We’ve mentioned ludicrous lawsuits before, but this one just might top the list.
From last month, courtesy of the Times Union:
A mentally disturbed suburban New York woman who drowned her three young children in a bathtub in 2008 wants a cut of $350,000 in wrongful death settlements obtained by the children’s fathers, attorneys said…
Is it just me, or does this smack of the old joke about chutzpah, where the kid kills his mother and father, and then throws himself on the mercy of the court because he’s an orphan?
Tragically, this isn’t a joke:
Brewer admitted she drowned her three young children — ages 6, 5 and 18 months — in the bathtub of her New Cassel apartment in February 2008. She later placed the children’s bodies on a bed, and then attempted suicide by swallowing a concoction of household cleaning chemicals.
When that attempt failed, she jumped out her second-story window, but survived.
This is simply horrific.
Yes, she’s nuts, but Brewer’s not going to jail for murdering her children. Isn’t that more than enough? How in heck can she even potentially be permitted to benefit from the atrocity which she caused? What sort of upside-down judicial system allows it to even get this far?
The lawyer for the father of two of the boys summed it up well:
“The only reason that there is money in this estate is because of her actions,” said attorney Thomas Foley, who represents Innocent Demesyeux, the father of the two boys.
“She killed the kids, and now there’s money.”
This case, as with thousands of others, screams for some sanity to limit the abuse of lawsuits in our courts. As companies are repeatedly sued out of existence even as the lawsuits themselves waste taxpayer dollars, it’s an issue which needs to be addressed (and fixed) immediately.
For a more in-depth look at exactly how lawsuit abuse is hurting our country, please take a peek at this John Stossel special from late 2012. It’s long, but as with all Stossel specials, it asks questions that no one else in media seems to bother asking.
Viewing any 10-minute segment will give you the gist of what he’s saying. But if you can spare the time, I recommend watching it all.
If I understand the law correctly you are not alowed to profit from a crime you commited. Which is only logical. But wow that would be like killing your spouse and asking for the insurance money. The sad part is I am sure there is a part of this lady that really believes she deserves this money.
I’m with ya’, Dragon: that’s EXACTLY what it would be like.
This lady needs to be placed in a rubber room where she can’t cause harm to anyone else, ever.
She does NOT need to be given a DIME of money as a result of her killing spree.
Shakespeare had it right when he said “First, we kill all the lawyers!”
Which is why I’ve never liked lawyers being compared to sharks: always struck me as being rather unfair to the shark.
People always ask why San Francisco has all the gays and Los Angeles has all the lawyers….San Francisco had first choice.
You’ve been working on your one-liners…..
Mental illness is a terrible ignored disease. The meds cost so much to control many types of mental illness most people can not afford them. Friends & family disappear when a person starts having symptoms. The people who truly need help, attention, and care are ignored or laughed at . They loose control and tragedy happens.
This kind of event causes me to take a step back before committing the tempting knee-jerk reaction. First, the use of “mentally disturbed” seems to be the catch-all phrase whenever an incident like this occurs. Yet, it makes one call into question the difference between the truly mentally disabled and those who are simply lacking in morals and conscience. Is it truly “mental illness” or is it simply a morally vacant person? The fact that she has the “presence of mind” to now try and profit from her crime doesn’t bode well in her favor for the “mental illness” argument. All, of course, IMHO….