Posted on 10/19/2004 7:29:25 AM PDT by esryle
Somebody beat Fieger to the case...
If it was Mom's the she should have swallowed it, cause the driver is usually the one that gets taken in, then she could have croaked and the son would either eventually follow her footsteps or clean up. either way we'd be less two scumbags.
Must have been a lot of cocaine.
I agree no sympathy for people like this.
I'm a little angry today :)
My point stands, if they police, by their own admission, saw him swallow cocaine . . .
To me, that statement OBVIOUSLY has a lot of assumptions in it. I mean, really. THis is FR, we have 1,000,000 post threads based upon a sentence taken out of context on a daily basis.
There are many sides to this story, I started with the assumption (not saying its likely) that if one side were telling the truth, this would be my thoughts on the matter.
Thats it!
Proof of natural selection at work. We need more chlorine in the gene pool.
Thanks, now I have no sympathy (other than what's respectful).
Look, let's use some simple observation here. The cops were obviously pulling the kid over, because he was driving a car that looked like it didn't belong to him.
the kid had drugs on him, and he tosed them in his mouth before the cops probably even got out of their car.
At best, they observed him swallowing "something".
The cops may have asked, what did you swallow? The kid probably said something like, "none of your cracker ass business". Since it's swallowed, there is nothing the cops can do. They don't know what he swallowed, maybe some crack, some pot, a few ludes.
They aren't responsible.
I'm shocked Fieger isn't on the case.
The cops didnt force him to swallow it. It was his choice, just like getting involved with the drug in the first place. Sounds like the kid made alot of bad choices, and now the cops are at fault for it. Seems like mama should have seen the kid was going down the wrong path before it got this far.
they didn'nt read him his Cocaine rights first. He didn't know NOT swallowing them was a legal option...
He denied it. You'd think the kid would know if he swallowed cocaine.
And would he have willingly submitted to an invasive procedure, knowing that if it recovered cocaine, he would be charged with possession of it.?
And if he did willingly submit, would he later sue the hospital and the police for coercion and duress, under which he "reluctantly" submitted to an invasive procedure?
And, let's assume a set of different circumstances, wherein there was no cocaine.
Are the police to treated as an innocent party for acting as "Good Samaritans", for assuming that the youth had swallowed something that might be injurious to his health?
My head is swinning. Someone should refer this to our wanna-be VP candidate, the erstwhile and earnest, John Edwards, Esquire.
Perhaps he can channel the dead youth and find out exactly what happened.
Only a trial lawyer can help us now.
Oh, wait, he's not finished combing his hair.
Get someone else.
Additional followup from this morning's WDIV story:
I misread, sorry.
Still no sympathy, as a user/pusher/whatever, he knew the possible consequences of his action. I'm tired of these kinds of bullsh*t law suits.
I break into your house with malicious intent, your dog attacks me, and I sue you. My lawsuit seeks to distract from the big picture here: What the hell was I doing breaking into your house in the first place. The dog attack was a reaction to my action. What's that obscure saying... Every action has and equal and opposite reaction?
lol, exactly!
Yes, and I'm sure it will all go to a good cause...
Say, the local hood on the corner...
yes, he does. it' not the duty of the police to take him to the hospical and pump his stomach on suspicion, which would get them sued as well. He denied swallowing drugs.
End of story.
And good riddance. or do you think he should have lived another day, and maybe sold some bad drugs to someone else, a group of kids, and they all die from it?
'The kid just saved taxpayers 65+ years of costs.'
Not if the $50 MIL lawsuit happens!
Why did he swallow the cocaine?
Because it is illegal to own.
Why are some drugs against the law to own?
To provide LEO / Government workers with a means to collect a paycheck.
So what if the kid died, the taxpayers will foot the bill, and LEO / Government workers will continue to rock on with the WOD.
The life of a stupid kid, breaking the law, is a small price to pay to continue the gravy train for LEO / Government workers.
Heck the loss of a few LEO / Government workers is no big deal, but a small price to pay to continue the war on drugs.
After all, the LEO / Government workers have families to feed and government pensions to collect.
And NO, I do not use recreational drugs nor do I care to, I know they are bad for my health, and I am able to make my own decisions.
I hear welfare is a lucrative business these days.
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.