Replies

Consider

1) Medical and pension are normal compensation. Just like $500,000 for his home represents the median price of a house in the LA area and does not factor in the specifics of sale price, last tax assessment, etc. The amounts I gave for medical and pension are reasonable as they represent an ABOVE AVERAGE compensation package.

2) His prior profession is unimportant, in 4 years he can obtain a new degree.

3) The court has the authority, and should, set the compensation for the Attorney who brought suit. His trial expenses were likely covered by a public defender... if not, those fees could be recovered as well but on a real dollar basis.

4) His out of pocket expenses are to compensate for expenses occurred while he was for the 3 or 4 prior years having to pay to support himself and does not count any part time or secondary employment that he had during that time.

Fundamentally you are starting from a wrong perception. He did not 'go through' something that was inherently wrong. He was accused and went to trial and was found not guilty. If, and that is a big IF, the cause of that disruption to his life was the FAULT of the county, then he is entitled to compensation but only to the amount that the county had direct impact. This should not be lottery welfare, ESPECIALLY if the county only did it's job in apprehending and trying an accused sex offender. It is far more likely that the FAULT of his ordeal lies with the teen who incorrectly pointed that person out to be the attacker.

If we get to the point where the county / state / federal government is required to compensate everyone for a 'ruined' life just because the justice system worked and put them on trial..... then buddy, get prepared to either fork over thousands more in tax dollars OR be prepared for the county / state to NOT take anyone to court because the risk of loosing will be too high.