What do you do when you murder 2 (or 3) people in a failed suicide attempt?

[LordJezo]

Sue everyone!

http://www.dailyinterlake.com/news/local_montana/article_3a5c2d3a-9d06-11df-8fed-001cc4c002e0.html

According to the stories Justine Winters tried to kill herself by driving her car head on to someone else. She done goofed, killed everyone in the car she hit, and survived. In the car she hit was a mother and her son and another baby in the oven.

A couple of days ago they decide to sue the family that she killed and the people who designed the road.

Awesome stuff. Murder everyone then sue them for being in your way.

At least she is going to be tried as an adult:

http://www.dailyinterlake.com/news/local_montana/article_596f80a2-a1c3-11df-b5b2-001cc4c002e0.html

[disneyspy]

dontcha just hate it when a family is driving a car instead of a tractor trailer

[disneyspy]

and what with these state highway people and their stupid guard rails,do you have any idea how hard that makes it to kill yourself by running into another car?

[disneyspy]

fucking airbags,how do they work?

[sailor]

i refuse to give aid and comfort to jezo, with regard to his plots.

[disneyspy]

i refuse to give aid and comfort to jezo, with regard to his plots.

im just the opposite when it comes to jezo,that sailor guy tho...

[Kevin]

Wow

Disney is bombing more than Staples in Redbank..

[TripleSkeet]

This country would be a much better place if these cases were immediately thrown out and not given 10 seconds iof court time to waste.

When you are at fault you shouldnt be allowed to sue. Period.

[Dell]

worse than the mugger that sues the guy that defended himself during the attack...

[Chigworthy]

If this homocidal twat had just not sued the victim, and stuck with suing the construction company, she would come out looking a lot better.

Obviously this bitch is ass-out loony, and deserves every bit of time the judge gives her, but the big-contract road construction companies are totally negligent in their projects in my experience. They have been widening and resurfacing a few miles (!) of a major highway here for the last year (!). They fucked up the road for a few months, then did a "temporary" pave for the rainy months. This huge project was put on hold so the company could go rape some other community. The temporary pave was so shitty that the drains against the median wall were about 4 inches higher than the road surface, so there was massive flooding anytime the slightest rain came down. Now they are on what appears the 4/5 paving attempt, and will pave 1 lane at a time, leaving a 3 inch drop off running right down the next lane where your tires want to go. Think of driving with one side of the car on a curb at 60 mph. On top of that, the striping is so confusing that when the sun is in you face (you know, during the heavy commute hours) you cannot tell the difference from 3 sets of lines from different stages of their scam project. They even have a special hot line for making claims for all the damage that their horrendous construction is doing to vehicles. They also just announced funding for a complete redesign of a busy interchange right in the middle of the project, so I imagine they will have to redo everything in that section.

So I can see where a construction company could be complicit in an accident.

[instrument]

They should make the entire car out of airbag?

[Serpico1103]

I imagine this is the father's idea, not the suicidal, mentally impaired teenager's. Also, they probably went to an attorney, knowing that criminal charges were pending and that they would be sued by the victims. The attorney probably suggested this approach.
There is a chance that while she did text a message saying she would kill herself, that is was only an idle threat. However, being upset, and due to improper signage she "accidentally" slammed into the victim at 85 mph.
Also, maybe she wanted to slam into the bridge or pull a princess diana type move, but failed and crashed into the victim. She would still be liable, but her intent wouldn't have been to directly involve another person.

[disneyspy]

Wow

Disney is bombing more than Staples in Redbank..

you're a colonostipy

[pennington]

Also, they probably went to an attorney, knowing that criminal charges were pending and that they would be sued by the victims. The attorney probably suggested this approach.

When I first read this thread, I thought it had sleazy-attorney written all over it. This doesn't excuse the girl, or her father, though. They could have said no.

Imagine how the husband must feel. His wife, kid and unborn baby get killed and now he has to deal with a lawsuit that will probably take years.

[Serpico1103]

When I first read this thread, I thought it had sleazy-attorney written all over it. This doesn't excuse the girl, or her father, though. They could have said no.

Imagine how the husband must feel. His wife, kid and unborn baby get killed and now he has to deal with a lawsuit that will probably take years.

There is a chance it was an accident and not manslaughter.
Also, this is probably more about insurance companies suing insurance companies. The victim's husband would have probably sued the father and daughter. It seems like more strategy than anything else; not necessarily a good one.

[Chigworthy]

There is a chance it was an accident and not manslaughter.
Also, this is probably more about insurance companies suing insurance companies. The victim's husband would have probably sued the father and daughter. It seems like more strategy than anything else; not necessarily a good one.

The civil action would have no bearing on the criminal trial.

[Serpico1103]

The civil action would have no bearing on the criminal trial.

No, but the civil actions would be combined. It is not a strategy to deal with the criminal suit, only the likely civil suit from the husband. I doubt the father or daughter would recover, or would pursue the case except to mitigate their liability.

[Chigworthy]

No, but the civil actions would be combined. It is not a strategy to deal with the criminal suit, only the likely civil suit from the husband. I doubt the father or daughter would recover, or would pursue the case except to mitigate their liability.

Good point, sir, good point. I was only thinking in terms of the criminal action, but I can see what you mean.

[Serpico1103]

Good point, sir, good point. I was only thinking in terms of the criminal action, but I can see what you mean.

Also, as dumb as it may be, they may be able to recover from the state or whoever is ultimately responsible for the road design and maintenance. Part of the Belt Parkway is now 45mph I believe because of lawsuits that it was unsafe at 55mph. Maybe the victim could have had more time to react if the speed limit was lower.
Again, this doesn't free the daughter from responsibility, just lowers her ultimate liability. That is why you sue everyone. If the victim's family sued the daughter first, the victim probably would have included the state or whoever else to increase the recover, or the daughter would have impleaded/joined the state at that point.

[Chigworthy]

Sol Rosenburg's America.