On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 07:06:35 -0700, Modemac wrote:
> Is $11 million a fair payback for insults from a bunch of wackos no
> one is going to believe anyway?
In a word, yes.
> This seems more like the actions of a judge who wanted to stop Phelps
> once and for all, rather than simply handle this one single incident.
The judge in the trial didn't make that judgment, the jury did. No doubt
the jury remembers the Phelps' plans for picketing at those Amish girl's
funerals. That was one of the most heinous things I've ever heard of.
If everyone who had been hurt by the Phelps' insanity had sued them and
won on the same grounds as in this case, even if the judgment was only one
million dollars for each case, I'm sure the total would exceed this
judgment.
And let's not forget that all of the Phelps' themselves are attourneys
who will sue at the drop of a hat. Abusing the legal system or a living,
apparently.
> The WBC's pickets and protests were legal, but the hurt they inflicted
> on the soldier's family wasn't. They should be punished for their
> hurtful actions, not for their legal ones.
They were.
I guess you'd need to have a dead child and a bunch of strangers trying to
inflict emotional pain on you and your wife, by telling you that your
child
deserved to die, for the sake getting of media attention for their insane
cause, to understand the egregiousness of that type of emotional abuse.
--
scalpod: How long can one reasonably expect to live without kidneys?
Huey: That depends. How many coffee filters can you hold between your
knees?
|
