They got this right?:
“The jury found the Wal-Mart employee, Martha Watson Hookfin, 100 percent at fault, an unsigned verdict forum shows.”
So the the woman and her care takers have no responsibility to properly treat the wound to PREVENT the infection?
Once the infection set it, the hospital and her care takers had no responsibility to properly treat the infection/wound?
No responsibility on her part to take her meds? Were there any? (not mentioned)
Unless the walmart employee sprinkled her with bacteria then chained her down so she couldn’t get it treated, she is NOT 100% at fault...
Exactly my attitude.
A lot of people just plain don’t like WalMart and this is a result of that attitude. I don’t like Target, but guess what, if the store name here was Target, I would have the same attitude I have about it being WM....something is missing in this entire scenario.