Replies

Something is very fishy about this case. Note, that "12 year old "believed" that "some adult" asked him to bring the gun". Excuse me, seems like the only adult around was the baby sitter. Did he ask the kid to bring the gun? Then, obviously not knowing much about guns, he fiddled with it, and accidentally shot the kid. Just exactly whose fault is this? I can't see any guilty party here except the babysitter.

Why wouldn't the "adult" just get the gun themselves? Why was the babysitter even messing around with the gun in the first place? If they were so incompetent, why didn't they just leave the gun alone? You're right, something doesn't add up here.

BTW, the most likely outcome is that the lawyers will pocket millions of dollars and the kid will get a coupon for $100 off future medical care.

I agree that it sounds fishy. Often we do not get a fulla count of court cases.

Everyone laments the outrageous McDonald's coffee cup verdict, but few heard about McDonald's own internal memos saying that their coffee was much hotter than it needed to be, and that many people had reported burns from spilling coffee, epspecially in their laps in the drive-thru (usually when the lids are not properly affixed). However others at McD's noted that they can squeeze more drinkable coffee out of fewer coffee beans (translating into higher sales and profits) if they make it at a higher temperature. BTW, the plaintiff received the equivalent of one day's coffee profits from McD's sales. Needless to say they are still in business. I wonder of their coffee is still as hot?