Florida Jury Awards $23.6 Billion to Widow of Michael Johnson in Smoking Lawsuit Against R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company … What Happened to Personal Responsibility?
Sorry, I am no fan of the cigarette industry, but I am one of personal responsibility. I generally cannot stand the smell of cigarette smoke and don’t understand why anyone even uses them, but this jury verdict is absurd and needs to be overturned by appeal.
An Escambia County, Florida jury awarded the widow of of a 36 year old man who died of lung cancer $23.6 million. The verdict included more than $16 million in compensatory damages. Cynthia Robinson claimed that smoking killed her husband, Michael Johnson, in 1996 at the age of 36 after he had smoked from the age of 13. The widow stated that R.J. Reynolds was negligent in not informing him that nicotine is addictive and smoking can cause lung cancer. The lawyer for the plaintiff’s said that because of the juror’s age, he had to shoe how the tobacco industry presented its product before the public awareness campaigns on tobacco risks and dangers in the 1990′s. HUH? Robinson’s attorneys, Christopher Chestnut also went on to say, “The jury wanted to send a statement that tobacco cannot continue to lie to the American people and the American government about the addictiveness of and the deadly chemicals in their cigarettes.” HUH?
A Florida jury awarded a widow $23.6 billion in punitive damages in her lawsuit against tobacco giant R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, her lawyer said.
Cynthia Robinson claimed that smoking killed her husband, Michael Johnson, in 1996. She argued R.J. Reynolds was negligent in not informing him that nicotine is addictive and smoking can cause lung cancer. Johnson started smoking when he was 13 and died of lung cancer when he was 36.
The jury award Friday evening is “courageous,” said Robinson’s lawyer, Christopher Chestnut.
“If anyone saw the documents that this jury saw, I believe that person would have awarded a similar or greater verdict amount,” he said.
The Escambia County trial took four weeks and the jury deliberated for 15 hours, according to the Pensacola News Journal. The verdict included more than $16 million in compensatory damages, the newspaper said.
Chestnut said five of the six jurors who heard the case were 45 or younger, which meant he had to show them how the tobacco industry presented its product before the public awareness campaigns on tobacco risks and dangers in the 1990s, he said.
Okay, let’s do the math for the obviously challenged Florida jury. I guess this one might be as clueless as the Florida jury that deliberated in the Casey Anthony murder case. For 50 years we have been warned that smoking is hazardous to our health, where was Michael Johnson during that time?
FIRST … WHO DOES NOT KNOW THAT CIGARETTES ARE HARMFUL TO YOUR HEALTH AND CAUSE LUNG CANCER?
Now for the numbers.
- Michael Johnson died in 1996 at the age of 36 from lung cancer.
- This means the deceased would have been born in 1960.
- Johnson would have begun smoking in 1973 as the story above states he began smoking at the age of 13.
- WHAT PARENT ALLOWS THEIR CHILD TO SMOKE AT THE AGE OF 13?
- All 50 states bad laws banning sales to minors by 1950. The most common age of restriction for cigarettes and tobacco products today applies to persons under the age of 18. In an effort to ensure stricter enforcement 11 states have lowered the age of restriction from 21 to 15 (Tobacco Merchants Association, 1971: 1-2).
- The smoking age was 18 meaning for 5 years the decease was breaking the law and smoking as a minor. Who’s fault was that?
- In 2006 Florida state Supreme Court tossed out a $145 billion class-action verdict. That ruling also said smokers and their families need only prove addiction and that smoking caused their illnesses or deaths.
- In 2008 on behalf of her late husband, Michael Johnson Sr.
- 2014 a Florida jury awards $23.6 billion in punitive damages in a lawsuit against R.J. Reynolds Tobacco.
- On June 12, 1957, Surgeon General Leroy E. Burney declared it the official position of the U.S. Public Health Service that the evidence pointed to a causal relationship between smoking and lung cancer.
- The 1964 report on smoking and health had an impact on public attitudes and policy. A Gallup Survey conducted in 1958 found that only 44 percent of Americans believed smoking caused cancer, while 78 percent believed so by 1968. In the course of a decade, it had become common knowledge that smoking damaged health, and mounting evidence of health risks gave Terry’s 1964 report public resonance.
- The Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act of 1965 (Public Law 89–92) required that the warning “Caution: Cigarette Smoking May Be Hazardous to Your Health” be placed in small print on one of the side panels of each cigarette package. The act prohibited additional labeling requirements at the federal, state, or local levels.
- In June 1967 the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued its first report to Congress recommending that the warning label be changed to “Warning: Cigarette Smoking Is Dangerous to Health and May Cause Death from Cancer and Other Diseases.”
- In 1969 Congress passed the Public Health Cigarette Smoking Act (Public Law 91–222), which prohibited cigarette advertising on television and radio and required that each cigarette package contain the label “Warning: The Surgeon General Has Determined That Cigarette Smoking Is Dangerous to Your Health.”
- In 1981 Congress enacted the Comprehensive Smoking Education Act of 1984 (Public Law 98–474), which required four specific health warnings on all cigarette packages and advertisements:SURGEON GENERAL’S WARNING: Smoking Causes Lung Cancer, Heart Disease, Emphysema, and May Complicate Pregnancy.
SURGEON GENERAL’S WARNING: Quitting Smoking Now Greatly Reduces Serious Risks to Your Health.
SURGEON GENERAL’S WARNING: Smoking by Pregnant Women May Result in Fetal Injury, Premature Birth, and Low Birth Weight.
SURGEON GENERAL’S WARNING: Cigarette Smoke Contains Carbon Monoxide.
I am of the belief that if cigarette tobacco is so bad, then make them illegal to use. Otherwise, it is just a way of the local, state and federal government making tax money off of lung cancer. It is an individual’s choice to smoke. Sorry folks, unless you were born prior to 1965 or your terminal lung cancer occurred prior to then, you have no one to blame but yourself. For nearly 50 years there have been warning labels on cigarette packages.
EXACTLY HOW MANY WARNINGS DOES ONE NEED BEFORE THEY REALIZE THAT SOMETHING IS HAZARDOUS TO THEIR HEALTH?
AG Eric Holder Bashes Sarah Palin on ABC’s ‘This Week’ Says … “She Wasn’t Particularly Good VP Candidate, She’s an Even Worse Judge of Who to Impeach”
Hmm, one might say Eric Holder isn’t a particularly good Attorney General and an even worse judge of what scandals should be prosecuted …
Eric Holder, Barack Obama’s attorney general took to ABC’s ‘This Week’ to bash Sarah Palin stating, “She wasn’t a particularly good vice presidential candidate. She’s an even worse judge of who ought to be impeached and why.” Really? With all the scandals that Holder could be prosecuting and getting to the bottom of, he is bashing Palin? Where is Holder on Benghazi-gate, Fast & Furious and IRS-gate? Where is Eric Holder in enforcing US immigration laws? HOLDER IS AWOL. Holder is the most political, partisan attorney general ever. This political hack will do nothing to investigate an out of control Obama administration because his allegiances lie with Obama, not America and the US Constitution. While we are at it, Eric Holder should be impeached as well. Make it a two-fer.
Administration efforts to pass comprehensive immigration reform, for example, have failed. Asked about calls by Sarah Palin to impeach Obama over the administration’s immigration policies, Holder said: “She wasn’t a particularly good vice presidential candidate. She’s an even worse judge of who ought to be impeached and why.”
Holder similarly dismissed calls for himself to be impeached for declining to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the IRS scandal. Holder insisted that a special prosecutor isn’t necessary, with “career people” and FBI agents “doing a good, professional job” investigating the matter.
As per Breitbart, House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) and other senior “establishment” Republicans have dismissed Palin’s calls and instead have opted to file a lawsuit against Obama’s executive overreach. Also, House Judiciary Committee chair Rep. Bob Goodlatte, (R-VA), said on “This Week” that he won’t push for the impeachment of President Obama, despite recent calls by some Republicans. Of course the GOP won’t, they are gutless.
“We are not working on or drawing up articles of impeachment,” Goodlatte told ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos on “This Week” Sunday. “The Constitution is very clear as to what constitutes grounds for impeachment of the President of the United States. He has not committed the kind of criminal acts that call for that.”
Eric Holder is hardly a credible source to talk about a poor candidate for a job or being able to judge anyone. Holder has been a disaster as AG.
Rep. Gowdy Questions AG Holder About Duty to Faithfully Execute the Law
One Year After George Zimmerman Acquittal in Death of Trayvon Martin, The Defense’s ‘Train Wreck’ Star Witness Rachel Jeantel Speaks Out
It was one year ago on July 13, 2013 that George Zimmerman was found not guilty in the death of Trayvon Martin and the defense’s star witness, let’s rephrase that, train wreck witness Rachel Jeantel speaks out. In an interview with CNN, Jeantel discusses her regrets that she could have said things and acted differently while on the witness stand. She played the victim and blamed the jury for not taking her seriously. Jeantel said, “they judge how they talk, how they look, how they dress.” Jeantel was upset because she felt like she was being judged. ARE YOU KIDDING? Rachel dear, you were a witness in a murder trial. It was the jury’s job to determine whether you were telling the truth and your combative actions and the testimony that Martin told her he was being chased by a “creepy-ass cracker” was judged. Rachel, here is a free life lesson … we are all judged by our actions every day.
Jeantel was the prosecution’s star witness, yet her testimony was a combative, profanity-laced “train wreck” that likely contributed to Zimmerman’s acquittal.
Jeantel’s curt, colloquial language prompted attorneys to ask her to speak up and repeat herself time and again during the trial, eventually eliciting an exasperated, “Are you listening?” from Jeantel.
She told CNN this week that she wishes she had “acted different” on the witness stand.
We do hope that the experiences that Rachel Jeantel went through during the Zimmerman trial does turn her life around and makes her a better person. As stated in the video above, no one knew it at the time of her testimony, but “she was barely able to read and write at the level of a third grader. Whose fault is that exactly? We can blame public school and Rachel Jeantel as she resisted any efforts of tutoring because it took too long. However, it appears that she is trying to get her life together and has graduated high school. Good for her!
What happened to Rachel Jeantel was not a matter of a jury falsely judging a book by it’s cover. In 2013 when she took the witness stand Rachel’s book was her cover, no more, no less. Was she smart, no. Was she well versed, not on your life.
‘Creepy a** cracker is following me’
Rachel Jeantel Can’t Read Letter She ‘Wrote’ About Shooting: ‘I don’t read cursive’
Trayvon Trainwreck – Star Prosecuting Witness Implodes on the Stand – Rachel Jeantel
That is obvious, otherwise she would not have felt the need to change and better herself. People criticized her for her actions and the way she talked because they were horrified by your actions and speech that you thought nothing of. Personally, I blamed at the time the prosecutors more than I did Jeantel because I could never have imagined anyone thinking that she would be a good witness. More so, did they do any coaching?
We can only hope that something good comes from the George Zimmerman murder trail and maybe that is that Rachel Jeantel woke up, grew up and got her life on track.
HOW WILL THE IRS REACT TO BEING ON THE OTHER SIDE OF A FEDERAL DEMAND?
Judge Emmet Sullivan of the U.S. District Court in Washington has ordered the IRS to explain under oath how former IRS employee Lois Lerner’s emails went missing. Do you mean a federal judge will not except the excuse, that the dog ate my hard drive? Imagine that, Lois Lerner warned IRS employee’s what they put in their emails and then her’s miraculously disappeared. Yup, not a smidgen of corruption here.
A federal judge on Thursday ordered the IRS to detail under oath how some of former agency official Lois Lerner’s emails went missing, as well as any potential methods for recovering them.
Judge Emmet Sullivan of the U.S. District Court in Washington gave the Internal Revenue Service exactly a month — until Aug. 10 — to file a report, which he demanded as part of a lawsuit from a conservative watchdog, Judicial Watch, against the agency.
Judicial Watch is seeking a wide range of documents from the IRS, including Lerner’s emails, as part of a Freedom of Information Act request. It has complained that the IRS didn’t tell it that the agency couldn’t recover all of Lerner’s emails from 2009 to 2011.
Sullivan cast his ruling as a compromise, and a potential way for Judicial Watch to get answers without the court wading any deeper into the matter. Judicial Watch had asked the court to potentially compel IRS officials to testify about the lost emails, through a process called limited discovery.
O.J. Simpson: 20 Years Since the Murders of Nicole Brown Simpson & Ron Goldman… After Midnight on the Morning of June 13, 1994, Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman were Found Murdered Outside her Home in Los Angeles, CA
It is hard to believe it has been 20 years since the murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ron Goldman. The two were found brutally murdered outside of her home in Los Angeles, CA.
Long after the so-called “not guilty” verdict of O J Simpson in the horrific murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman so many questions still remain. There was a mountain of evidence, including DNA, that should have made this a slam dunk case. However, in what was probably the greatest example ever of jury nullification, a jury acquitted OJ Simpson in the double murders. Of course, common sense and rational people knew then and know now much different. The murder trial of O.J Simpson was dubbed, The Trial of the Century. But sadly, instead of the trial being about finding justice for Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman, for their brutal and savage murders, the Defense ‘Dream Team’ sought to make the trial about race and pulled the race card out from the bottom of the deck. The trial divided America. The verdict was a travesty of justice and for all those involved in that travesty, and applauded that travesty … God help you.
Remember Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman murdered 6/12/94
To many, particularly in minority communities, the trial of Orenthal James Simpson became not so much a determination of his guilt or innocence of murder in the first degree, beyond a reasonable doubt, but whether or not a black man could find justice in a legal system designed by and largely administered by whites. To others, many of whom were white, the key question was whether a mostly minority jury would convict a black celebrity regardless of the weight of evidence against him.
Ron Goldman’s father: Son’s death is ‘like yesterday’
“It’s like yesterday,” said Fred Goldman on TODAY Wednesday. His son, Ron Goldman, was murdered along with Simpson’s ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson. “The loss is exactly the same. Nothing has changed.”
Years after O.J. Simpson was acquitted of the murders, questions remain about what happened 20 years ago this month and how an apparently strong case with “a mountain of DNA evidence” failed result in a conviction.
Shortly after midnight on the morning of June 13, 1994, Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman were found murdered outside her home in Los Angeles. Evidence on the scene led police to suspect O.J. Simpson of the murders, and Simpson’s lawyers arranged for him to turn himself in on the morning of June 17.
Soon after Simpson failed to appear at the allotted time, police issued an all-points bulletin. Early that evening, a bizarre low-speed chase ensued, with up to 20 police cars pursuing Simpson in his white Bronco, driven by his friend Al Cowlings, while media helicopters televised the chase nationwide. The chase ended at Simpson’s house, where he eventually surrendered peacefully.
Simpson’s trial on two counts of murder began in January 1995 and ended with his acquittal more than eight months later.
Most people focus on the cute tag line by the late defense attorney Johnny Cochran when O.J Simpson was asked to put on the bloody gloves, “If It Doesn’t Fit, You Must Acquit”. There is a general rule withing the legal industry that a lawyer is never to ask a question they do not already know the answer to. Assistant DA Darden blew this one.
However, folks may want to better remember where that bloody golf came from, the gruesome crime scene where Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman were stabbed to death. Where Nicole’s head was nearly severed from her body. Take a good look at that bloody glove, doesn’t seem so cute with “if it doesn’t fit” does it? What doesn’t fit is that an obviously guilty individual was set free. WARNING – DISTURBING AND GRAPHIC PHOTOS: pics here of crime scene.
16 months after the killings of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman on June 12, 1994, a jury found there was not enough evidence against O.J. Simpson to convict him. But there was plenty of evidence the jury didn’t see.
- Nicole’s best friend Kris Jenner said Nicole told her just weeks before the murders, “He’s gonna kill me, and he’s gonna get away with it.”
- Two other key witnesses told police they saw O.J. Simpson soon after the killings. Jill Shively said, “All of a sudden, a white car comes flying north on Bundy, and I barely miss him. It was O.J. Simpson.” But Shively never testified because she sold her story to the press.
- Jurors never heard, either, from Skip Junis, who said he saw the former football star and actor at the airport later that night. “He was carrying this little, cheap gym bag, and was pulling things out and dumping ‘em in the trash can,” he said.
- There was also a suicide note, read by Simpson’s close friend Robert Kardashian. It was never heard in court. Neither did 911 recordings from the police’s famous low-speed chase of the white Bronco on Los Angeles highways.
Samuel “Curt” Johnson III, SC Johnson Heir Pleads Guilty to Sexually Assaulting Teen … Sentenced to Misdemeanor, Fourth-Degree Sexual Assault
THERE CAN BE NO JUSTICE WHEN THE VICTIM DOES NOT WANT IT …
Samuel “Curt” Johnson III, heir to the SC Johnson fortune, was convicted on Friday of sexually assaulting a teen. However, the felony was downgraded to a misdemeanor, fourth-degree sexual assault and disorderly conduct. Johnson was initially charged in 2011 with the repeated sexual assault of a child, that charge carries a maximum penalty of 40 years in prison and a $100,000 fine. However, Judge Eugene Gasiorkiewicz sentenced Johnson to four months in jail and fined $6,000. Wow, $6,000, that is the equivalent of like 6 cents for this individual. However, the problem this time was not a lenient judge or lame prosecutor, it was the victim and her family. Neither the girl nor her mother wanted a case brought against Johnson, but the female victim did initially tell Racine County investigators that Johnson had inappropriate sexual contact with her 15 to 20 times, starting the summer after she finished sixth grade. She said Johnson exposed himself, fondled her under her clothes and kissed her breasts and elsewhere.
A Wisconsin billionaire pleaded guilty Friday to repeatedly sexually assaulting a teenage girl, a charge that prosecutors ended up downgrading from a felony to a misdemeanor after they said the victim and her family repeatedly refused to cooperate.
Samuel “Curt” Johnson III, whose family has run home-products giant SC Johnson for five generations, was convicted of fourth-degree sexual assault and disorderly conduct. He was sentenced to four months in jail, short of the one-year maximum. He was also fined $6,000.
In considering the sentence, Judge Eugene Gasiorkiewicz acknowledged that neither the girl nor her mother wanted a case brought against Johnson. Authorities only became aware of the allegations after the 59-year-old sought counseling at a clinic in Scottsdale, Arizona, where he made an undisclosed comment that triggered a mandatory report.
Sadly, this billionaire sex offender is going to get off with a slap on the wrist. Assistant District Attorney Robert Repischak said the victim and her mother refused to cooperate from the outset, leaving him a flimsy case at best. Repischak told reporters after the hearing, “I would have liked a chance to present the felony case to a jury. But given the state of the case, with little if any evidence, I did was I was able to do.”
Football Hall of Famer & Former Miami Dolphin QB Dan Marino Sues NFL Over Concussions (Update: Marino Withdraws from Concussion Lawsuit)
DAN MARINO SUES NFL OVER CONCUSSIONS …
Hall of Famer and Miami Dolphin quarterback great Dan Marino is the latest to sue the NFL over concussions. According to court documents, a lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania by Mariono and 14 other former NFL players. Marino and the other 14 plaintiffs join more than 4,800 others who have alleged the NFL misled players about the long-term dangers of concussions. The NFL has denied those claims. Although no specific symptoms are alleged for Marino in the lawsuit, it does contain language for the QB great, “On information and belief, the Plaintiff … sustained repetitive, traumatic sub-concussive and/or concussive head impacts during NFL games and/or practices.”
Dan Marino, the Hall of Fame member and former Miami Dolphins quarterback, last week sued the NFL over concussions, according to federal court records.
As the behind-the-scenes effort to gain approval for the proposed $765-million settlement of the concussion litigation continues, Marino and 14 other former players sued in U.S. District Court in Philadelphia.
At least 41 members of the Pro Football Hall of Fame, or their estates, are among about 5,000 former players suing.
The 18-page complaint alleges the NFL concealed information about football-related brain injuries and misled players, claims that are similar to those made in more than 300 related lawsuits. The NFL has repeatedly denied such claims.
A federal judge rejected the proposed settlement of $765 million in January by the NFL, concerned about whether the settlement amount is sufficient for all affected players. To be honest, $765 does not even come close to what medical bills and treatment would cost over their lifetime. I am not even sure if $2 billion is adequate.
UPDATE I: As reported at CNN, Dan Marino is withdrawing his name from a lawsuit suing the NFL over concussions, saying he didn’t realize his name would be attached to the lawsuit. HUH? Well that’s mighty brave of him. I guess suing the NFL is bad for getting a job with the NFL. Profiles in courage.
Dan Marino, considered one of the greatest quarterbacks in National Football League history, is withdrawing his name from a concussion lawsuit against the NFL, according to published reports.
The news, first reported by the South Florida Sun Sentinel, comes a day after media reports that the Hall of Fame quarterback and 14 other players had filed a lawsuit that claims the NFL knew for years of a link between concussions and long-term health problems and did nothing about it.
Marino, 52, said he didn’t realize his name would be attached to the lawsuit.
“Within the last year I authorized a claim to be filed on my behalf just in case I needed future medical coverage to protect me and my family in the event I later suffered from the effects of head trauma,” the former Miami Dolphins star wrote in a statement published in the Sun Sentinel and on Sports Illustrated’s website.
CNN Legal Analyst Jeffrey Toobin States President Barack Obama “Clearly Broke the Law” in Releasing Taliban Detainees from GITMO without giving Congress 30 Days Notice … Jonathan Turley Too
Two Liberal Lawyers say Barack Obama clearly broke the law …
CNN’s legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin stated yesterday on ‘The Situation Room’ with Wolf Blitzer that President Barack Obama “clearly broke the law” by failing to provide notice to Congress at least 30 days before trading five Taliban members from Guantanamo Bay in exchange for Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl. George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley also said on CNN that the White House broke the law by releasing five high-ranking Taliban prisoners from Guantanamo Bay without congressional notification.
“They did,” the professor replied matter-of-factly. “I don’t think that the White House is seriously arguing that they’re not violating federal law. And to make matters worse, this is a long series of violations of federal law that the president’s been accused of. … This is going to add to that pile. I don’t think there’s much debate that they’re in violation of the law.”
But as those Hillary Clinton likes to say, “what difference does it make?”
CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin declared on Monday that President Barack Obama “broke the law” when his administration failed to give Congress notice of at least 30 days before releasing five ranking Taliban members from Guantanamo Bay. Toobin said that a presidential signing statement did not absolve Obama from culpability for failing to abide by the law mandating congressional notification.
“I think he clearly broke the law,” Toobin said. “The law says 30-days’ notice. He didn’t give 30-days’ notice.” Toobin added that Obama’s opinion expressed in a signing statement “is not law.”
“The law is on the books, and he didn’t follow it,” Toobin added.
Why should this come as a surprise to anyone that Barack Obama is willfully and purposely breaking the law? He defends the laws he likes and ignores the ones he doesn’t. This is what an Imperialist president looks like.
Receipt Racism … Tennessee Man Sues Red Lobster & Waitress for Falsely Accusing Him of Writing Racial Slur “Ni**er” on Receipt
Tennessee man sues Red Lobster for $1 million for falsely accusing him of writing racial slur on receipt … Hires handwriting expert to clear his name.
Devin Barnes is suing Red Lobster and the waitress that served him for falsely accusing him of writing a racial slur “NI**ER” on his receipt in place of writing a tip amount. Barnes is suing the waitress, Toni Jenkins for posting his personal information on the Internet and for receiving about $11,000 in donations based on the story and the lawsuit is asking for a jury trial and $1 million in damages. Barnes hired a hand writing expert to review the receipt and help clear his name from this damaging accusation. At least two experts believed this to be a hoax. Barnes admitted to writing the word “none
Weeks ago, Barnes’ attorney and pastor, Richard Dugger, hired an independent handwriting expert who compared the receipt with samples provided by Barnes and his wife.
“There is no evidence that neither Devin Barnes nor his wife wrote that hideous statement on the line total, which means that someone else did,” Dugger said.
The incident occurred in September 2013 when Devin Barnes ate at the Red Lobster in Cool Spring, Tennessee. Barnes stated that he was running tight on time, so he had his waitress put the meal into a to-go container. When he paid the bill, he wrote “none” under tip. What followed would change his life forever. Toni Jenkins, a Red Lobster waitress, posted on Facebook a photo of a receipt from customer Devin Barnes with his personal information was on a receipt where someone had written the n-word.
In court on Thursday, Barnes filed suit against the waitress, Toni Jenkins, and Red Lobster, claiming that Barnes and his family have suffered because of the situation.
According to the court filing, they have expert testimony from a handwriting analyst to prove Barnes didn’t write the racial slur on the receipt.
Barnes is suing Jenkins for posting his personal information on the Internet and for receiving about $11,000 in donations based on the story.
He also contends the restaurant didn’t do enough to contain the situation.
In response, the restaurant chain said in a statement that, “it is against our policy to post guest information online. Our standard procedure is to suspend the employee involved with pay while we determine what happened. After the completion of a full investigation into this matter, Ms. Jenkins returned to work.”
The lawsuit is asking for a jury trial and $1 million in damages.
The Daily Caller: Waitress, Red Lobster Sued For $1 Million In Alleged Race Hoax.
But two handwriting experts who looked at the receipt and at writing samples from Barnes, his wife, and Jenkins determined that it was unlikely that the couple had written the slur.
The expert hired by Barnes and his attorney concluded that both Barnes and his wife were unlikely to have written the slur.
Another expert, contacted by The Daily Caller News Foundation, analyzed the receipt, comparing it to a copy of a writing sample from Jenkins. The expert determined that “within a reasonable degree of certainty” Jenkins had written the slur.
Jenkins responded at the time telling TheDCNF that she no longer believed that Barnes had written the word.
She said she would apologize to Barnes but maintained that she did not write the word either.
Asked if she planned to share any of the donations she received with Barnes, Jenkins said “Honestly I would…if there was any left.”
Hopefully Red Lobster and this waitress will be successfully sued to put an end to this crime of “Racism by Hoax”.
Marion Superior County Judge Kurt Eisgruber Orders No Prison Time for Indiana Man David Wise Convicted of Drugging & Raping his Wife Mandy Boardman
Talk about a travesty of Justice, since when have we become lenient on rapists … What is is this Shariah Law?
Get ready to be outraged … On May 10, 2011, Mandy Boardman told the detectives at the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department the bizarre story that her husband, David Wise, had been drugging her for at least three years and raping her in her sleep. She had also found video on his cell phone. Last month a jury convicted Wise of six felony charges related to sexually assaulting his wife. On Friday, May 16, 2014, Marion Superior Court judge Kurt Eisgruber sentenced Wise to 20 years. Seems OK so far, right? Well it ends here.
The judges sentence did not include one day in prison. In regards to the 20 year sentence, 12 years were suspended and 8 years were to be spent in home confinement. WHAT THE HELL WAS THIS JUDGE THINKING!!! Since when are we lenient on rapists?
But perhaps the strangest thing is what happened after a jury convicted Wise last month of six felony charges related to sexually assaulting his wife.
On Friday, a Marion Superior Court judge sentenced Wise, 52, to 20 years — but not a day in prison. Of the sentence, 12 years were suspended and 8 years were to be spent in home confinement.
Prosecutors had asked for 40 years in prison.
And Boardman — who divorced Wise after discovering what he’d been doing — is furious.
“To have my rapist, my attacker, convicted on all six counts, only to be let go – only for him to walk out that door the same time I could — was just unfathomable,” Boardman told the Los Angeles Times in a phone interview on Monday. “I never thought that he would be at home, being able to have the same rights and privileges as I do.”
It gets worse, if possible. From Mediaite, check out the rapists defense as to why he was drugging and sexually assaulting his wife.
His wife was “snippy” and drugging her “made her nicer” is how an Indianapolis man convicted of repeatedly drugging and raping his wife explained his actions in court. The offenses, carried out over the course of three years, netted Indiana resident David Wise a grand total of zero years in prison after a trial in which he was found guilty.
Wait, it gets even worse, if that is possible. The judge turned to the victim and told her that she needed to forgive her attacker. WHAT!!! Where does this judge get off making any such comment, especially when the rapsist never apologized and showed any remorse.
“While the judge was giving his opinion on the sentence, he first turned to me and told me I needed to forgive my attacker, which is unfathomable,” Boardman told The Times. “He told me I needed to forgive my attacker and I needed to let my attacker walk. It was a punch to the gut from the justice system — or from one judge.”
The Marion County Prosecutor’s Office confirmed the accuracy of Eisgruber’s remarks.
EXIT QUESTION: What is more criminal, a sicko husband who drugs and rapes his wife or the judge that gives this depraved individual a slap on the wrist?