[Dustbunny]

Unbelievable. I know he must be hurting over the loss of his wife but how can he possibly hold Wal-Mart responsible?

[LoneRangerMassachusetts]

Unbelievable. I know he must be hurting over the loss of his wife but how can he possibly hold Wal-Mart responsible?

Simple, greed. He can't sue the prison from which the abductors escaped because it is a public entity. Public entities have virtual immunity by way of statutory limitations for wrongdoing, a mere hundred thousand dollars or so. There are no such limitation on private business. The sky is the limit. So who do you think the lawyer advises the plaintiff to sue. The near empty coffer or the treasure chest. It's absolutely amazing that business continues to thrive in this country and that public incompetent employees go unpunished.

[JSteff]

Lawyers

[bulldozer]

Unbelievable. I know he must be hurting over the loss of his wife but how can he possibly hold Wal-Mart responsible?

Because there happens to be a big pot of gold in the picture.

[JasonC]

He doesn't. He sees deep pockets and unpopularity and bleeding hearts, and figures maybe their press is bad enough a jury will just plain give me some of somebody else's money. Voters do it all the time, why wouldn't juries?

[SALChamps03]

My sympathy ends when the lawyers come out. F#$k him. I hope he goes bankrupt after losing this suit.

[HitmanLV]

how can he possibly hold Wal-Mart responsible?

Most likely, he sees this as a moneymaking opportunity. Walmart has deep pockets and lawyers like to sue entities with deep pockets. As morbid as it sounds, he is treating the situation as if he won lotto.