Saturday, March 10, 2012

Boxers Or Briefs?

Boxers or briefs? Today it is briefs. Legal briefs and a brief post. Off to Mom's in an hour or two to do her errands and take her to lunch. The caregiver is back so I didn't have to stay there last night or tonight. It really is a relief. The caregiver even took care of dinner for tonight so it will be an easy Saturday. Well maybe not easy but it will be helpful to knock off items on my to do list.

First up, good parents or bad parents:

Next up, good result or bad result:

Finally, the right outcome or the wrong outcome?

Comment Away.


Lady DR said...

Glad the caregiver is back and you had a couple nights off and even a break from fixing dinner. Here's hoping next week will be a bit easier for you.

How do you decide good/bad in a case like the one documented? I don't know the people involved, nor is there much information about them. Perhaps their decision (to terminate the pregnancy, if there was a problem) was because they didn't feel they could capably and financially handle a special needs child. I can't imagine the shock of believing you have a normal baby due and the discovering otherwise. That consideration aside, I'm not sure I agree with the large dollar amount, but if they're financially hurting, then I think they should have help in paying for the little girl's needs, given the snafu at the hospital and the fact they felt there was a need to confirm the fetus was normal.I kinda hope the judge will insist some sort of trust be set up, to assure the money is dedicated to the child's needs.

Equally ambivalent about the illegal immigrant winning the lottery. I guess, in some ways, it's no different from someone from IL buying a ticket for the KY lottery, while traveling, and winning. Again, there seem to be some missing pieces. And the guy is currently in jail for DUI? Has he ever attained or attempted to attain legal status? I guess that's kind of my sticking point.

As to the detective. More lack of info. Did she ever deny the fact? I know there's sometimes question of DNA, because no one really knew how to handle it back then, since it wasn't considered a valid forensic tool, beyond fingerprints. More missing pieces. In so many cases that hit the papers, I wish they'd give us valid facts as to why the subject is of interest and more background information, to support the cases and decisions. Picky little me - blame it on my stars.

Pat said...

YAY for the caregiver being back, and I'm glad she did dinner, too.

I can't approve of lawsuits that are for purposes other than the stated ones, so if these parents lied about whether they would have aborted had they known the truth, I don't admire them for doing this. OTOH, I also don't approve of incorrect test results, and I have all the sympathy in the world for people who have a special needs child and want to do everything possible to make that child's life good. The health center was clearly not practicing good medicine, since they kept reassuring the parents that there was nothing wrong when at least three tests indicated there was. I'll vote with the juror who said "I don't think there is a winner in this."

It was his ticket, he should get the money. And go home.

Beats me about Stephanie Lazarus, but it seems they had enough evidence and the jury was convinced to convict without a lot of palaver. For DR, there was actually quite a bit of info on the case here. Lazarus was in love with a guy who up and married Rasmussen. Lazarus was very displeased by this. At the time, they didn't have reliable DNA testing, but they recently opened a "cold case" unit, went back and looked at this one, found the DNA, got Lazarus's from a drink cup, and voilá! It was hers. That seems to have sealed the deal. She did, of course, deny it, long and loudly, but that didn't save her.

William J. said...


It really made for a stress free day with the caregiver there. Hope today is one also!

I think I am with you. I think the parents deserve something because not once but three times the hospital misread tests. That is just incompentent. But three million just sounds a tad to much.

I am kind of with Pat on the illegal immigrant winning the lottery. His ticket, his win. Then send him packing after taking taxes out of the winnings.

The last case was featured on Dateline Saturday night. She denied being guilty numerous times and the case is on appeal. I am just uncormfortable find someone guilty that long after a crime. Witnesses die, move, and forget. What may have been reliable testimony twenty years ago I find suspect now. I am not sure if I were the DA if I would have even brought charges this late in the game.


William J. said...

Hi Pat

It was really thoughtful of the caregover to bring dinner.

I agree with you about the lawsuit if the parents lied but it sounded like the jury thought they were pretty sincere. The three tests puts me on the side of the parents. I am a little troubled by the size of the award. And you and the juror are right, no winner in this case.

You and I agree completely on the lottery winner. Take the money and go home.

Lazarus's case was featured on Dateline Friday night. She sounded pretty sincere to me. I just am uncomfortable about evidence and wittnesses that old. According to Dateline there is going to be an appeal.