Follow us!

    Re: DD: Plaintiff's Counsels...Keep Up the Good Work

    Posted by dd on 3/20/04

    Good point. Ignorance is no defense and small comfort to those whose
    lives were destroyed.

    On a more positive note, a change in climate has drastically improved
    my respiratory health and outlook. It is just scary to have lost so
    very much due to someone's negligence. It is another thing to be
    dismissed as inconsequential and unimportant. Logically, no one
    would be willing to risk their health and everything important to
    them to 'scam' another over this. We are not talking about physical
    injury, i. e. whiplash, that can be faked. If I, or people like me
    are faking, then the countless doctors that we have seen must be very

    On 3/19/04, ff wrote:
    > DD:
    > OK. I was referring to "Dark Overlord" as Mr. Darkness. I have
    > not seen the types of cases or expert testimony that fits his
    > characterizations.
    > I have seen situations where defense experts, and supporting
    > scientists, typically fell into two categories: 1.) They were
    > willing to lie, i.e. they knew better, or 2.) What they thought
    > they knew, or believed to be factual, was later proven to be wrong.
    > Nothing fits better than the case referenced some time back by
    > Mary: Fla. 4th DCA. For years, it was believed that a certain
    > chemical did not contaminate water. In fact, in Florida, the
    > agencies excluded water contamination in their investigations into
    > this chemical based on this belief.
    > The 4th DCA states that the minimum distance from point of
    > application of this chemical, to where the aquatic damage was
    > observed, was ten miles. That seems like an awfully long distance
    > for a chemical that doesn't contaminate water?
    > Dark Overlord likely fits into category 2 above. I consider
    > Suppression Bias as the most likely explanation for 1 and 2 above.
    > He may be a victim of lies from those he trusts, suppressors, and
    > just doesn't know better?
    > ff
    > On 3/18/04, dd wrote:
    >> Don't understand your statement. I am replying to Dark
    >> Overlord's post. The reality is that very few plaintiffs' firms
    >> have deep enough pockets or perfect enough clients to pursue
    >> these matters. We can't all be Ballard, McMahon, or Jordan, but
    >> we still have been damaged by the negligence of others.
    >> I am referring to some of my lingering health concerns as a
    >> result of my exposure.
    >> On 3/18/04, ff wrote:
    >>> Mr. Darkness?
    >>> Your perspective is certainly the flip side of what I have
    >>> seen. Get a grip on it. Possibly, you're a victim of your
    >>> own "team's" paticipation in suppression bias and believe the
    >>> BS they put out?
    >>> ff
    >>> On 3/18/04, dd wrote:
    >>>> Clever. Too bad archival retrieval on this site isn't
    >>>> available. I can no longer sit at a campfire, attend live
    >>>> music performances where smoking is permitted, work or be
    >>>> around chemical cleansers, be in facilities regularly
    >>> treated
    >>>> with commercial pesticides, and much, much more. Course, I
    >>>> was in the girl scouts and sitting around campfires and
    >>>> eating marshmellows has been known to cause all sorts of
    >>>> health problems that might cloud the issue of mold induced
    >>>> illness. And the fact that I worked at a stables could be
    >>>> equated to working in a grain silo, corn, specifically.
    >>>> As for the frivolous lawsuits, no reasonable person would
    >>>> willingly expose themselves to the rigorous scrutiny of
    >>>> defense interrogatory and discovery for love or money unless
    >>>> compelled to do so by grievous harm or wrongdoing, of course
    >>>> there are exceptions, like the occasional defense counsel
    >>>> that has morals and ethics. As for whore experts opinions,
    >>>> defense bar holds the cards for that one, so you should no.
    >>>> As for trials that go down in flames, we all know that it
    >>>> takes money at every step to stay in the 'civil' justice
    >>> game
    >>>> and defense bar holds the cards the majority of the time in
    >>>> that game, too. Sounds like you watched the Devil's
    >>> Advocate
    >>>> repeatedly.
    >>>> Archuleta
    >>>> On 3/16/04, Dark Overlord wrote:
    >>>>> Every frivolous lawsuit you file, every specious claim you
    >>>>> make, every discovery response you obfuscate, every whore
    >>>>> expert who opines, and every trial you go down in
    >>>>> flames...we in the defense bar thank you.

    Posts on this thread, including this one

  Site Map:  Home Chatboards Legal Jobs Classified Ads Search Contacts Advertise
  © 1996 - 2013. All Rights Reserved. Please review our Terms of Use, Mission Statement, and Privacy Policy.

The Counsel.Net ChatBoardsm. All Rights Reserved.