The Rowleys said that Dimmick held them at knifepoint, and a neighbor told The Topeka Capital-Journal that the young couple were able to gain their kidnapper's trust "by eating Cheetos and drinking Dr. Pepper with him while watching the movie 'Patch Adams.'"

So he tortured them, too?

B-b-b-but I didn't mean it!!!! Please just give me money for all the trouble I caused so I can feel better.

Theaetetus: The Rowleys said that Dimmick held them at knifepoint, and a neighbor told The Topeka Capital-Journal that the young couple were able to gain their kidnapper's trust "by eating Cheetos and drinking Dr. Pepper with him while watching the movie 'Patch Adams.'"

So he tortured them, too?

But the officer's gun "accidentally" went off in his back, so it all evened out.

I think it's just that the Judge in this case is probably looking forward to a semi-retirement career as a law professor, and he needs material to base his book on.

The more I read the more insane it becomes. The lawyer who took this case should be disbarred.

Any judge not trying to AW himself out to the media would throw this one out before it saw the light of day...but, nowadays...AW'ing is all the rage...so, yeah...it'll go to trial, the couple will spend tens of thousands defending themselves against a claim made by an incarcerated wacko while the judge makes wacky quips behind the stand hoping to garner attention.

/hopefully not.

imontheinternet: If you don't want the jackbooted government thugs to attack you, #Occupy protesters have to do what the TEA partiers did - show up armed.

....Yeah, I'm going to go ahead and say just leave this here. It's at least as useful to this thread as any other it might've landed in.

ihatedumbpeople: Any judge not trying to AW himself out to the media would throw this one out before it saw the light of day...but, nowadays...AW'ing is all the rage...so, yeah...it'll go to trial, the couple will spend tens of thousands defending themselves against a claim made by an incarcerated wacko while the judge makes wacky quips behind the stand hoping to garner attention.

/hopefully not.

I think it's safe to say any reasonable judge will throw the suit out of court, on the grounds that the "contract" was clearly signed under duress.

blazemongr: ihatedumbpeople: Any judge not trying to AW himself out to the media would throw this one out before it saw the light of day...but, nowadays...AW'ing is all the rage...so, yeah...it'll go to trial, the couple will spend tens of thousands defending themselves against a claim made by an incarcerated wacko while the judge makes wacky quips behind the stand hoping to garner attention.

/hopefully not.

I think it's safe to say any reasonable judge will throw the suit out of court, on the grounds that the "contract" was clearly signed under duress.

And besides, an oral contract isn't worth the paper it's printed on.

netringer: Thisbymaster: The more I read the more insane it becomes. The lawyer who took this case should be disbarred.

The lawyers are agreeing with you. He's representing himself.

I do find it refreshing that nobody wanted to represent the kidnapper. Not even the sleaziest of mall lawyers looked at the suit and thought, "Yeah, this could work."

Let's see, hasn't he ever heard of duress?

Aquapope: netringer: Thisbymaster: The more I read the more insane it becomes. The lawyer who took this case should be disbarred.

The lawyers are agreeing with you. He's representing himself.

I do find it refreshing that nobody wanted to represent the kidnapper. Not even the sleaziest of mall lawyers looked at the suit and thought, "Yeah, this could work."

Saul Goodman would've taken it.

Robert E. Keeshan, an attorney for the Rowleys, denies there was a contract and says that even if there had been, it wouldn't be legally binding because their consent would have been given under duress, there was no specified price, and hiding a fugitive is illegal.

This is all that needed to be said. The idiot's counter-claims will be dismissed and he has most likely given the couple an extra claim for abuse of process.

I see the general consensus is that the contract is not enforceable and I agree

Contracts entered during the commission of a crime as well as contracts which encourage a crime to be committed are generally not enforcable.

Also, not only could they claim duress but it could also be claimed that if they sympathized with him, then they were suffering from Stockholm Syndrome. Under the latter, they legally may not have been able to consent even if they said they wanted to.

gunga galunga: I do find it refreshing that nobody wanted to represent the kidnapper. Not even the sleaziest of mall lawyers looked at the suit and thought, "Yeah, this could work."

Saul Goodman would've taken it.

But Reynoldo Ortega _{(new window)} wouldn't! He has integrity. Mexican integrity.

blazemongr
But the officer's gun "accidentally" went off in his back, so it all evened out.

What I don't get is that he says he's suing the couple partly because he has no way to pay the medical bills from being shot in the back.
If he really has to pay those bills himself, one would assume that the better case would be to see if the person who was negligent enough to "accidentally" shoot him isn't liable for those bills.

People have won lawsuits because they hurt themselves breaking in to someone's house! Explain that one to me.

hokiethug1992: People have won lawsuits because they hurt themselves breaking in to someone's house! Explain that one to me.

I refuse to be outraged until a burglar hurt while burlgarizing claims, and receives, workers comp.

hokiethug1992: People have won lawsuits because they hurt themselves breaking in to someone's house! Explain that one to me.

Paying a few thousand bucks to a thieving burglar costs less than paying tens of thousands to a thieving lawyer, I guess.

Are they gonna make a movie about it starring Dennis Leary??

hokiethug1992: People have won lawsuits because they hurt themselves breaking in to someone's house! Explain that one to me.

[Citation Needed]

Link me to actual cases where this happened. I know there's rumors and urban legends like this but I don't think this has ever actually happened.

I'd like to be the judge before whom he brings his lawsuit so I can tell him "Get the f*ck outta my court!"

Troublesome Strumpet: hokiethug1992: People have won lawsuits because they hurt themselves breaking in to someone's house! Explain that one to me.

[Citation Needed]

Link me to actual cases where this happened. I know there's rumors and urban legends like this but I don't think this has ever actually happened.

It has. You can google "burglar wins lawsuit" and find some.

Troublesome Strumpet: hokiethug1992: People have won lawsuits because they hurt themselves breaking in to someone's house! Explain that one to me.

[Citation Needed]

Link me to actual cases where this happened. I know there's rumors and urban legends like this but I don't think this has ever actually happened.

Didn't Snopes debunk this?

gunga galunga: Troublesome Strumpet: hokiethug1992: People have won lawsuits because they hurt themselves breaking in to someone's house! Explain that one to me.

[Citation Needed]

Link me to actual cases where this happened. I know there's rumors and urban legends like this but I don't think this has ever actually happened.

Didn't Snopes debunk this?

Yes they did. (new window)

Aquapope: gunga galunga: I do find it refreshing that nobody wanted to represent the kidnapper. Not even the sleaziest of mall lawyers looked at the suit and thought, "Yeah, this could work."

Saul Goodman would've taken it.

But Reynoldo Ortega (new window) wouldn't! He has integrity. Mexican integrity.

I must know what the hell this is. I just wasted quite a bit of time with it.

/I hate the internet almost as much as I love it

Ain't No Party Like A Tea Party: /I hate the internet almost as much as I love it

It's from National Lampoon about 30 years ago. I always thought it was funny as hell.

gunga galunga: Aquapope: netringer: Thisbymaster: The more I read the more insane it becomes. The lawyer who took this case should be disbarred.

The lawyers are agreeing with you. He's representing himself.

I do find it refreshing that nobody wanted to represent the kidnapper. Not even the sleaziest of mall lawyers looked at the suit and thought, "Yeah, this could work."

Saul Goodman would've taken it.


Maybe this guy too

I, the defendant suffered a gunshot to my back,
Cops need to improve there aim.