fbpx

Readers Rage Back! 




March 19, 2000

VERDICT IS IN!


Readers Rage Back!


A day in the life of our postmaster


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).




Name: Dwayne (Wegottum99@aol.com)
Time: 10/5/2002 (23:5:7)

Talk about outrage, Who ever Feels sorry for this Scum Bag is A PUSSY like you will never see in any life time.If you Think your a nice person because of your guilt think again. Scum like you dont deserve to be protected from Evil like that. I was horrified. You better pray that if you ever get in a jam like those people were in that you would be so lucky to have cops to protect you!


Name: Michael Atkisson (bigredtrucks@hotmail.com)
Time: 4/23/2001 (0:42:42)

This case about the robbers in LA and the cop being sued, IS SO FAR BEYOND MY COMPREHENSION AND IDEA OF COMMON SENSE,…. I am not exaggerating when i say that if the other robber survived he should be shot. The family that aggreed to let yagman sue should be imprisoned, and the cop should be given a commendation, a medal, and a promotion for EVEN ATTEMPTING to save that guys life. And As for YAGMAN himself… That guy should be castrated, and then drawn and quartered. And then have his remains hung to rot above the entrance to the LA courthouse to scare away all the other corrupt PIECES OF SH*T lawyers who would attempt such a thing.
HAVE A NICE DAY.

— Michael Atkisson


Name: Louis Menyhert (Swaziland2@email.msn.com)
Time: 3/20/2001 (1:36:50)

The loonies have taken over the aslyum. How can good folk have any respect for the law or the institutions of this country when criminals and this type of lawyer destroy good people? I think the city should institute proceedings against the family of the dead man for abusing the legal system. Worse, the judge should be removed from the system.


Name: CARL (CWSIV_NEWS@HOTMAIL.COM)
Time: 4/18/2000 (15:32:39)

nO WAY. tHUGS trying to rob a bank deserve a cent from the taxpayers for their deaths.


Name: Mark Smith (jacarandatree@hotmail.com)
Time: 4/12/2000 (21:8:32)

It seems that the majority of the commentators here would do extremely well in a totalitarian nation (where they are in charge) for that is what you advocate, a nation where there is no redress for wrongs. I am a conservative Republican but I don’t care who you are you do not have the right to deliberately allow a human to die, this was murder and the policeman ought to be thankful this is only a civil suit, he should have been tried for murder! I remember seeing the newspaper the day after a picture of the day still alive with a policeman’s foot on his back, it said he died later and it was an outrage all right. Were a on a jury I would award the children what they seek and then double it.


Name: Liz (No email address provided)
Time: 4/10/2000 (7:10:44)

I can’t believe this is going to court again. It was rediculous in the first place and now we have to pay for it all over again!
Josette, the judge did hear both sides the first time, and the judge doesn’t decide, the jury does. Let me ask you this, if one of your children were killed, or your husband or mother was killed brutally for no reason, you are more concerned with the care of the murderer and whether or not his family should get money for it all? If that’s true, then I certainly wouldn’t want to be a member of your “family”.
All the police have to do is call for an ambulance, and their responsibility is done. End of story.
No one has even mentioned the fact that the policeman was fired after being cleared of any wrong doing by the police force. If anyone should be suing the police department, it should be him!
I guess the American dream has changed. I should be hoping that I have a murderer for a husband or son, who dies after killing an innocent man and almost killing many, many more, and then sue the police for doing their job. And if I had someone like Josette on the jury I’d have it made.


Name: josette collins (No email address provided)
Time: 4/9/2000 (1:33:50)

At the risk of being perceived as illogical, the judge and possibly the lawyer are doing their jobs.

The bank robber’s family is most likely accusing the police officer and the city of intentionally letting the robber die. Had medical care been provided, they will assert, the robber would have lived and gone to jail. Now, the judge was not there, how does she know if that is a true statement or not? It might be a bold face lie, but she was not there and doesn’t know. That’s why she must grant a trial. She needs to hear both sides of the story. She MUST grant a trial. She MUST! If she doesn’t she hasn’t let the robber’s family have their day in court and could be removed from the bench.

Now the family is permitted to hire an attorney to present their side, perform discovery and the like. When was the ambulance called? Did the officer tell the ambulance driver not to help the bank robber? An attorney needs to find this stuff out. If the attorney really did solicit the business as you say, he should be disbarred — such actions are ethical violations.

What I find to be appalling though, is that if your summary of the facts is correct, and the death was truly accidental, where did they get such a screwed up jury?? My guess is that the attorney representing the city is a loser, otherwise he/she should have no problem winning this case. The outrage is that at least one juror actually sided with the robber’s family and caused a mistrial. The outrage is that the city doesn’t hire better legal help. They are probably overworked or right out of law school.


Name: –Anonymous– (No email address provided)
Time: 4/5/2000 (18:0:8)

Fools, all of you. Of course crime pays, thats why there are so many criminals. There are so many weak people out there just waiting to be raped, robbed, or killed some people just can’t resist taking advantage of you sheep. Most people in this country are cattle awaiting the slaughter. Fools.


Name: Barry Gibb (bgibb@ryde.nsw.gov.au)
Time: 3/28/2000 (21:4:28)

How about this for an idea. When you step outside the law, all rights for you then cease to exist. That would be the simplest way of stopping idiotic cases like this coming up. I fyou are engaging in a criminal activity, you should no longer be protected by the law. Very simple.


Name: F. Wolff (MommaWolff@aol.com)
Time: 3/28/2000 (17:10:31)

No wonder our kids grow up with the idea that crime pays. In an earlier more just time that lawyer would have been pushing up daisies by now lawyers will take on any case for that almighty dollar.


Name: Charlie (Anonymous)
Time: 3/28/2000 (0:40:25)

Why should this surprise anyone? Crime DOES pay, and pays well in todays wishy-washy society! It’s crazy!!! Every law-abiding, hard working, TAX PAYING person in LA should be ringing the city’s phones off the wall and overflowing their mail boxes protesting any forms of settlement.


Name: –Anonymous– (No email address provided)
Time: 3/22/2000 (21:45:55)

In a more sane society, this attorney would be a marked man.


Name: micol (No email address provided)
Time: 3/21/2000 (14:4:4)

the case is absurd beyond belief. if you choose to commit a crime and remove other people’s right to live and be safe then i believe you have automatically lost all your rights. society doesn’t need such scum-people like these are the most wretched vile filth alive, that make a slimy living stealing( legally or not) other people’s money and time. cases such as these shouldnt even be tried- my disgust is too much to print. for the criminal’s family : “you are some of the most revolting people alive and your relative deserved an even worse death. stop living off our money and get real jobs. you are pathetic” (hey you think i have a lot of hate in me, you havent heard anything yet!)


Name: Larry Rehm (bnb@nnex.net)
Time: 3/20/2000 (17:1:11)

I have to say that any occupation carries with it certain risks.
Robbing banks,More than others. This case should never
have been entered on a court docket once,let alone twice.
Lawyer Yagman should have been with them at the time,
as he seems to be as much a thief as the two dead felons.


Name: Neal Laur (nekela@home.com)
Time: 3/20/2000 (15:34:55)

I have to agree with you on these “asinine” court cases they
are having these days. If these lawyers were so much for justice as they are for
lining their pockets we would have a great justice system , but they are so greedy
all they can think of is how much can I get from this. I have seen many cases
of this and I don’t know if I would ever want to do business with one , even if I were guilty of some crime.


Name: paul (paengler@hotmail.com)
Time: 3/20/2000 (13:52:19)

the only way to stop this insanity is the british way;make the lawyers and the plaintifs pay when they lose


Name: Bob Trexler (av1611@comteck.com)
Time: 3/20/2000 (5:41:35)

NO!!NO!!NO!!
Do not settle the case. There
is just more to come from the
scu.


Name: Lorrie Gant (lorrie_gant@hotmail.com)
Time: 3/20/2000 (0:59:22)

Another trial is obsurd. The first one was enough to make your head reel. What a waste of time and money!!!! The officer was doing his job, plain and simple, and from what I understand, he did it to the letter.


Name: Bill (pistolbill@webtv.net) Time: 3/19/2000 (22:14:51)

Hey-Hey boys and girls, don’t get your draws in a twist over simple situations like this one. The L.A.PD as we all know is a fine, honest, honorable, and above reproach bunch of guys. They have to get rid of a little stress now and then. Its all quite understandable. Lets take a look at the big picture. First of all they were totally unprepared to get into a shootout with these two pukes(That were really prepared) What amazes me is the fact that none died. If one officer had the proper weapon in the trunk of his patrol car, and was trained to use it, this gunfight would have ended early on. Full Body armor means absolutly nothing to a properly trained person with the proper weapon. The rage is all about “WHO” is responsible for putting our police on the street without the tool’s to do the job? Come on you guys!! let’s rage about something important!! This shister lawyer is not worth my spit, nor yours. The circle will come around on him and all the others like him. Our system is evolving it’s self. What say we devote some of our energy to what cause and effect really means.


Name: Lawrence Cahn (manifestor@email.msn.com)
Time: 3/19/2000 (21:24:6)

Evidently, Yagman considers himself to be one of the intellectual elite who is capable of defending the indefensible. He should be sued by the victims, or their relatives, for the intentional infliction of emotional distress.


Name: Chad Reeser (ceeter@dadchad.lovelock.nv.us)
Time: 3/19/2000 (20:39:37)

My opinion cannot be fully stated because it depends on language that is wholly unfit for any children who might accidentally find and read it. I’ve written to both the City Attorney and Mayor Riordan supporting your position in this matter, and hinting that my relatives in LA will also be watching this case. The fact that the jury took “hung” status is strong evidence that the inmates are taking over the asylum! Frankly, when something like this is possible, it scares the hell out of me!


Name: Bernie Loechel (bigbear66@msn.com)
Time: 3/19/2000 (19:49:31)

What I think about this case can not be put in print. It would set the computer afire.


Name: John Maggiore (Eflatjohn@webtv.net) Time: 3/19/2000 (19:1:32)

What can anyone call the demise of the degenerate, murdering felon except:: “Hazaardous Waste Removal” !!(the same as can be said of the forthcoming funerals of a number of high-ranking degenerates in Washington.


Name: Maret Kita (mmkita@yahoo.com)
Time: 3/19/2000 (16:42:59)

I can’t believe that 12, supposedly competent people could even think of awarding that Scum’s family anything! Those bank robbers got exactly what they deserved. In fact, if I were the ambulance driver, I would have made sure to take the route with the most traffic.
To be able to bring such suits to trial in the first place is the outrage. That poor officer shouldn’t even have to defend himself against such charges. And what about the innocent victims of this shooting spree? What do they get out of this? They should be able to sue the bank robbers’ families (but, unfortunately, it would probably come out of some other innocent victim’s pocket). Who’s running the U.S. Justice System? The criminals, apparently. They obviously have more rights than the victims of their crimes. I think they should bring back public executions, stoning, flogging, etc. Maybe if it weren’t kept behind closed doors, people would think of their punishment. I have another thought on prison “overcrowding” Hey, they’re in there for a reason and deserve to be overcrowded. My thought on this is throw all the violent criminals in one huge room and let them kill each other (overcrowding solved!).


Name: Andrea Cocco (lccc1021@aol.com)
Time: 3/19/2000 (16:13:58)

Attorneys who are “ambulance
chasers” should be disbarred!!
They add to the costs that we
as citizens have to pay in taxes. It’s time to do some-
thing about these rogues who
only care about themselves.
This man is suing on a matter
that is entirely legal and shd
be thrown out of court!!!


Name: Dave (Dave739@aol.com)
Time: 3/19/2000 (16:11:1)

I am astonished that even a few members of this jury could have even remotely consider awarding one Lincoln Penny to some dirtbag who had just robbed a bank and shot a number of people. So he bleed to death, tough. It’s a hazrad of the criminal profession. Bad things can and do happen to you in the act of committing a violent felony! The OUTRAGE is right about this one. Scumbag Yagman, ambulance chaser extraodinaire, and those like him should be prevented by law from bringing such suits. Time for lawmakers to enact legislation preventing any criminal who is either injured or dies in the act of or as a result of committing a felony from suing.


Name: Kirk Gregory (kdg59@worldnet.att.net)
Time: 3/19/2000 (15:57:8)

This whole trial and up-coming re-trial stinks of raw sewage. If a jury fails to find for the plaintiff, I say dis-bar the Yagmiester. If however, the jury finds for the plaintiff, I would be ashamed to call myself a citizen of L.A. and send such a message to the rest of the country, seeing how California is such an influence on the nation as a whole.


Name: jack hand (jackhand@hotmail.com)
Time: 3/19/2000 (15:32:17)

I swim against the current. I believe that the Outrage
presents a very one-sided opinion. I have been working
in the LA area for the past 2 years and many of the
articles that I have read in the LA Times show that the
police have deliberately framed and killed individuals.
People who were doing nothing wrong. However, the
police just wanted to set an example. The recent
Ramparts problem being but one example.

The bank robber did deserve medical attention. There
have been several articles in the local papers stating
that such care was probably deliberately kept from him.

Yagman has a history of going against the LAPD. And,
with good reason. Instead of a little smoke, with the LAPD,
there has been far too much fire.

They should really clean house. Maybe this case and the
Ramparts problem will get them to do so. Or else, maybe
the people of LA can vote in a new administration.


Name: chris aldridge (home4sale@prodigy.net)
Time: 3/19/2000 (15:16:1)

Where is the common sense? LA should stand firm against this atty, S. Yagman. The legal profession wonders why they are not respected by the vast majority of Americans. With Yagman as your posterboy, stop wondering, you have your answer!


Name: Takenby1 (takenbyone@takenbyone.com)
Time: 3/19/2000 (14:6:26)

Oh, this is just unreal! How could anyone with an ounce of grey matter even come close to defending the criminals in this case? The city should NOT settle this case, not even a little bit. The city and the cop should be fully reimbursed and get a public apology from the scum that calls himself a “lawyer.” (He embarrasses even bad lawyers!) And that same scum should lose his license to practice ambulance chasing antics at the taxpayers’ expense. (“Practice” is the operative word here.) Those criminals lost ALL of their rights when they shot innocent people. Those innocent people never got a say in whether they would live or die, or whether or not an ambulance was called. The only good thing in this whole mess is that the taxpayers’ won’t be footing the bill for the murder’s housing, food, medical, and education while someone else decides he’d be a good wife behind bars.


Name: Shotsy (cshore@caprica.com)
Time: 3/19/2000 (13:45:14)

I’m a Los Angeleno, and I recall watching this incident
live on TV as it happened. It is true that the police
left this robber to bleed to death on the ground when they
should have called an ambulance.

I’m not condoning robbery, of course. But do the police
have what amounts to the right to execute someone
on the spot, without benefit of trial? This essentially is what
they did, by their failure to get medical attention for
this man.

This is the other side of this story…






Rage Back!

Are you Outraged by this Outrage? Want to set us straight? Or perhaps you feel an overwhelming need to tell us exactly how you’ve been enlightened by The Outrage. Post your comments below and they will appear on this page. (All messages become the property of The Outrage.)




E-mail address:

Comments:




Email editor@www.dailyoutrage.com if you have any trouble using this form.





Sign Up for FREE Outrages via e-mail



© Copyright 1996-98, The Outrage is produced by Athens New Media. All rights reserved.

    ShareThis
  • 1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars
    Loading...
    Rate this Rules To Live By

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Best comments get a free hardcover copy of Living Sanely in an Insane World. We'll email you for your address if you're selected.