Sitting as a Juror on a murder trial

[Freak Out]

.44 Desert Eagle is a pansy gun compared to the .454 Casull.

And then there's this thing: http://emuse.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/16789

None of those schmucks even know how to shoot! Look at the stance of most of them. Can you say pain?

I used to guide for a bit and I had a 375 HH magnum brush gun that was about the same length. Just a kicking beast but good for close work in an alder thicket.

[falco]

The closest I got was on jury call for a week for the County. Never got called in though. I would LOVE to be on a jury for one of these people who sue for stupidity and WIN. Like spilling coffee on yourself or suing McDonald's because you are fat. I am not a small guy and I will admit that I love McDonald's. But is their fault I pay to eat their food? Um no...lol. What is the old saying when one of those cases win? "The District Attorney was so stupid that he found 12 people that were too stupid to avoid jury duty."

Steven Avery is a good reason to bring back the death penalty. So was Ed Geene (sp?) and Jeffry Dahlmer and anyone who intentionally kills a police officer.

A few years back, armed robbery and murder carried the same sentence, 25 years. So if you robbed someone you might as well kill them because you wouldn't get anything more if you got caught. Now there was a law to protect the citizen's!!! I don't believe it's like that anymore but even so, why should we imprison someone for life and basically pay for a roof over their head, TV, meals, library, work outs, etc?

everyone rips on the lady who sues mcdonalds. but nobody knows the facts of the case.

1: Stella Liebeck was a 79-year-old grandmother who was the passenger in her grandson's car.

2: McDonalds served the coffee at roughly 190 degrees. 190 Degree liquid will cause third-degree burns within 2-7 seconds of contact with the skin.

3: Stella was wearing cotton jogging pants, and the 190 degree liquid soaked into the pants. She received third-degree burns to her thighs and genitals. This is what a third-degree burn looks like:



4: McDonalds admitted that the coffee was not fit for human consumption at the temperature they served it.

5: Over 700 men, women, and children had been burned prior to Stella's lawsuit.

6: Stella offered to settle with McDonalds just for her medical bills. They refused.

[falco]

Further reading for those who actually care about facts:

The poster-child of tort reformers is the famed “McDonald’s Coffee Case” - the case where a woman obtained a multimillion-dollar jury verdict for spilling hot coffee on herself. Most people think that a careless woman spilled some hot coffee on herself while driving, received minor burns, and then filed a lawsuit. That’s not what happened. Here's what did happen:

Stella Liebeck, a 79-year-old grandmother, was the passenger in her grandson’s vehicle and ordered a cup of McDonald’s coffee. McDonald’s served the coffee at approximately 190 degrees. McDonald’s admitted coffee at that temperature is “unfit for human consumption”; 190 degree liquid causes third-degree burns within 2 to 7 seconds of contact with skin.

Stella spilled the coffee on the crotch of her cotton jogging pants, and the coffee immediately soaked through her pants and caused third-degree burns to her legs, thighs, and genitals. The burns were so severe she needed skin grafts to heal the damage. It took many months for her to recover from the severe burns.

Stella offered to settle the case with McDonald’s if they would just pay her medical bills, which were into the many thousands of dollars. McDonalds refused, and Stella filed a lawsuit. During the trial, it was discovered that in the ten years prior to Stella’s accident, over 700 men, women, and children had been burned by the unsafe McDonald’s coffee.

For years, McDonald’s sold coffee that was “unfit for human consumption”, and made $1.3 million dollars a day in profit doing so. Information such as this wasn’t really reported by the media. What was reported was the $2.6 million dollar jury verdict.

The jury arrived at that figure by calculating the profit of two-days worth of coffee sales, and “fining” McDonald’s that amount to get their attention and make them fix the problem.

It worked. The day after the verdict, McDonald’s lowered the coffee temperature to a safe-but-hot 158 degrees. This is still hot enough to cause third-degree burns, but it takes closer to sixty seconds worth of exposure to do so.

Many believe that $2.6 million dollars was too much money. The judge in the case did, and he reduced the verdict to less than $500,000. Stella actually settled with McDonald’s for even less money. It took a multimillion dollar jury verdict to get McDonald’s to fix a dangerous problem they knew about for ten years; doesn’t that prove the system works?

[Freak Out]

They should have doubled the reward.

[esoxx]

I've always maintained the McDonald's coffee claim wasn't frivilous. There are plenty that are but that wasn't one of them.

I once investigated a claim for a McDonald's drive-thru worker who claimed she tore her rotator cuff simply handing change to a customer.

Now THAT is frivilous.

[Freak Out]

I've always maintained the McDonald's coffee claim wasn't frivilous. There are plenty that are but that wasn't one of them.

I once investigated a claim for a McDonald's drive-thru worker who claimed she tore her rotator cuff simply handing change to a customer.

Now THAT is frivilous.

Ha ha!

[Partial]

I have dipped my hand into boiling water before. It didn't even come out burned, just really freaking hot. That seems a bit bizzare that in 2 seconds you can get a third degree burn at that temperature.

That must be one nasty looking poonany.

[the_idle_threat]

The closest I got was on jury call for a week for the County. Never got called in though. I would LOVE to be on a jury for one of these people who sue for stupidity and WIN. Like spilling coffee on yourself or suing McDonald's because you are fat. I am not a small guy and I will admit that I love McDonald's. But is their fault I pay to eat their food? Um no...lol. What is the old saying when one of those cases win? "The District Attorney was so stupid that he found 12 people that were too stupid to avoid jury duty."

Steven Avery is a good reason to bring back the death penalty. So was Ed Geene (sp?) and Jeffry Dahlmer and anyone who intentionally kills a police officer.

A few years back, armed robbery and murder carried the same sentence, 25 years. So if you robbed someone you might as well kill them because you wouldn't get anything more if you got caught. Now there was a law to protect the citizen's!!! I don't believe it's like that anymore but even so, why should we imprison someone for life and basically pay for a roof over their head, TV, meals, library, work outs, etc?

everyone rips on the lady who sues mcdonalds. but nobody knows the facts of the case.

1: Stella Liebeck was a 79-year-old grandmother who was the passenger in her grandson's car.

2: McDonalds served the coffee at roughly 190 degrees. 190 Degree liquid will cause third-degree burns within 2-7 seconds of contact with the skin.

3: Stella was wearing cotton jogging pants, and the 190 degree liquid soaked into the pants. She received third-degree burns to her thighs and genitals. This is what a third-degree burn looks like:



4: McDonalds admitted that the coffee was not fit for human consumption at the temperature they served it.

5: Over 700 men, women, and children had been burned prior to Stella's lawsuit.

6: Stella offered to settle with McDonalds just for her medical bills. They refused.

Well done, falco. Just like a plaintiff's attorney. Focus on the plaintiff and the injury in order to raise sympathy, complete with gory picture no less.

There are other facts which justify the reduction of the award.

1. The plaintiff knew the coffee was very hot.

2. In the unlikely case the plaintiff didn't know the coffee was very hot, there was a caution warning on the cup. The jury, in its ridiculous verdict, found that the warning was not big enough or conscpicuous enough. Outside of a waiver that a person has to sign before taking possession of the coffee from the drive-through employee, how can one be assured that any warning is big enough or conspicuous enough?

3. McDonald's didn't spill the coffee on the plaintiff. She spilled it on herself when she was adding cream and/or sugar.

4. How she spilled it on herself was key: Despite knowing that the coffee was very hot, she placed the styrofoam cop between her knees and pulled the cover toward her, tipping the cup into her own lap.

5. That was really stupid.

6. People who cite the case as litigation gone wrong don't necessarily believe McDonald's should have paid nothing ... McDonald's paying some medical expenses might be reasonable, given that they did serve unusually hot coffee (even though they had a business reason for doing so and the vast majority of the other millions of customers had no problem with the coffee's temperature). Of course, McDonald's did offer to settle for some unknown amount, but Stella wanted them to pay all her medical bills even though her own stupidity was clearly a huge contributing factor.

7. People who cite this case as litigation gone wrong are more likely to believe that an act this stupid should not result in a lottery verdict.

If she had only been awarded the compensatory damages to pay for the harm she suffered (found to be $160,000 in this case after reduction for her share of fault) people would not have blinked. The punitive portion of the damages, which can only be given in cases where the defendant acted recklessly or willfully, was the sticking point. The jury had to find that McDonald's serving very hot coffee was not simply negligent, but reckless in order to award punitive damages, and they did in this case. Who was really reckless here ... the company selling hot coffee, or the defendant who put a styrofoam cup of hot liquid between her knees and tipped in into her own lap?

The punitive portion of the award was originally $2.7 million, and was reduced to $480,000. The total damage award was still $640,000 after all was said and done. The case was appealed, and then settled for "less than $600,000".

At the end of the day, she banked several hundred thousand dollars net of medical expenses. That's a lot of $$$ for spilling hot coffee on yourself. Yeah, I know she was in a lot of pain and all, but I would be in pain too if I slammed my balls in my car door. Would that entitle me to sue Ford Motor Co?

I have provided the other side of the story. There's a wiki page which provides a more balanced view than yours or mine here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonald's_coffee_case

[Zool]

I agree with Idle. People use the courts far too much to make other people pay for their own stupidity.

Has anyone sued Ginsu because their knives are too sharp? People know damned well coffee is going to be hot when they buy it, and would bitch up a storm if it wasn't. Society complains too much about too many things. There's a general sense of entitlement out of the general populace that annoys the shit out of me. No one owes anyone anything.

[MJZiggy]

I agree with you idle, the only thing thing is that they didn't put the warning on the cup until after this case came up. Other than that, if you buy coffee, I say, expect HOT coffee.

[the_idle_threat]

I agree with you idle, the only thing thing is that they didn't put the warning on the cup until after this case came up. Other than that, if you buy coffee, I say, expect HOT coffee.

I'm sorry, Zig, but you are mistaken about the warning. There was a warning on the cup that she tipped into her lap. They made the warning bigger after this case.

The jury specifically acknowledged the "Hot Coffee" warning, and claimed it was insufficient. That's why they should go to signed waivers.

[esoxx]

Other than that, if you buy coffee, I say, expect HOT coffee.

You're missing the point. Who doesn't want or expect the coffee to be hot? We all know coffee is supposed to be hot. Fine it even came with a warning but again, we all expect the coffee to be hot. So it's a bit redundant to put a warning label on it like people don't understand coffee is actually hot in the first place. Of course it is.

It's the temp you serve it at that's the problem. You don't need it to melt steel or in this case when you make a dumb mistake end up with permanent disfigurement.

Raise your hand if you haven't done something stupid before. We've all spilled things in different ways and all of them were unplanned. The point is when you spill it you shouldn't be subjected to severe injury and scarring.

Actually, we had a case with Fazoli's that involved a burn case to an employee. It was found, at this particular location, that they cooked their pasta at a level that was above prescribed standards. If they had cooked it according to standards, the woman wouldn't be subjected to the permanent scars she suffered.

Believe me, I'm on the other side of the fence from plantiff attorney's. But again, the coffee case actually had some merit to it. I could cite numerous claim examples that were much more ridiculous and frivilous than this one could ever be.

[Merlin]

The closest I got was on jury call for a week for the County. Never got called in though. I would LOVE to be on a jury for one of these people who sue for stupidity and WIN. Like spilling coffee on yourself or suing McDonald's because you are fat. I am not a small guy and I will admit that I love McDonald's. But is their fault I pay to eat their food? Um no...lol. What is the old saying when one of those cases win? "The District Attorney was so stupid that he found 12 people that were too stupid to avoid jury duty."

Steven Avery is a good reason to bring back the death penalty. So was Ed Geene (sp?) and Jeffry Dahlmer and anyone who intentionally kills a police officer.

A few years back, armed robbery and murder carried the same sentence, 25 years. So if you robbed someone you might as well kill them because you wouldn't get anything more if you got caught. Now there was a law to protect the citizen's!!! I don't believe it's like that anymore but even so, why should we imprison someone for life and basically pay for a roof over their head, TV, meals, library, work outs, etc?

everyone rips on the lady who sues mcdonalds. but nobody knows the facts of the case.

1: Stella Liebeck was a 79-year-old grandmother who was the passenger in her grandson's car.

2: McDonalds served the coffee at roughly 190 degrees. 190 Degree liquid will cause third-degree burns within 2-7 seconds of contact with the skin.

3: Stella was wearing cotton jogging pants, and the 190 degree liquid soaked into the pants. She received third-degree burns to her thighs and genitals. This is what a third-degree burn looks like:



4: McDonalds admitted that the coffee was not fit for human consumption at the temperature they served it.

5: Over 700 men, women, and children had been burned prior to Stella's lawsuit.

6: Stella offered to settle with McDonalds just for her medical bills. They refused.

That wasn't the case I was refering to. I do know a lot about that one, it was the copy cats way after the fact that I am talking about. I should have been more clear, my bad. Someone went after Hardees, Wendys and Burger King. None of them were burned severly, their skin was "irritated" less then a mild sun burn in each of the 5 cases I saw. 3 of them were successful and 2 were thrown out if I remember right.

[Merlin]

I might also add that the picture with 3rd degree burns is actually one taken after treatment has been applied. From what I can see they used the Phillips Petrolium screens and this looks bad but isn't painful at the point it is in. I had 3rd degree burns on my leg and went through the treatment. When they pull the screens off, it pulls the scab off and your wound bleeds. This promotes skin growth (so they sad but hurt like hell). This photo, there is no blood, just some normal healing. Mine healed fine, the hair even grew back after they said it wouldn't. It's scared but the hair kind of covers that.

[digitaldean]

I have always wanted to be a Juror.

I sat on 2 jury trials, both personal injury cases. One justifiable (we found the plaintiff) and one where a good Samaritan was sued (tow truck driver sued by someone who ran into his truck even though he followed all correct procedures).

It's interesting, but heart breaking what some people have to go through.

It also showed me the more seamy side of people who were out for a buck.