What is Digg?106 Comments
- ReligionKills, on 03/30/2009, -0/+52Are we going to have to build a Nerf world for these people?
Sheesh! - nevetando, on 03/30/2009, -1/+45complete miscarriage of justice.
Drunk well above the legal limit and hit a wild animal....HMMMMM. - acwoo, on 03/30/2009, -0/+35Ridiculous! Drunk motorcyclist hits six wild boar on a windy section of the coast highway and somehow the State of California is responsible and now must pay him $8.6M. Did he even wear a real helmet?
- inactive, on 03/30/2009, -2/+37How much do the pigs get?
- Biscuitz, on 03/30/2009, -1/+32I got run over by a drunk driver, suffering injuries for the rest of my ***** life and got just a little over 100k in my pocket. Which I have none of now because of further surgeries.
FML. - Czechxican, on 03/30/2009, -2/+24"And so to conclude my closing argument, yes my client was drunk, yes he wasn't wearing a helmet, and yes he was attempting to pee into an empty Jim Bean bottle, but clearly someone has to pay for this travesty. And that's why my client deserves 8.6 million dollars for hitting a pig. I rest my case."
- posidous, on 03/29/2009, -5/+26Hmmmmm.. I think I will get drunk, run into large street sign. Then sue the city because it does not meet this idoits requirements, or rather that of his lawyer. Hey should be worth at least 2 million
- AntiGravityHero, on 03/30/2009, -5/+24Lawyer pig, lawyer pig... does whatever a lawyer pig does...
- angrynorwegian, on 03/30/2009, -2/+218.6m? BRB going to go find some boars
- nymphetamine, on 03/30/2009, -0/+18Nerf World sounds like an awesome amusement park.
- Sliver85, on 03/30/2009, -0/+13Make sure you get drunk first
- inactive, on 03/30/2009, -5/+18AMERICA, LOL
- gurp13, on 03/30/2009, -0/+12Here's an article that better sums up the case and has a lot more information. Even after reading it I still think it's a completely wrong judgment by the jury.
http://www.montereyherald.com/local/ci_12000272 - uptwolait, on 03/30/2009, -1/+11Forget storming Washington, let's go after these cash-sucking lawyers.
- duke, on 03/30/2009, -2/+12California, LOL (fixed it for you)
- Vzylexy, on 03/30/2009, -0/+8WTF?
- Veni_Vidi_Vici, on 03/30/2009, -0/+8The problem with juries nowadays is that they think "well, he was inured and that sucks. Even though it was his fault, I am an idiot and don't understand the concept of personal responsibility. I feel sympathy for him so ill vote in his favor because the city has deep pockets and can spare 8 million."
- gurp13, on 03/30/2009, -4/+11Sorry, no. It's still ridiculous. Jurors *can* be stupid you know. OJ Simpson?
He was 20% over the legal limit for blood/alcohol content. He was driving illegally!!! Drunk on a motorcycle! He deserved to die and should have. - drifter, on 03/30/2009, -1/+8This is Chewbacca.
- inactive, on 03/30/2009, -1/+8motorcyclebearpig
- Taiyoryu, on 03/30/2009, -0/+7I'm less surprised at the $8.6 million for medical bills, and more so for the $500,000 for "loss of consortium" awarded to the wife. So a lifetime of sex does have a price. Then again assuming 15-20 more viable years left, that's $25k to $33k per year. Some prostitutes certainly make more. I suppose one could argue that sex with some people is worth more than with others.
- blkrabit, on 03/30/2009, -0/+7you gotta line 'em up just right
- LordBalderdash, on 03/30/2009, -1/+7ridiculous
" The final witness was Kenneth Ziedman, an expert on human visual perception, called by the plaintiffs to counter the state's defense that alcohol use caused the accident.
Ziedman said Rogers would have had one second to react after he saw the pig in the roadway. Whether he was impaired by alcohol or not wouldn't have mattered, he said. "The accident was completely unavoidable," he said. "
actually it was very avoidable because while he's caught up in the 'drunk or not drunk' he's completely skipping over the second part of the equation which was getting on the bike to ride home. if his blood tested .10 then he *knew* he was drunk and got on the bike anyway. his attorneys can argue how the state knew about pigs in the road all day long but what it comes down to is the guy was drunk, knew he was drunk, got on his bike anyway and ***** himself up. - randumbusername, on 03/30/2009, -0/+6i always find in funny that with 100s of years of history oj simpson is the only miscarriage of justice people point to.
- benologist, on 03/30/2009, -4/+10He must have spent a lot of time practicing his boarwling to hit 6 of them.
- inactive, on 03/30/2009, -0/+6I'm of the opinion that organ donor cards should be mandatory for motorcycle license holders.
- jitterbits, on 03/30/2009, -1/+6Deserved to die? Regardless of what you think of the jury's decision, that's really harsh.
In any case, I don't think that saying the juries may know more than we do is too strange considering that we got a very small portion of information (we can't say that about the OJ case, can we?), but it doesn't appeal to our knee-jerk reactions so I can see why it was buried.
I wasn't saying their decision was a right one, just that it isn't wise to conclude either way considering the minute amount of information we were given. - ooshlahe, on 03/30/2009, -1/+6This is why our government is poor... stupid jackasses on juries and stupid lawmakers and judges.
- flygirl62, on 03/30/2009, -0/+5Exactly! It's so easy to be generous with everyone else's money.
- foxley, on 03/30/2009, -0/+4bs - if you're drunk, you have no right to be on the road. Pigs or No Pigs.
- brandnewx, on 03/30/2009, -2/+6Right bro, sell your feet and brain for $8.6mil.
- keraneuology, on 03/30/2009, -0/+4Juries should always have it pointed out to them that they are the ones who will be paying out these ludicrous awards. They are generous because they think it is somebody else's money - if it ever dawned on them that it is THEIR money they might not be as generous.
- Czechxican, on 03/30/2009, -1/+5buried for failure.
- gerran, on 03/30/2009, -0/+4The fact that the wife was granted $500k because she can't have sex with her husband anymore is the most ***** up part (pun intended).
- richlw, on 03/30/2009, -0/+4He is from Endor
- blkrabit, on 03/30/2009, -0/+4I guess it's more expensive when you call it "consortium".
- Midtowner, on 03/30/2009, -0/+4Sure the jury awarded the money... but will the judge let it stand? If the facts are as they are, then I really doubt it.
If nothing else, this should be reversed on appeal. The failure of the jury to consider contributory negligence, I think is reversible error if the judge doesn't do something about it. It seems clearly against the weight of the evidence. - fightingforair, on 03/30/2009, -0/+4What could they have done? Built a bridge and hoped they would have used it?
- byrdboy, on 03/30/2009, -0/+4This man gives motorcycle riders and motorcycles themselves a bad name.
Also, this jury should be extremely ashamed. The accident was completely his fault. He knows that motorcycles are inherently more dangerous than a car and require an elevated sense of awareness. Alcohol directly affects the ability to be aware of your surroundings and your ability to adjust to them.
If anything, he should have been ordered to pay for the court costs and sent on his way. - ziggy88, on 03/30/2009, -0/+4That's my local area here is a video on it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Wsy6iL-JZ8 - TiberiusDRAIG, on 03/30/2009, -0/+4Agreed, if I were to sue because I hit a wild animal in the UK I would more than likely be laughed out of court and perhaps even be charged with wasting their time. As a motorcyclist myself I can say that if he was flying round a blind corner then it is entirely his own fault. Bikes aren't like cars, you have to account for stuff like this a lot more actively when riding.
He's an idiot. An unlucky idiot, but an idiot nonetheless. The fact that he was drunk just adds weight to my opinion if him.
Frankly, I'm glad he has rendered himself unable to procreate. Darwin award anyone? - d00by, on 03/30/2009, -1/+4Finally something we can all agree on. We must exterminate all the pigs.
- inactive, on 03/31/2009, -0/+3My sister, who works as a physical therapist, calls motorcycles "donorcycles" (like a lot of other medical professionals, I understand).
Not to mess with your personal freedoms, but if you're going to be traveling at highway speeds with nothing between you and the asphalt but your bike and (maybe) a helmet, you're taking risks. You should be responsible for the risks you take, including the cost of recovery for doing something abnormally risky.
Unless state officials were actively causing wild boars to stampede out into the highway, I don't see the justice in awarding a drunk idiot millions of dollars for this. - anexanhume, on 03/30/2009, -2/+5I'm sorry that this happened to this guy, but generally, every motorcyclist who wrecks in California has it coming to them. They drive like maniacs and lane split all the time. It seems like every morning in the traffic report there's at least one crashed somewhere.
- ASSASSYN360, on 03/30/2009, -0/+3LMFAO!
- bass427, on 03/30/2009, -1/+4"Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them?" - Gandalf
- keraneuology, on 03/30/2009, -1/+4There is no duty of a state to keep all animals off of a road. None. And your logic is deeply flawed - I'll leave it up to your somewhat addled brain to figure out why.
- foxley, on 03/30/2009, -0/+3bs - if the guy is drunk, he shouldn't be on the road in the first place. "A" (being a drunk on a motorcycle) took place before "B" (hitting some pork), and B is what he is suing for. "A" for *****.
- tashtego67, on 03/30/2009, -0/+3I don't know what California highways are like but in South Carolina there are often deer on state roads. Most are not fenced and you just have to watch for them. It would never occur to me to sue the state if I hit one which I have more than once. The damn things have no sense and will jump out of the brush into your oncoming car. If I were drunk at the time I would be even less inclined to call attention to myself. Why do you think the state is responsible for keeping wild animals off the roads and motorists are not responsible for driving at a speed that would allow them to stop if an animal, child, or idiot were to wander into the road?
- DrHoliday, on 03/30/2009, -1/+4You guys are missing the point.
Regardless of whether the guy was drunk, there were six wild boar on the highway.
Let me repeat that. There were wild boar on California's state highway. The state is responsible for the safety of motorists. While the man was drunk, it doesn't excuse the fact that someone in Highway Safety ***** up a fence inspection somewhere that allowed pigs to walk on the road.
There's no such thing as 'this makes up for this' justice. I can be a drunk, rapist thief who beats animals on his spare time chasing someone's dog down the highway. If the bridge collapses the state can't weasel it's way out just because of what I was doing at the time (and what kind of person I am). -
Show 51 - 100 of 108 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is