Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

westborneastbred t1_j5g417y wrote

Reply to comment by TheHighWarlord in A woman who got wasted at a Marilyn Manson concert blew up $15 million worth of property. She's suing the company that served her. by end_of_rainbow

I understand that. But taking the responsibility of the act and placing it on the bar as if this person didn’t have a responsibility knowing they were drinking to decide to not drive, to pre plan a ride home, or to think. To say they could drink themselves into a stupor, destroy ppls home but then place the responsibility of this individuals action on the bar that is crazy. Regardless this person made the choice to go out, to plan to “turn up”, knowingly continued to drink, drank to the point of being removed, then to get in a vehicle, destroy property, and then watch these homes burn, and as a spit in the face say it’s not their fault it’s the bar cause they let them drink? That sounds absurd. So this woman gets no responsibility of hours prior knowing she was gonna to be drinking heavy? Naw talking about the bar as if she doesn’t have responsibility doesn’t sit right with me. There are numerous point that she could have decided not to drive and this could have been adverted. Naw she can go to prison

2

TheHighWarlord t1_j5g65kj wrote

>To say they could drink themselves into a stupor, destroy ppls home but then place the responsibility of this individuals action on the bar that is crazy.

Well, the law talks about partial responsibility, not complete liability. So she still gets held accountable for the criminal side of things and part of the civil side.

>So this woman gets no responsibility of hours prior knowing she was gonna to be drinking heavy?

No one is saying the woman gets away free. I'm only saying that some states in the U.S. would also hold the bar accountable for its role in the accidents and they should be. The same if a business sold products that poisoned its customers.

1

westborneastbred t1_j5gnuph wrote

I wasn’t stating you. I was speaking of many are focusing on the bars responsibility in this, which we can debate, the law will handle that. The debate for me is she is suing to shuck responsibility in her part and that’s my point. She is suing to give someone else the blame instead of her, which was the active participant. The law will take care of that bar. But her suing is her saying she think that she has no fault in this. And that is the absurd part for me. I’m not debating the law. I’m debating her audacity for a law suit to say that the bar is the reason she drove their and did this so they should pay. The bar may have the legal responsibility to stop serving her. But she was 100 percent at fault for the 12 million in damage she did

2

TheHighWarlord t1_j5iby19 wrote

> The bar may have the legal responsibility to stop serving her. But she was 100 percent at fault for the 12 million in damage she did

If the bar has a legal responsibility, then she can't be 100% at fault. Those are two contradictory statements is what I'm telling you.

Also, anyone can file a lawsuit over anything. Even though it's unlikely a jury or judge will find the bar responsible for all of the damages, there is nothing wrong with aiming high and landing somewhere in the middle.

0

westborneastbred t1_j5go1rx wrote

I’m sure the bar will get there’s. Cause bars have to follow laws and most countries and states and places are strict on alcohol related offenses. But this lady should not be able to shuck what she did to the bar. Not in this suit

1