Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Salt Lake Tribune)   "Folks, you don't get damages just because your constitutional rights were violated. This isn't 'The Price Is Right'"   (sltrib.com ) divider line 199
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

29000 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 Jul 2007 at 2:28 PM (8 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



199 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2007-07-03 01:37:15 PM  
I would like to know what services the jury thought should have been offered to parents the caseworkers suspected were harming a child.
 
2007-07-03 01:46:57 PM  
While I agree that you don't deserve "pain and suffering" compensation for slights against your civil rights, when a child is taken from their parent by the state, it has to be the one of the most traumatic experiences for a parent and a child. If the state is later found to be in the wrong, I'd say lots of punitive damages are in store.
 
2007-07-03 01:47:03 PM  
It shouldn't be about getting something for being wronged. It should be about paying for farking up. That provides an incentive to take your job seriously especially when that job involves splitting up families.
 
2007-07-03 01:47:55 PM  
Does anybody else feel that chill in the air?
 
2007-07-03 02:18:22 PM  
rodeofrog:

Does anybody else feel that chill in the air?

Close your barn door - you won't have that problem.

I can't say I agree with the decision - but damned if that quote doesn't make me laugh.

I wish judges would use that in frivolous law cases.
 
2007-07-03 02:25:39 PM  
How about a Hero tag for the jurors?

Suck it Roskas, your filthy grab for money has been denied.
 
2007-07-03 02:29:48 PM  
If it's not about the money, that should be stated to the jury before the trial and any award above court costs should be designated to go to an independent charity. Then it would be plausible. Otherwise, it IS about the money, and EVERYBODY knows it.
 
2007-07-03 02:32:22 PM  
That case worker looks like she has some droopy dogs
 
2007-07-03 02:32:41 PM  
From TFA: The state had twice offered to settle with the Roskas; once for $100,000 and again for a more generous sum.

I love the fact that they were offered a $100,000 settlement but decided to take it to trial instead.

FAIL!
 
2007-07-03 02:33:18 PM  
ckelly.typepad.com
two dollars!
 
2007-07-03 02:33:35 PM  
i72.photobucket.com

I want my two dollers!
 
2007-07-03 02:34:11 PM  
Isn't the knowledge that you helped change state law to safeguard the rights of other parents enough?

No?

okay, how about $2?

makes perfect sense to me.
 
2007-07-03 02:34:21 PM  
Damn you!
 
2007-07-03 02:35:08 PM  
$2? Meh... Just go get some free health care and food stamps instead.
 
2007-07-03 02:36:18 PM  
you don't get damages just because your constitutional rights were violated

Uh, why not?

I'm totally against people who sue for millions of dollars over petty shiat, but I think you should be entitled to more than $2 if somebody violates your rights. How much should you be entitled to? However much it takes to make the offenders wish they hadn't farked with you -- that's what "punitive damages" are for. (Punitive means punishment.) Either that or the offenders should be punished in some other way, like PMITAP time.
 
2007-07-03 02:36:47 PM  
ckelly.typepad.com

/obscure?
 
2007-07-03 02:37:02 PM  
Is that $2 pretax?
 
jvl
2007-07-03 02:37:25 PM  
Dudes, if the Jury awarded $2, that means they were seriously pissed off by the plantiffs. You can't appeal if you win. What the Jury was saying is "not only are you plantiffs wrong, but we're going to ensure you can't even appeal."
 
2007-07-03 02:37:41 PM  
Utah

The land of 3.5% beer, and 98% stupidity. If canyons could walk, they would.
 
2007-07-03 02:38:23 PM  
You can bet the blood sucking lawyer will take 50% of that.
 
2007-07-03 02:38:33 PM  
Seems like they still get to sue the caseworkers individually. Should also get to sue their supervisors and so forth. So, it shouldn't be too bad, except that caseworkers are paid squat, which leads to shiatty caseworkers, which leads to this case.
 
2007-07-03 02:38:46 PM  
you don't get damages just because your constitutional rights were violated

I'm with gradatim: why not? What else is going to stop the government from violating my rights any time it wants? Is the government going to put itself in jail?
 
2007-07-03 02:39:05 PM  
c.myspace.com
 
2007-07-03 02:39:39 PM  
They were offered $100,000 and then another, even more generous sum to settle??

LAWLS

Serves them right.
 
2007-07-03 02:39:41 PM  
The price is wrong biatch! sorry had to
 
2007-07-03 02:40:49 PM  
These guys need to check out how the Phelps family earns compensation for civil rights violations.
 
2007-07-03 02:41:14 PM  
Poorboytech2000
You can bet the blood sucking lawyer will take 50% of that.


Yeah, I sense a vacation to the vending machine.
 
2007-07-03 02:41:18 PM  
I find the Utah AAG's point of view quite interesting, and would like to subscribe to his newsletter.
 
2007-07-03 02:41:36 PM  
If the GOVERNMENT violates your rights, you need to revolt. Not sue them for a big bunch of money.

Viva la revolucion!!
 
2007-07-03 02:42:01 PM  
My guess is that the jury saw the people who were suing as not worthy of receiving a $2 million dollars settlement.
 
2007-07-03 02:42:12 PM  
Scooby's'pawn: it has to be the one of the most traumatic experiences for a parent and a child.

I agree, and I felt bad for the parents, until I continued reading and found they were without their precious angel for a week. I'm sorry, disturbing and confusing, sure. But PTSD for a week in foster care? What the hell are they claiming went on in that childcare. If that kid is screwed up, THEY did it, not his week in foster care camp.

The child care services believed he was being poisoned, leading to kidney disfunction. Is anyone really surprised they pulled the kid without dotting every line? Yes, it's wrong, and yes, protective services has a lot of horror stories about pulling kids wrongly, but in this case a week of protective custody while they figure out if the parents are causing the kidney problems wasn't an unreasonable call. This isn't months and years of court battles over the kid telling some other kid once someone touched his bathing suit area.
 
2007-07-03 02:42:15 PM  
Anyone else notice that she was unfit for motherhood, but runs a daycare? Hmmmm....
 
2007-07-03 02:42:18 PM  
I know, I'm sorry, they were all out of Kool Aid. But this has the same effect.

img337.imageshack.us[\img]
 
2007-07-03 02:42:44 PM  
c.myspace.com
 
2007-07-03 02:43:10 PM  
The kid was gone for a week. I'm sure it was traumatic for them. Thousands of families go through all kinds of trauma. They don't get free money. Why should these people?

Good on the jury.
 
2007-07-03 02:43:42 PM  
Maybe, just maybe justice will prevail and a few members of the jury will get to deal with Utah's Division of Child and Family Services.
 
2007-07-03 02:44:04 PM  
First you have to prove you were damaged. No blood, no Band-Aid.

No damage means no wrong-doing. No wrong-doing means no punitives.

$$ = Not yours

Where there is suspected child-abuse, the case-workers are required to act in the best interest of the child, and to NOT give anyone the benefit of the doubt.
 
2007-07-03 02:44:07 PM  
Bresin

You bring your prejudice to the doorsteps of the Morman community.
 
Ral
2007-07-03 02:44:08 PM  
All the parents out there who ARE harming their children, and caseworkers won't do anything about it. Meanwhile this poor kid gets removed from a loving home by caseworkers who suspect abuse. WTF?
 
2007-07-03 02:44:10 PM  
The Roskas left the courthouse Monday in tears and declined to comment.

But they were later heard to remark "Now, we can't go to farkin' Disneyland!"
 
2007-07-03 02:44:25 PM  
...and that removals without due process were common in the late '90s

Oh, well that makes it o.k. then.
 
2007-07-03 02:44:26 PM  
I think they were going to trial to set a legal precedent. That those who do fark up are held accountable.. That would have made state workers wake up a bit..

I mean come on, the worst employees are the life-time state workers.
 
2007-07-03 02:45:37 PM  
Odie_SG: /obscure?

Yes, wildly so. Especially considering two people posted it before you.

Seriously... for the last goddamned time:
NOTHING IS OBSCURE ON FARK.
 
2007-07-03 02:46:01 PM  
Ral: All the parents out there who ARE harming their children, and caseworkers won't do anything about it. Meanwhile this poor kid gets removed from a loving home by caseworkers who suspect abuse. WTF?

Awarding damages would have set a very bad precedent, effectively scaring caseworkers into not acting quickly when they need to. Unfortunately, the civil suits against the caseworkers will do the same thing, so I hope they are thrown out quickly.
 
2007-07-03 02:46:12 PM  
hosalabad
These guys need to check out how the Phelps family earns compensation for civil rights violations.


As far as checking out goes, I got as far as the daughters and quickly learned that they're not such a bad bunch of folks.
 
2007-07-03 02:46:15 PM  
If you don't award injustees with something of value from the injusters then you can expect the injustees to take matters into their own hands.
 
2007-07-03 02:46:27 PM  
I have two teen children, male.

If the state tries to take them...


The best time would be around 8 tonight.


Make it a no knock warrantless search so I can pretend to be outraged.


The key's under the mat and the door was expensive so use that.



/miss 'em already
//come back kids and turn the lights and TV off
 
2007-07-03 02:46:36 PM  
I guess the quote is funny, but now that I think about it, I don't get it. Do they violate your constitutional rights on The Price is Right?
 
2007-07-03 02:47:29 PM  
From TFA:

"The Roskas alleged caseworkers yelled profanities and shoved children out of their way during Rusty's removal. Sneddon told Roska if she didn't carry Rusty out to the van, she would "drag him up the stairs," Russell said."

How does shiat like this happen? Really, I'm serious. What kind of parent would allow these people in their home? Or allow them to take one of their children without a physical fight?

Christ, I'm a pretty mellow guy, but if someone tried to take my son for any reason -- social worker, cop, whatever -- they'd best come heavily armed. And that's with a court order that I've had a chance to contest.

Someone shows up on my doorstep, identifies himself as a social worker, and tries to take my kid? He gets to meet Gretchen, the wunderdoberman, and her friend, Remington 870.
 
2007-07-03 02:47:41 PM  
Man On A Mission

I love the fact that they were offered a $100,000 settlement but decided to take it to trial instead.

Approves.
l.yimg.com
 
Displayed 50 of 199 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report