We are, of course, amazed that our readers occasionally disagree with our brilliant and witty essays. In fact, sometimes quite a few readers think that The Outrage editors are wrong, misanthropic, idiotic, selfish, deluded, or all of the above.

Mother Outrage always told us that even the dull and the ignorant should have their say, so we've allowed space below for those dissenting opinions (and for shameless flattery).

If these negligent morons were so concerned with their childs life. Maybe they would take 200 Mil of the judgment and give it to a non-profit that studies ways of making children safer in automobiles, or god forbid, they put the money in a trust to give poor people who cannot afford them, child seats. No these horses asses are probably living large in some (of many) mansion in an exclusive neighborhood. Just know that when they die, they will get their REAL compensation for endangering a childs life.

the "editor" has apparently demonstrated his ignorance about the above litigation cases, as well as Shakespeare...the reason they wanted to kill the lawyers was to create ANARCHY.....

I agree with one of the other reader's comments - publish all the names of the judges that award these types of ludicrous settlements so we can VOTE THEM OUT. I WANT NAMES!!! I WANT ACCOUNTABILTY from these idiots.

This shows how screwed up the world is these days. Lawyers could probably BUY OUT the world if they all banded together in a law library. Oops, I shouldn't have said that..now they'll come running after me with a flock of reporters running after them. And kids, the moral of the story is that you can become wealthy and be all over tv if you a) are a mindless sap with a (some) good lawyer(s) or, b) are armed with a tape recorder. God save my sanity.

Most of these cases are reported in the UK as amusing anecdotes to fill in column inches. Unfortunately a country gets the legal system it deserves and the US leads the way in the 'I'm not to blame league'. Do any Americans take any responsibility for their own actions? they must but we hear very little of them. Unfortunately we are importing drivel such as Gerry Springer shows and these only reinforce the opinion that no-one stateside will possibly admit to being responsible for their own mistakes, its allways someone elses fault. People are demanding respect but how can you get that if you are not in charge of your own life? Also when you see the studio audiences at these shows then you can see where the cretins in the jury come from. My greatest fear is that this trend seems to be trying to establish itself in the UK but forwarned of your misfortune some of the bizzare cases are now getting the bums rush in the courts. Thank God for that, I believe the only thing that should chase ambulances are dogs.

forget about the insanity never ending...how about the absolute stupidity of people! this is dumber than the moron who sued for millions of dollars after spilling hot coffee all over herself, and much more idiotic than people smoking four packs of cigarettes per day, only to sue for millions of dollars themselves after the inevitability of cancer is revealed at their latest doctor appointment. not strapping their child to the car with a seat belt and then suing the car company! i'm actually looking forward to stubbing my toe in the dining room, and making my millions suing the carpet company.

The Bible says in the last days "darkness will cover the earth, and GROSS darkness the people". Has the Bible ever been wrong? I suggest you change it from the outrage to the gross darkness.

I can't believe that they we awarded that amount of money! They we responsible for their child's death by not strapping him into the seat with the seat belt. I don't see how you can blame the car company for this problem. Although I no fan of large companies, this wasn't their fault plain and simple. The problem in a court of law people tend to be swayed by the best speaker and not always by the evidence. Sometimes they made stupid decisions despite the evidence to the contrary. Sometimes they don't get to hear all the evidence they need to hear to make an informed decision. Like shakespear said kill all lawyers (and Judges). Especially Judges who exclude vitial information.

I never really knew the extent of madness in the world until I found The Outrage. I am so sick of people saying "I was harassed because I'm ___________ (fill in the blank)." Maybe if certain people didn't dress like they were prepared to steal security guards wouldn't keep such a close eye on them. As for the couple who lost their child, I'm saddened everytime a child is killed or murdered. But I just wonder how often those people think about their child? Do they think about him when they are cashing their settlement check with their smiles on their faces? Do they think about him when they are buying a new car that their child paid for with his life? How about on vacations? I'm sure their child would have loved to have gone on a vacation. But with all of their money I'm sure they probably have more important things to think about than him. They have to figure out where to spend money that they should have never gotten in the first place. If they were such loving parents (you know the kind who deserve $262.5 million for the loss of their child),why could they have not taken better precautions to make sure their child was safe in the first place? The wreck was the father's fault in the first place. This is completely an obscene amount for a settlement.

please publish the names and venues of judges who appear to be incompetent so we can vote them out or start imopeachments...

I have devised a pet theory to explain the outrageous penalties levied on the Deep Pockets of the world. Look at your average jury composition. Then ask your friends and co-workers whether or not they have served on jury duty.

I have found that most hard-working, intelligent people with a modicum of common sense tend to evade jury duty as if it were a burden rather than a priveledge. I, personally, would be honored to take first hand part in our judicial system, but the majority seem to find it a chore to be avoided at all costs.

I have even heard people tell stories of using racial epithets and sexist comments during the interview so they will be dismissed as biased.

On the other hand, the type of people who have all day to watch soap operas and talk shows always seem to be the types that are actually serving on the jury.

They seem to be either unemployable, lazy, or bored. I don't mean your typical homemaker, but the type that puts their kids in day care just so they don't have to deal with the realities of parenthood while the other parent is earning a living. When somebody's examples for normal life are the characters on the soaps and the weirdos on the talk shows, it becomes obvious why juries do what they do.

Mind you, this is a pet theory of mine, but I'm not in charge of a government beauracracy, and I'm not independently wealthy, so I cannot give it the detailed study that it so richly deserves.

Hmmm...maybe I could sue somebody for the resources to start this project...

I just discover The Outrage and I am not sure what to think. Are you exagerating a little, a lot or not a all? Is there something you don't tell us?

I never heard about those case (I am from Canada) and I find it completely absurd to give away so much money. How people (jury) with their right mind found the car company guilty? There's something I'm missing. Here you'll never hear something like that.

If the exact thing would have happen in Canada, It's the parents who would be in court for criminal negligence. And no one will think about suing the car company.

For the Eddie Bauer affair, the verdict would have been the same except for the amount of money (probably a hundred time less) and nothing for the friends.

I don't know who is responsible of this madness? The lawiers (not all of them I know) or the people who always want more money?

Sure, I'm proud and happy to be Canadian but so far I loved what I saw of your country (NY,North of CA, all New-England...).

Were the awards reduced on appeal??

Whatever happened to people taking responsibility for their own actions? The guy who spouts off in the long winded monolouge must be a lawyer himself. Fine, Chrysler should pay for not providing a safe latch. But the drivers negligence contributed equally, if not more, to the childs death. Seatbelts are in cars for a reason.

Child safety seats are mandatory for children for a reason. I suppose that the lady who sued McDonalds was right because she got burned. Maybe McDonalds should have sued the car company from who the lady purchased her car because they didn't provide cup holders so the lady put the coffee between her legs. There's a bright idea.

Let's stick something very hot between our legs while in a moving object that is subject to anomoalies that could cause the coffe to spill. This excessive award stuff needs to stop.

People complain because lift tickets cost so much at ski resorts. Know why? Because the resort has to carry HUGE liability policies because idiots who know the risks of skiing screw up and injure themselves and then claim the ski resort is at fault. Or they ski beyond the posted boundary.

And what's worse, there's a disclaimer that is on every ticket that a resort sells that says the person will hold the resort not liable but lawyers will find loopholes just to extort $ for some lame brain who screwed up and has to blame somebody else because he/she is pathetic.

I resent having to pay high prices for lots of things just because a company has to protect itself from this overly litigous society.

When are people going to start taking responsibility for their actions? When is the insanity going to stop? Does anyone know where "Galt's Gulch" is located?

In the case of the people who's son died in the van wreck just remember I would bet they did not get home before a lawyer was foaming at the mouth to have there case and what would be is take in this suit 30% or maybe 50%.

These people probably did not know how to get this money till the lawyer told them remember when a plane crash's the lawyers or on the scene almost before the paramedic how do they sleep at night they would stop at nothing to defend some low life who eats little kids as long as there are $$$$ signs.

I read your Outrage on both the car case and the Bauer case. I must say that there is a bit of the reactionary response in your write-up not to mention yellow journalism.

My girlfriend is a paralegal and unless she mistook this case for another similar case( the Eddie Baur case that is) what the security guard did was violate our Constitutional amendment against,

UNREASONABLE search and seisure and violation of privacy. You guys remember the constitution don't you, it's only that document that keeps us from being a hairs breath from becoming a racist police state. Remember this strip search was for allegedly stealing a shirt that later turned out not to be stolen.

What if it was a woman instead of a man? Regardlees it is very humiliating to be stripped seached in front of your friends. The jury may not have found racism in this case but that can be difficult to prove sometimes, even when it is present. This looks like another case of "shopping while black". What you've never heard the term? It happens all time!

The reason Eddie Bauer was sued is because security guards are lawsuit-proof due to cronically underpaid wages, which is one of the reasons why you get such unprofessional behavior.

Maybe if Eddie Bauer spent some money on training their security guards better this would not happen. As for the car case, it is obvious that the latch was faulty. In a legal case all the rest of the circumstances become irrelevent. The lack of safety of a car latch is judged on its own and independent merits, the latch is supposed to be designed to take impact from various angles and within a specifically prespecified speed range.

It is supposed to stay secure regardless of the red light or if seatbelts are secured. You conviniently left out these details. Because these are Federal regulations that the car companies have to comply with, that is why the judge in this case suppressed the fact that the car went through the red light or that the seatbelt was unfastened.

He suppressed it because it was evidence that was irrelavent in regard to the direct safety of the latch. I ask you this, why is that an Indy car can hit the wall at over 200 miles per hour, flip a half dozen times, and become a heap of scrap metal that barely retains the resemblance of a car, and the driver walks away without a scratch, and a car company cant design a car that does the same for the public?

Please don't say it would cost too much, the reason Indy cars are so expensive is that they are individually made one of a kind. They would be a lot cheaper if they were mass produced like passenger cars. The reason they don't do it is that they would rather squeeze more profit out of a car than improve safety.

There is a cieling price at which consumers will refuse to buy a car so if improvements are a bit more expensive they squeeze profit margins. When faced with this delema what do you think CEO's natural impulse, whose job security is always based on the bottom line, do? The courts are there to remind them that putting people in harms way is not profit friendly.

How many people out there remember the Corvair death trap when Ralph Nader went after the car companies.

Or the Tucker car that was put out of production by the car companies acting in conspiracy to suppress a car that was not only safer but that with the exception of one, they are all still functional road worthy cars today. They were made over 40 years ago. Because of Nader many of the cars you drive today were forced to incorporate most of the safety features of the Tucker as standerd equipment. The car companies had to be dragged through both Congress and the courts kicking and screaming for those changes to be made.

As for the huge judgement, I just hope it was enough to make the company realize that cutting corners isn't profitable. What is unfortunate is that the judgement will probably be reduced to the point that the company will notch it up to the price of doing business and return to business as usual screwing us all.

Personally, I think, the CEO's should have been slapped with criminal charges of criminal endangerment and depraved indifference to human life. That always seems to make a bigger impression than just a civil suit. As for the family, I think that the loss of their child is punishment enough for their negligence.

Unless they have the kind of ice that oftwen runs through the veins of many car company CEO's, their wound will not be healed with any amount of money. And as much as many of you out there may think that coming into this much money all of a sudden is a blessing for many people who are not used to managing this kind of money it often brings many unforseen problems.

Sometimes to the point of landing them in bigger debt than before the judgement. As for the lawyer, he deserves the cash for hopefully making cars safer for all of us. As for all those out there reading this, I hope you all write your congressman and ask them why they haven't passed legislation making passenger cars as safe as Indy cars.

And why hasn't there been legislation making the fuel cell powered Hypercar that was designed by the ROCKY MOUNTAIN INSTITUTE (they have a web page

http://www.rmi.org/a_report/trams.html) the standered for the next generation of motor vehicals. And while we are at it make the utilities change their generating plants to fuel cell technology. Those two changes would drop the coast of fuel through the floor, make us independent of forign oil, help farmers become profitable since fuel cels can be fueled by virtually any hydrocarbon ke it very difficult for Saddam Hussain to purchase any weapons.

Don't believe me check out the hypercar page and then look up fuel cells with your search engine. Remember that many of the militias that have sprung up is because many people in the midwest lost their farms. I think it is time for a change.

I'm sorry, but no one and I mean no ONE should get 250,000,000 dollars for ANYTHING. Period. But, especially not for murdering your own child.

I am from South Carolina and it saddens me to know that there are morons there that are dumb enough to give that out as an award. It saddens me even more though that there ar "educated" judges that let this nonsense go on!

Has anyone heard Jimenez say whether he will be going to Didney Land or not?

I sure could use some of that cash to pay tuition this semester!

I read the jimenez case, and looks like the Jimenez are getting a lttle bit of the value of Arizona, Texas , New Mexico and California, that amricans bought with rifles, politics and intimidation. I don't call that justice nor the Jimenez case.

I had my own taste of the american justice when my son was hit by a vietnamese woman, he was riding his bike and the woman her toyota, I got a lawyer, and guess what, I didn't get a penny. I even had to pay for the ambulance. I think the anmerican system doesn't go mad in Seattle yet. The police still doing the right think, they listen to the part that still concsious.

sincerely:
Rodolfo Gil

Excuse me, but doctors are honest? school teachers are honest?

Some are, yes; so are some lawyers. I've been involved with all three, and the NEA is the CAUSE of the corruption at all levels, in all professions. Read "Who's Ruining Our Schools", for one source. The NEA is a socialist propaganda machine, period.

And it destroys children, one way or the other. Medicine is not honest; the CDC was denying AIDS could be contracted from lab. spills after 3 had already died from such. Docors are greedy and corrupt and incompetent and make a lot more than lawyers, on the average.

Don't forget the good when blaming the bad, and don't buy the PR that the good are the whole or even most of the story. that'd be as stupid as buying the PR that the FBI is and was always the Good Guys.

I think that the money that was awarded in the Chrysler case was horrible. This man killed his child (why in the world would you not seat belt a child, and then run a red light is beyond me), then he turns around and sues the car company.

Yes, Chrysler should have fixed the latches on the door. That is their responiblity. But it was the father's job to try to keep his child as safe as possible. Leaving a child unseatbelted and running a red light with the unseatbelted child is just plain stupid.

I hope this father knows every day that he killed his son. And with every dollar of that money he spends, I hope he is reminded about what a stupid and carless person he is.

Well, now that these people have won all of this money, there is but only one thing to do, and that is for the security guard and the other driver to sue for their half.

After all, just think how the security guard feels, he probably lost his job and I'll bet this incident will look good on his resume. And what about the other driver?

He was the one hit , because an idiot was behind the wheel of the other car. Oops. Pardon my ignorance, you can't sue idiots, can you?

Both cases should be handed over for examination, to NASA or your Health Authorities. My opinion is that the judges and the trial lawyers in those cases are either ALIENS or they are really not well in those areas where thinking and logic are mandatory.

I'm disappointed with The Outrage for using easy "hot-button" emotionalism to build a case. For example, you say: "In June an Alabama jury ordered General Motors to pay $150 million in a similar door latch failure case.

In 1981 Ford was ordered to pay over $128 million as the result of a gas tank explosion in a Ford Pinto. In 1984 the award for a Ford Mustang explosion was over $106 million." Would you care to tell us how many of those awards were or might be reduced later?

You see, I can say "In 1982, a jury awarded $50 zillion in a case," and conveniently leave out "which later was reduced to $100,000." You're using just a piece of the truth to spur emotional reaction.

PI lawyers are not representative of the whole legal profession. I agree the verdict is outrageous, but it won't stand and will be reduced, just like all the other outrageous jury verdict awards. They are ALWAYS reduced on appeal.

Secondly, there are very valid legal and public policy reasons why the judge didn't allow certain evidence into the record. I won't waste space here, but there is, and if you think about it you can probably figure it out.

As a whole, the legal system and the courts are fine. Before everyone sounds off, I would suggest investigating how the WHOLE system REALLY works, instead of relying solely on the media or other select reports or incidents (such as OJ or the Chrysler case).

I realize that most Americans are too intellectually lazy to try an exercise like that because it's much easier to whine about what we don't know about, but maybe one day...

Something has to be said about the juries in these cases who award these outrageous amounts. Is everyone who sits on the jury just totally stupid?

Having never been on a jury myself, I have no knowledge of how they are instructed to come to their decisions, but it seems that some responsibility for this outrage must go to the jury itself. Why do they award such outrageous amounts?

Why do they vote in favor of the plantiff to begin with? Maybe if juries would stop rewarding carelessness, and use a little common sense, then there would not be as much incentive for people to sue.

Something has to be said about the juries in these cases who award these outrageous amounts. Is everyone who sits on the jury just totally stupid? Having never been on a jury myself, I have no knowledge of how they are instructed to come to their decisions, but it seems that some responsibility for this outrage must go to the jury itself.

Why do they award such outrageous amounts? Why do they vote in favor of the plantiff to begin with? Maybe if juries would stop rewarding carelessness, and use a little common sense, then there would not be as much incentive for people to sue.

Your outrage about the monetary award of 200+ million dollars IS outrageous itself! I might agree with your claim that the award is mind boggling and an outrage, but the manner in which you describe the events and who might be responsible are disgusting and insensitive beyond belief and comprehension!

I would suggest to you, the writer of this column -- a course in empathy training. No matter you might be to blame in this regard... a child was lost!

So far as the Eddie Bauer blurb goes -- again, I feel the dollar amount might be outrageous, but the security persons actions were equally as outrageous. Had it been yourself, or one of your children who were so falsely accused AND detained illegally... do you REALLY think that I believe you would have just let the matter go, and chalk it up as a "security guard doing his job in everyday America"?

You don't fool me one iota -- we both know you would have gone to court to get "compensated" for your humiliation and inconvenience just like these young men did.

The outrage is not in these 3 young men exercising their rights to due process... the OUTRAGE is that the American Judicial system runs amok -- and is totally out of control!

I was in an accident, March 1995. My daughter and I were wearing our seatbelts. While I was making a left turn, another driver ran the red light and struck our car.

He was speeding, and had no insurance. He was NOT tested for drugs or alcohol, but my daughter and I were (we had none in our bodies). I was in the hospital for 6 weeks, and almost died.

My 12 year old daughter never regained conciousness, and died the next day. The other driver paid $900.00 in traffic fines, but the county attorney refused to prosecute for manslaughter.

I had to sue my own auto insurance company top comply with our policy, finally recieved some of the monies I was owed over 2 years later.

The company then went into recievership before my legal action against them could be taken any further. I lost my daughter, almost died. and it took over 2 years to get compensation from my own insurance co. The other driver paid a meager fine.

I couldn't have said it better. I'm making a copy of this outrage to spread around and hopefully, everyone will. Here's to the appeal!

The basic problem in our legal system is that most lawyers are smart and most juries are composed of stupid people who feel that large companies should pay regardless of who is wrong. All judges, of course, are lawyers and who do you think they will favor.

Our legal system will eventually crumble if we do not put some kind of limits on punative damages. Mr Manske seems upset that the Government loaned Chrysler 1 billion dollars (which was paid back with interest) so I guess he would have been happy to see Chrysler declare bankruptcy.

Well, 30 or 40 more suits like the 265 million dollar one will accomplish this. Mr Manske would probably be thrilled to see Chrysler (the mean bad big business) go out of business with thousands or workers out of work.

The Eddie Bauer secuity guard "suspected" that Alonzo Jackson had stolen the shirt, but he had no evidence whatever upon which to base his action: he did not see him steal it. Therefore: WRONG!

I support Jackson fully; maybe he'll share the money with me.

As to the two detained against their will: that's false imprisnment and a violation of thier constitunal rights. Security guard WRONG again.

I fully support the kids. Maybe they'll share their money with me, too. (This is the first time I have disagreed with you. If you will share your money with me I may be more supportive of you.)

I am a lawyer who does not handle personal injury cases. I share your "outrage" at the ludicrous verdicts being given to victims of their own stupidity. However, don't lose sight over how the system works -- the lawyers propose, the judges and juries dispose.

If the lawyer down the street gets a fat verdict because his idiot client spilled coffee on her lap (and if the judge upholds it), *that* becomes the law. I have a duty to represent my client zealously, within the bounds of the law.

It becomes my *job* to try to hang liability on some tangentially involved party with a deep pocket (legalese for a guy with lots of money, at least till I get done with him).

If the last victim got a multi-million dollar award, it is my job to ask for that much, too. If I fail to, *I* am negligent and can be sued.

Please don't think that the PI lawyers don't enjoy their fees -- I'm sure they do.

But, it certainly would help if *juries* quit playing with other people's money and had some common sense or even a bit of stoicism. More important than that, judges must stop being "lapdogs," as you accurately describe them, *especially* the judges in the state appeals courts.

The buck stops with the appellate judges, and, as long as they permit wackiness, that is what they will get.

About the time that the Supreme Court got into the illegal business of legislation, smart lawyers (and most of them are) figured out how to milk the system. We need tort limits. Some states have passed them, but its not enough.

There is no more justification in a lawyer making 40% of anything than there is in a football player making 10 Mil or more to play a game.

We have become a nation of lazy, blood sucking leeches. It is all founded in moral decadence. I wonder if the kid's parents will erect more than a perfunctory marker to their lost son. It's no wonder lawyer jokes abound. Did you hear the one about ....

Please don't mistake this as a defense of plaintiff's lawyers, the culture of victimization, or product liability law. Product liability law was created out of whole cloth by judges who were not content with simple judicial review and yearned for legislative power.

However, I wish to point one thing out which is not well known about The Outrage's Quote of the Day, Willie S's line from Henry VI about killing all the lawyers: That line was spoken by one anarchist to another as the two of them plotted to overthrow their government.

They not unreasonably saw the lawyers as the first line of defense of the rule of law. Now, whatever may be said about the current state of our government, which was once a vibrant experiment in democratic federalism, I'm sure even Grandma Outrage won't advocate its overthrow.

So, if you must, kill the plaintiff's attorneys, but please don't kill all of the lawyers (especially me).

That does it! I'm going to law school. One or two good cases and I can retire!

The only outrage I see in the Chrysler award is that a company that the Federal government loaned over $1 Billion hid the fact that they had a faulty door latch and then continued to sell cars using the defective latch instead of designing a better one.

The lawyers may get paid too much and the family may have a lot of blame for not taking the proper precautions with their child, but the lawsuit was over Chrysler's decision to not fix the latch after they knew it was dangerous and just pay the price in court later.

If this large a seattlement discourages the bean-counter reaction to saftey issues it is a good thing.

IMHO, your anger should be directed at Chrysler for their fraud. They said it was a "safe" vehicle, they knew it wasn't, and more people than this poor child with unsafe parents have died as a result.

I think everyone reading this would have been MUCH happier with criminal charges than these large civil cases. That goes for the EB case too.

There is a very simple solution to this. The awards should go toward reducing the National Debt. The lawyers (I use the term loosely) could be paid a flat rate if they win.

Everytime I read The Outrage I suffer a severe physiological reaction: elevated blood pressure, stomach churning, teeth clenching, muscle tension; ie. I become outraged.

The Outrage failed to warn me of the hazards of subscribing to this mailing list despite knowing the content of the mailing list, and knowing (as evidenced by the name "The Outrage") the effect that the mailing list will have upon its readers.

The Outrage continues to intentionally inflict these outrages upon me, and this exasperates my damages.

You will be hearing from my lawyer. . . .

HAHAHA They'll make the Forbes list! It's funny, 'cause this list lists the way people made money. It'll be the first 'litigation,' or perhaps 'killing own child.'

As a society, we've been bitching about the judicial system for as long as I can remember, yet the system continues to deteriorate.

Why? Seems to me the result of our societal failure to take back control from those who have perverted the system.

These same folks, with the best of intentions - perhaps, have brought us multi-culturalism, diversity, political correctness and a society in which people are taught that they're not responsible for their actions, that, instead, they're victims of some ur-conspiracy to hold them down and deny them their God-given rights to free (unearned) food, shelter and clothing.

These cases are symptomatic of that perversion and are only it's latest manifestation.

What about the schoolyard bully that gives "noogies", or just pushes kids around? It's time to sue..Think of all the pain and anquish these bozos cause.

It's time for the parents of America to stand up for their kids' rights!!

And what about the teacher that is just plain mean? Assign too much homework for my kid and I'll sue!

And the coach that makes my kid run extra laps for screwing up.. I'll see him in court..

As for your quote of the day... AMEN!!

With all of the sexual harrassment suits flying around, why not physical harrassment. If a boy says something a girl doen't like, the parents can sue the school and whatever other authorities in charge.