On October 12, 2007, 34 vehicles crashed inside a tunnel along I-5 in Southern California. A diesel tanker spilled fuel onto the freeway which exploded. Three people died. Although the California Highway Patrol completed their accident investigation fairly quickly–and assigned responsibility to speeding drivers, including a trucking company using faulty brakes–the three surviving families have not recovered a dime for their losses. One of the dead, an entrepreneur carefully driving his recently purchased tractor-trailer on the slick roads, left a young family behind in dire financial straits. Tragically, the defense seems to be able to avoid paying money to help make up for the losses of these families by taking advantage of the sheer number of people involved in the crash and related pressures on the court system. Here is an L.A. Times article discussing the matter: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-tobar-20100618,0,4762224,full.column
Posts Tagged ‘lawsuit’
Defense Attorneys Delay Justice for Wrongful Death Victims in Fiery I-5 Crash
Saturday, June 19th, 2010Ben Roethlisberger Could Face Another Personal Injury Lawsuit Under Civil Burden of Proof
Monday, April 12th, 2010At approximately 2:00 p.m. local time, people in Pittsburgh, PA and around the country took a break from their day to learn that Ben Roethlisberger would not be criminally prosecuted for the alleged sexual assault of a college student in Georgia. The District Attorney who made the decision not to prosecute was clear he could not prove the case against Roethlisberger, “beyond a reasonable doubt”. That standard of proof is used universally throughout the United States as the benchmark of guilt–if someone is guilty “beyond a reasonable doubt”, then they are legally guilty of a crime. If a prosecutor can’t prove that a crime occurred “beyond a reasonable doubt”, then it would be unethical and unconstitutional to go forward with the prosecution. Nonetheless, the facts in a case, including in Roethlisberger’s situation, may be enough to prove that he broke the law “more probably than not”. That is the burden of proof for a plaintiff in a civil lawsuit for personal injury or sexual assault and battery. Thus, if the alleged victim chooses to file suit, she and her attorney must do so with a good faith belief they can prove an injury, assault, or battery was committed on a, “more probable than not basis”. In time, we will learn if the Georgia incident will result in a civil lawsuit against Roethlisberger just as the Nevada incident gave rise to a sexual assault lawsuit without criminal prosecution. While there are many reasons why there may be a civil case but no criminal case, the different burden of proof fundamentally explains why this duality can legally occur in our justice system.