Speechless
Yes – just for once I am at a loss for words.
The background to the story is simple and tragic.
In March 2016 a family were out for a drive in Donegal. In the course of the day the driver of the car reversed onto a slipway at a harbour, presumably as part of a manoeuvre. Unfortunately the slipway was covered in algae and the car slid back out of control into the sea and the entire family were trapped inside. As people watched horrified, the driver managed to squeeze his four month old daughter through the window to a bloke who was trying desperately to help. This bloke passed the infant to his girlfriend, Stephanie Knox.
Sadly all the remaining occupants of the car were drowned. The infant was the only survivor. It was a tragedy, plain and simple.
So what has me bereft of words?
Apparently Stephanie Knox – whose only part in the tragedy was to hold the infant and keep her warm – is suing the estate of the dead family for “loss of earnings and other matters”.
What the blue blind fuck?
I read the account in three different papers and they all say the same – she is suing the family for “loss of earnings and other matters“.
I could give Ms Knox the benefit of the doubt and assume that the original report was in error and the other two just picked up the incorrect version without checking the facts, but that seems a bit far fetched?
Or else she accidentally sued the wrong people by mistake? I find that hard to believe too.
There is a clue in yet another paper.
Her sister posted on Facebook that “a number of people” who were present on the pier on the day of the tragedy were lodging claims and her sister then sought advice from a solicitor.
So a number of people who were present but who were doing fuck all except gawking at the tragedy unfold were suing? For what? They did nothing at all except stare. Are they claiming for Post Traumatic Distress? If they were so fucking traumatised then they should have looked the other way. No one was forcing them to watch. I have witnessed far worse when some cyclists were killed right in front of me. Yes I was traumatised but time heals and it never occurred to me to sue anyone, even for the damage to my car. It was a tragedy and it is morally reprehensible to attempt to profit from it.
By my understanding, Ms Knox didn’t even consider suing until she saw Farcebook, whereupon she jumped at the chance to get herself a few bob. All she did was follow the sheep in the chance of some easy cash.
What we have here is a mob of grasping bottom feeders who see the chance of some free money. If they were financially at a loss because of some damage to their property then there may be an argument, but to claim just because they were merely present is the lowest of the low. Even to consider a claim is beyond any common decency.
Society has hit yet another low.
All of it encouraged by those nice altruistic philanthropists in the legal profession.
Dick the Butcher (Henry VI pt 2) had it right with “The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers”.
Fucking ambulance chasers!
We can but hope they’ll become ambulance occupiers…
They’d still find someone to represent them – no win, no fee.
People like Miss Knox need to be publicly hung by the neck for being a scumbag in public.
Nah! They should just be made pay for any failed court case, in full. That would stop the rot.
The problem, as with most of the Health & Safety nonsense these days, all tracks back to the introduction of no-win-no-fee lawyers. Individuals like Ms Knox are actively encouraged to invent/create/manufacture claims on the grounds that she’s got nothing to lose and potentially lots to gain – in most cases, the lawyers’ costs far exceed the claimants’ pay-outs, hence their own enthusiasm for these easy pickings.
Change the law, go back to when the claimant had to ‘gamble’ and the vast majority of this nonsense would evaporate, saving us all from bearing the costs indirectly.
But Parliament is full of lawyers, many still on the payroll of their chambers, so there’s bugger-all chance of that happening anytime soon, in fact Jeremy Corbyn is more likely to convert to Judaism before that happens.
I could not agree more. People tend to blame Health & Safety for being overcautious about everything, but it’s really down to liability. Everyone is shit scared that they’ll be sued for any excuse whatsoever. When you get to the stage where a drunk customer can sue a bar for falling over, or as in this case, for PTSD because they witnessed something, then it has gone beyond farce.
I agree completely about the “no win no fee” lark. It’s an open door for grubby compensation seekers.
Seems she’s exactly as you describe, a dumb opportunist bitch.
Her partner, who actually saved the infant and had to watch as the family resigned themselves to a death by drowning, wants nothing to do with what she and others claim.
Locally she’s shunned and reviled, while social media are having sport. Something she doesn’t like.
However she told her story to The Mail this morning.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5553121/Nurse-apologises-suing-relatives-family-five-saw-drown.html
Seems the law firm are suing the council for the not for purpose surface of the slipway, not the estate of the deceased.
And the boyfriend still thinks they’re all arse holes, as do I.
What the fuck are bystanders doing suing the council? They weren’t affected unless they slipped and broke something. Even then any idiot knows that algae on a slipway are slippery. I’m with the council on this one. Short of filling the sea with weedkiller, there is fuck all they can do about algae. They are a part of the sea like limpets, shells, seaweed or anything else that grows in coastal waters.
I suppose the next thing is that people will sue the council if the see a big frightening wave near the coast?
Wholly agree, we’ve got stacks of slipways in Scotland, some with seaweed growing on them, however we don’t seem to have many idiots who try manoeuvres on them, only to launch or pull out inflatables.
Their claim seems to be for distress caused by the twat while using a slipway for a purpose it wasn’t designed for.
It’s opportunism plain and simple, however the law firm is the instigator in this.
I believe they’ll lose simply because the council’s duty is only to the high water mark.
I once used my scooter to go to the Holy Isle in Northumberland, the causeway is under water except at low tide. Stacks of warnings there as well as “good” times to cross. Despite that there are inevitably fuckwits who chance it and if they do there’s no recourse whatsoever.
Council, once it gets it slung out on its ear should go after the law firm and sue the living daylights out of the partners, then just for sport go after the petitioners!
*insert extra special, weapons grade, Blocked Dwarf vitriol once he has stopped feeling sick to his stomach*
As we used to say on the BBS boards “someone badly needs raping with a 10ft curare tipped, rusty fence post”.
Unless they are a sado-masochist of course?
Nothing to do with lawyers etc, there will always be bottom feeders, this is purely down to the total lack of empathy being encouraged in society today. The vast majority just do not give a flying fuck today. Makes my heart bleed for the folk of tomorrow,god help em.
It’s down to an attitude of entitlement and greed. People see a chance for some easy money no matter how feeble the excuse.
Grandad,
The bottom of that barrel that’s being scraped must be getting pretty thin now and heavens knows what horrors await us once it’s broken through.