility on to the next generation…aren’t we lucky? Damn I’m glad I wasn’t born until 1967 and missed all that crap!
I think if you have enough
money you can buy the best
legal help that money can buy….
our legal system has gone amuck!. Most judges do not judge, nor do they keep attorneys in line or to the standard of decency. Most attorneys are blood sucking animals. their fees are outrageous. We need tort reform, but how do we get it when they control the very system through which change could occur.
I think the legal system stinks!! You can’t do anything without a lawyer – even if you have court papers already. In July my 14 year old son went to visit his father in Florida, he said he has more fun and freedom there and didn’t come back. Even though I have full custody papers from our divorce, I was told that I had to get a lawyer. The lawers around here want a $1500 retainer fee and $120 – $130 an hour. I explained that I can’t afford it – there was nothing anyone could do.
My friends son broke his back and is entitled to disability. When he went to take care of it he was told that he had to get a lawyer! Why? He has all the paperwork from the doctors and the hospital – the lawyers want 25% of what he gets!!! Legal Aid won’t handle it.
I do believe that our laws are for the most part okay but when posing as a juror in a mock courtroom scene I was ask to decide a most difficult case: An open bottle of liquor in the back floor of a car that belonged to a father. His 16 year old son jumped in the car for a quick trip to town when the father arrived home. On the way to town he was stopped for speeding and the officer spotted the open bottle. The law says “no open container” so he was arrested. Is this fair? What would you decide? But when it comes to classic cases like O.J. Simpson I feel the defense lawyers made a mockery of our judicial system. I could go on and on starting with Richard Jewell and the FBI, I am so disgusted with all the mess with the President of our great country and found it very refreshing to hear Charleton Hestons great speech he gave at Harvard Law school. I am wondering…can we ever get it back?
If this country brought back absolute truths and feared God we would’nt be in this mess. As Jesus Christ said: It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
Mans Law
This is law based on what’s right and wrong at any given moment. Mans law changes to suit the need of the influential, the people of a special majority or minority, the special interest, the ones with a need that could only be satisfied by taking from others what they themselves think is harmful or wrong. Mans law in many ways can never satisfy everyone, it may help and destroy all at the same time. It takes two to interact with a law, the ones that obey it and the ones that defy it. In the case of the latter, man often has to create new laws and penalties to enforce and prevent circumvention of the original law. This often introduces new restrictions on those that the original law may never have even applied to. If you go further with this concept a gradual deterioration of rights and freedoms is inevitable and man is judged not by what he is, but by who he is and by those who judge themselves as better than he. This is very dangerous for everyone because, the value of human life then becomes cheap. This is where a foundation of unchangeable laws and absolute truths must come into existence. Let’s bring God back into this country and teach our children of him and they will become our new leaders, judges, lawyers, teacher etc…
I have long contended that we have a “legal” system but no “justice” system. It is the Achilles heel of our government and may well destroy the American dream.
I think the legal system is totally screwed up, if the president can commit adultery and purjury and get away with it what does that show about the US court system? Also letting murderers and rapists go on parole????? What happened to an eye for an eye? In my opinion I say let them critters fry, and not let them walk out of prison with just a slap on the wrist….
Speaking of irresponsibility, how about reporting conclusively with only a smattering of facts, plus a huge portion of 1990s glib?
Bob Bellott and dozens of other insurance agents have been terminated during recent years because insurance companies are reneging on their agents’ contracts’ provision that their agents are independent contractors. The companies want them to be independent contractors for taxation and benefits purposes, but de facto employees for purposes of control.
The contract says State Farm insurance must be the agent’s principal occupation; it does not specify sole or exclusive occupation.
The office is not State Farm’s office; it is entirely the agent’s office to the extent of 100% of all operating expenses and 100% responsibility for the purchase or lease of the facility.
The Alaska court has refused to support the contract’s requiring the agent to engage in unethical practice, and has demanded, “You will not treat people this way” in response to State Farm’s firing their agent for refusing to practice unethically.
$150 million is barely over 1/3 of 1 percent of State Farm’s net worth and is equal to about one week’s increase in net worth. Hardly crippling; in fact, some wonder if it’s enough even to slow their recent ruthless behavior toward their agents. It is afterall, the agents, not home office executives, who have built the company to the most successful enterprise of its kind.
The post by Joe above is a
classic example of irrationality
and emotionalism. Tell us
again exactly why an agent
should make 1,000 times more
by going to court than he would
in the normal course of business?
Or why an attorney bringing
these totally bogus cases
should become wealthier than
people that invent products
or produce real wealth?
The thinking that damages need
to be massive to affect
corporate behavior is silly.
Does that mean that every agent
who is “mistreated” is entitled
to some percentage of
State Farm’s net worth? And
tell us again why an agent
going to court and his lawyer
are entitled to make
several hundred times the
annual salary of the chairman
of State Farm?
These cases are motivated
by one thing and one thing
only – rapacious greed on
the part of attorney’s and
their clients.
The fact that large businesses can be attacked the way they are in today’s legal system is completely our fault.
We don’t educate ourselves enough to know anything more than what a lawyer tells us. Think about it this way. If a lawyer stands to make 50 million from a court case he doesn’t care about right wrong, truth or lies. He’s thinking about the new house he’s going to buy. This is the true motivation behind class action suits. Forget fair and unfair and think about our morality as a people. After all the lawyers don’t decide the verdict randomly picked jurys do.
Well, well. It’s clever to be the editor and publicly post a reply to a private response to what was thought to have been a private message, without posting the initial response. I’m learning. My response was:
For your information, Bob Bellott’s life’s work was taken from him for his refusal to cave in to State Farm’s compulsion for control. The termination wasn’t about any real contract violation; it was about Bellott’s refusal to fall into line, the company line. I will repeat for you: The contract does not specify sole or exclusive occupation, it says principal occupation, and the office is not State Farm’s office.
For your further information, $2.7 million was a fair (barely) compensatory award for the loss of future income Bob Bellott would have derived from the agency he built. He was one of State Farm’s leading producers and an ethical man by every measurement accepted by our society. When large corporations determine to gain absolute control of independent contractors (Bellott was not an employee) the very essense of the contract State Farm intself wrote, has been violated.
$150 million will never be paid, but nevertheless a jury has declared, “You will not treat people this way!” State Farm will now have to deal with that and if they want to avoid similar instances in the future, maybe they should consider stopping the abuse of the very people who built the most successful enterprise of its kind and in that process, created the CEO’s job as well as all the other employee jobs at State Farm.
You see, the CEO of State Farm is much more dependent for his job security on the likes of Bob Bellott, than Bob Bellott is dependent on the CEO. A founding executive of State Farm said, “At State Farm, nothing happens until an agent sells a policy.: That means there are no jobs unless agents sell policies and service their customers.
State Farm is a mutual company, meaning it is owned by its policyholders. There are no stockholders. I agree it’s outrageous (I recently wrote an article about it) that policyholders’ funds must be committed to such proceedings. In a stockholder held company, there would be a stockholder uprising and a management bloodletting. Too bad the executives responsible for the unethical behavior weren’t ordered to pay; nor will they be taken to any sort of serious task for their actions. No matter. They will have to at least stop and think bofore continuing their corporate bullying.
I’m for fair and good faith dealing in all aspects of business. If you find that irrational and emotional, that’s just going to have to be your problem.
It stinks
Only two words need be used to describe our nation’s legal system: IT SUCKS!