And NOW, A New Low

If there is anybody that needs to be beat to death more...

Da CLIK!

Suing the Victim: Motorist Goes After Parents of the Boy He Struck and Killed
Monday, November 15, 2010
By Dave Collins, Associated Press

Hartford, Conn. (AP) - A driver who's serving a manslaughter sentence for striking and killing a 14-year-old boy is suing the victim's parents, blaming them for their son's death because they allowed him to ride his bike in the street without a helmet.

Matthew Kenney's parents, Stephen and Joanne, sued 48-year-old driver David Weaving shortly after he was sentenced last year to 10 years in prison, accusing him in Waterbury Superior Court of negligence and seeking more than $15,000 in damages.

Weaving, who has a history of drunken driving convictions, responded months later with a handwritten countersuit accusing the Kenneys of "contributory negligence." He's also seeking more than $15,000 in damages, saying he's endured "great mental and emotional pain and suffering," wrongful conviction and imprisonment, and the loss of his "capacity to carry on in life's activities."

"It drags the pain on," said Joanne Kenney, a stay-at-home mom with two other children, ages 2 and 13. "It's a constant reminder. Enough is enough. Can you just leave us alone and serve your time?"

Prisoners nationwide file tens of thousands of court actions a year on allegations ranging from wrongful convictions to poor jail conditions to civil rights violations, according to federal judiciary data. But lawyers and victim advocates say it's not often that convicted criminals sue victims and their families.

Prosecutors say Weaving was recklessly passing another car at about 83 mph in a 45-mph zone when his car hit Matthew Kenney on Route 69 in the Waterbury suburb of Prospect on April 27, 2007. A jury convicted him in December 2008 of manslaughter and other crimes.

Weaving has five drunken driving arrests since the late 1990s on his record, four of which resulted in convictions. He was not charged with drunken driving in the Kenney case.

The Kenneys say Weaving's license should have been permanently revoked in 1999 under state law because of the multiple convictions. They're seeking permission from the state claims commissioner to sue the Department of Motor Vehicles and its commissioner, Robert Ward.

The department has acknowledged it made a mistake in not revoking Weaving's license and said it has taken steps to prevent similar problems.

Matthew, a well-liked seventh-grader who played several sports, suffered severe head and internal injuries, broken bones and lacerations. He was declared brain dead the next day.

Weaving insists he was driving the speed limit and wasn't acting recklessly when he passed another car in a legal passing zone and Matthew suddenly appeared in the road around dusk in wet, foggy conditions. He alleges Matthew and some friends were jumping their bikes off a ramp at the end of a friend's driveway and landing in the middle of the two-lane road.

In his lawsuit, Weaving wrote that had the Kenneys "complied with the responsibilities of a parent and guardian and the laws of this state and not allowed their son to ride his bicycle without a helmet and to play out in the middle of Rt. 69 ... this incident and Matthew's death would not have happened."

Joanne Kenney, 42, calls Weaving's claims "unbelievable." While she and her husband are paying an undisclosed amount of attorney's fees, Weaving is filing his claims for free because he's considered indigent; a judge has waived $500 in fees so far.

"I just think it's crazy that they have the ability to do this behind bars," she said. "I think inmates have too many rights. They're the ones who committed the crimes, not us. And we're the ones who suffer more."

The federal government and several states, not including Connecticut, have laws and regulations requiring inmates to pay lawsuit fees as part of efforts to deter frivolous and malicious lawsuits.

Perpetrators don't often sue victims, said Jeff Dion, director of the nonprofit National Crime Victim Bar Association. Its database shows about 485 cases of perpetrators suing victims out of more than 12,000 civil cases dating to the 1980s, he said.

Perpetrators who sue often do so in an attempt to get victims and their families to give up on their lawsuits, Dion said. They generally lose their cases.

"It can be very distressing to victims' families and make them say, 'I can't deal with this,'" Dion said. "Justice can bring a sense of accountability and healing, but sometimes it's not a very pleasant experience."

He noted the case of "America's Most Wanted" host John Walsh, whose 6-year-old son, Adam, was kidnapped from a department store at a Florida mall and killed in 1981. Walsh wrote in his book "Tears of Rage" that he and his family dropped a lawsuit against the store and the mall after being put through difficult depositions and facing questions about their own actions by the defendants' lawyers.

"So, in the end, they broke us. We folded," Walsh wrote.

Attorney Andrew Cates calls Weaving's countersuit a part of the legal process. Cates is representing Weaving in appeals aimed at overturning his convictions -- which were recently upheld by the state Appellate Court -- but is not involved with the lawsuit involving the Kenneys.

"I can see their side of it. I'm a parent," Cates said. "But I can also see the other side of it. If you're driving down the street and your car makes contact with a pedestrian and you think it's the pedestrian's fault, you have to raise the issue."

State Attorney General Richard Blumenthal -- just elected as the state's next U.S. senator -- and State Victim Advocate Michelle Cruz say they're appalled at Weaving's countersuit.

"Blaming the victim is just offensive," Cruz said. "It takes obviously a very unique individual to go after the family of a deceased child. I would say it's an unsound lawsuit."

Matthew was a popular student at Long River Middle School, a few miles from the accident site. A memorial Facebook page in his honor has more than 600 members.

"He was a loving kid," Joanne Kenney told the AP. "He was a caring kid. He was a helping kid. He was an honors student. He played sports. He was full of life. He had so much to give."

 

that is just plain wrong.
what the hell is wrong w/ people today, he hit the kid at over 40mph over the posted speed limit. I don't think a plastic bike helmet would have helped the kid at all.

 

People are fucked up. The End. The guy is doing ten years, WTF else does he have to do?

...

 

Indeed and since he can do it for free, he literally loses nothing. It also gives him something to do instead of sitting idly around.

 

Cyborg seems to get off on this death and destruction shit. WTF is up with that? Nutter..

 

And you seem to get off on fucking with Cyborg......WTF ? Bwahaahaaahaa

 

First off I don't agree with what's going on at all. Once somebody is in jail, you shouldn't be allowed to sue them, and they shouldn't be allowed to do anything back. But if you read the news article, the timeline is something like this: the motorist commits the act, gets charged, sentenced, and put in jail, the parents decide that this is not enough and they sue the motorist, the motorist (months later) files a countersuit. The motorist didn't file a lawsuit until after the parents filed theirs. He's in jail, he lost his job, I'm sure that the debt collectors have all ready taken pretty much all that he's owned. Where is the $15K going to come from that they are seeking? Are we as taxpayers going to have to pay that too, as well as the money for his incarceration? It's a completely F'd up situation that the guy was negligent and killed that kid, but as a society, we've taken our pound of flesh, and it looks like the parents want more.

 

See, I told you those Jedi Knight Mind Reading cassettes worked. He is even sending me mash notes. "Ah, Badbilly. Been awhile. How have you been? Catch cancer yet?***************" I'm reluctant to respond in fear that he may want me drawn and quartered for some transgression real or imagined. Sturm und drang..

 

Cool! This one is even better:

"Nah BB, I don't want you drawn and quartered. Nope, not at all! I'd much rather you catch something that will kill you slowly and painfully.***************"



I'd hate to think what this dude would want to do to Mother Theresa if she offended him. Probably some sexual fantasy would be involved..

WoooHooo!

 

Whoa....I didn't realize one could "catch" cancer. Makes me thinks twice about the things I like to do with boobies

 

No, one can't catch cancer but in BB's case it'd be nice if it did happen...

 

I bet there are some dudes that wish they couldn't catch crabs.

 

Make no mistake, I think that drunk driver in jail probably should do more time than he was given. And I certainly feel for the parents of the victim. I can remember the biggest fear I had when I was a cop, was arriving at an accident scene and finding one of my loved ones involved.

I do agree with the parents thought on suing the DMV for the DMV missed the boat when they may have had the opportunity to pull this turd's licence. Not that that always works. But none the less, they admittedly made a mistake.

But to sue the inmate after the fact for 15K for a child. Now many of you may think I am hard here, but other than love and emotion, who was dependant on this child? Had it been the father of a family, or even worse, the mother of the family, then suit for millions would be in order. This suit is purely punitive, and if that is what you want to do, and that option is available to you, then fine. But just remember, you starting the suit for this pittance of $15K, is what is causing a whole heap of grief to continue when it is time to move on, remember the child with fondness and love, and try to rebuild your life with the family you have remaining, rather than to destroy what you have with hatred.

MHO for what it is worth.

 

It sounds like the whole thing is about the fellow that hit and killed the child is simply trying to avoid coming up with 15k in addition to serving time. As observed by others here, jailhouses are full of ad hoc lawyers and inmates have lots of free time.

More evidence that dirtbags are savvy on "the system". No surprise there.

Maybe he'll catch cancer from his cellmates crabs.

 

In light of that, what do you think of Cyborg's solution to the dilemma? Maybe we could storm the penal institution and take the guy out and lynch him or burn him at the stake.

 

Personally, I vote for burning at the stake. I don't know, it just has that nostalgic religious thing goin for it, and you could throw books and stuff on there too. That's just efficient, trains running on time type stuff, no?

 

Beware the spelling police..

 

Compared to the airlines, the trains are lookin darn good..

 

You're slipping. I throw you a perfectly good Nazi reference and you don't use it to fuck with Cyborg some more. I cannot continue stealing company time in good conscience to post shit up here if you're just going to waste it.