Posted on 07/12/2004 11:06:34 AM PDT by neverdem
The Raleigh News & Observer John Edwards, who made a fortune in personal injury law, after a trial. Of his clients he said, "Their cause was my cause."
The News & Observer John Edwards representing the family of a young girl injured in a swimming pool. He won a $25 million verdict in that 1997 case.
I think it's time to repost this rather good article.
PING
PING
From time to time, I’ll post or ping on noteworthy articles about politics, foreign and military affairs. Let me know if you want off my list.
There's no such thing as an "overnight expert". Anyone who claims to be is what Edwards is: a sheister.
He's a trial lawyer. ANYONE'S cause is his cause if it PAYS well enough. He's a mercenary. National policy will be sold to the highest bidder. Even worse than the Clinton years.
What % of his cases did he win. If he's a loser that's worth mentioning. But, if he won more than he lost - well then he must know something about the law.
I thought I saw some polls yesterday that indicated the 'trial lawyer' is less negative than the 'halliburton exec'.
I also don't recall seeing anything that said Edwards was unethical or a cheat in any of the cases he argued. So, what's the point in bringing up his monetarily successful career?
But don't forget that after he achieved a certain prominence, he was able to select only very lucrative and very strong cases, such as those where the child was injured, rather than died. I think these cases were more about persuading juries than about the law though obviously, to withstand appeal, they had to be legally defensible. But note that in the one case, they had to talk to 41 doctors before finding one who would testify on their side. Suggests that the science was perhaps flimsy at best.
I also don't recall seeing anything that said Edwards was unethical or a cheat in any of the cases he argued. So, what's the point in bringing up his monetarily successful career?
I think the issue is his posturing that he was in this career for "the little guy," rather than to earn a living. Some of his actions (taking cases of brain damage rather than death, opposing legislation that would have offered benefits to other children, rather than just those who sued successfully, etc.) suggest that perhaps it wasn't just the crusading aspect that appealed to him. I don't think the monetary success necessarily is the issue, but it is a bit much, don't you think, for him to claim or imply that he was doing it just for the children? Apparently he isn't content with the monetary rewards he received.... he wants to be hailed as a noble crusader who was only fighting injustice. I think that is the issue.....
. . .sifted through several dozen expert witnesses to find one who would attest to his claims, and opposed state legislation that would have helped all families with brain-damaged children and not just those few who win big malpractice awards
Just a start. . .
Punitive bump.
All this being said, the Republicans will likely get eviscerated if they go after Edwards' trial record. The Democrats aren't stupid, and they will play it up for all it's worth, a la Kerry in Vietnam. I'm confident that Cheney has all the ammunition he needs in Edwards' inexperience and voting record, and his calm rationality is the perfect foil to Edwards' exuberance. Though there's certainly fuel for the fire in Edwards' trial career, it is rather tangential to larger and more important points - Edwards' complete lack of foreign policy experience and ultra liberal voting record - and the GOP would be wise not to touch it.
I am not sure they would get eviscerated, but I think there are better avenues for pursuit. I think the trial lawyer angle is better left to commentators (such as Ann Coulter or Mark Steyn) than to the Republican party proper. I agree with you that the GOP is better off addressing issues such as the lack of experience.
You do know there's a thing called right and wrong don't you?
Just because it isn't specifically illegal doesn't mean it's at all right.
This nation was founded on the principle that we were self governing people that didn't require a law for every possible situation that had to be enforced by big brother.
Complete, total, unadultered crapola. This guy is an absolute disgrace.
Referring to an hour-by-hour record of a fetal heartbeat monitor, Mr. Edwards told the jury: "She said at 3, `I'm fine.' She said at 4, `I'm having a little trouble, but I'm doing O.K.' Five, she said, `I'm having problems.' At 5:30, she said, `I need out.' "
Wow, imagine what Edwards would of said had he been channeling a baby suffering a Partial Birth Abortion.
Oh yeah, didn't he opposed banning that method of slaughter?
Maybe that should say something about what the vast majority of doctors think is the appropriate medical standard of care, and whether it was met in this case.
You can always find a whore if you know where to look.
Seems to me the single best method of tort reform in medical malpractice would be to remove the power of attorneys to shop for expert witnesses. Let the judge appoint the medical experts, with no input from the greedy pirates of the plaintiff's bar.
-ccm
He got his money by wrecking the medical system, harrassing and bankrupting perfectly innocent doctors, and (as the article notes) opposing a relief fund for cerebral palsy victims that would mean more money for sick kids and less money in his own overstuffed pockets.
Look at the numbers: A FIVE-fold increase in C-sections, that's five times more not five percent more-- and this resulted in absolutely no measurable difference in rates of cerebral palsy. Every word he said to the jury was a lie, every word his pet doctor whore said was a lie, every penny he earned from this piracy is stolen money.
This man is a heap of stinking dung, like 99% of all lawyers. They are scum and pirates and wreckers, and I say they are more of a threat to our way of life than drug dealers and Al-Qaeda put together. Bastards. I don't let my kids play at other kids' houses if their fathers are lawyers. Scum. god do I hate them.
-ccm
I think they should make an issue of it at the state level, where it belongs, with state pubbie organizations attacking what the dark side has done to increase medical costs while advocating socialized medicine. The administration and some pubbies in Congress were trying to make tort reform a Federal issue not long ago.
The human punching bag returns.
You are either a complete buffoon, or the alter-ego of Jim R. providing target practice for the Warriors.
"...providing target practice for the Warriors."
If they ever make sense - the 'mighty warriors' - maybe I'll pay attention.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.