Gentlemen,
Liebeck's attorneys argued that at 180–190 °F (82–88 °C), McDonald's coffee was defective, claiming it was too hot and more likely to cause serious injury than coffee served at any other establishment.
I remember laughing hard when I heard about the start of the lawsuit. I knew some people at the time who worked in fast food places who told me a number of times how people will send back coffee because they don't think it's hot enough if they don't see you pour it for them. I've seen it happen too. So making a lawsuit that it's too hot was laughable when anything suspected of being any cooler meant sending it back. I could see if the container was defective, but it seemed ridiculous to sue when the customer fumbled it and she was given what she asked for.
us law is a lot different from here
thank god
over there they sue if you look at someone the wrong wayl
My only legal case experience was a positive one. The lawyer was helpful and cut his fee to suit the amount of work he did instead of taking a percentage of the amount I received. But the U.S. is a very litigious country in part because of the huge emphasis on rights and legal support, and in part because of ambulance chasing lawyers and people who either don't understand what the law is meant to address or deliberately try to exploit it regardless of understanding.
The problem goes well beyond prostitution. Normal sex in the south, as defined by statute involves a penis in a vagina.
Well, first of all people here shouldn't be branding "The South" for archaic legal codes when the situation also exists in other areas and other countries. Whether Southerners are generally a little more prissy/archaic in their views about sex also depends on individuals and specific regions. Many are quite modern in thinking and attitudes.
He was a high school student wiith a promising future who received oral sex and prrformed intercourse on camera from a younger high school student in Georgia. He received a long prison sentence with sex offender registry primarily because of the oral sex. People were outraged and the law was changed but not retroactively.
If the Wiki is accurate I have a problem with the idea Wilson was just innocent as some seem to suggest. If you are a promising student don't be stupid enough to allow yourself or put yourself in a position to be video taped performing any kind of sex on anyone, especially someone is in no condition to give consent.
Still, the way the law was written to block any reflection in the final judgment of the actual circumstances is ridiculous. The whole idea that anything but vaginal intercourse should get people registered as sex offenders is nuts. Follow through on that and soon people would find themselves commonly living next to sex offenders everywhere, if not being labelled one themselves. How then could anyone distinguish between adult consensual sex and real sick dangerous predators.
...the tendency of people to use their cell phones to provide evidence for the prosecution is not exactly helpful to the defense.
You could also say this tendency has lead to conviction of real criminals and without it these criminals would have gone free. It's a double-edged situation that has led to real offenses being successfully prosecuted.
Still, are you suggesting it was wrong to provide evidence of sexual intercourse on an incoherent and likely passed out person? Are you suggesting turning off to coverup? I think it's a blessing that some are too foolish to realize recording offenses then passing them on is providing evidence. These archaic laws need to go, but that doesn't mean there aren't real offenses being committed on these recordings.
Merlot
