Re: An offensive defense

On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 12:32:54 -0600, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

On 2/5/2025 12:22 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

On Wed, 05 Feb 2025 16:39:22 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
 

On Wed Feb 5 08:36:39 2025 AMuzi  wrote:

https://nypost.com/2025/02/05/sports/driver-says-nhl-star-johnny-gaudreau-and-his-brother-had-been-drinking-before-fatal-accident/

>
They could call that the "Liebermann defense". Jeff alleges that he is never wrong,

 
That's not what I said.  I said that YOU were always wrong (with a few
minor exceptions).  When describing myself, I indicated that I have
made a few mistakes and usually apologized to the group for making
mistakes.
 

just as a drunk driver is claiming that his crimial act of driving drunk is not a crime if others are also doing it legally on vehicles that do not offer a danger to others.

 
What manner of vehicles "do not offer a danger to others" when
operated by an intoxicated driver?  I hope you don't mean a self
driving car, where blaming the car for accidents has not succeeded in
the courts.
 
"Drinking and Self-Driving Cars"
<https://ggrmlawfirm.com/blog/personal-injury/auto-accidents/drinking-and-self-driving-cars/>
"There is no exception for drunk driving and driverless cars."

>
>
>

What manner of vehicles "do not offer a danger to others"

>
The dead brothers were on bicycles which make less mayhem on
impact (F=MA and all that).

I assume that the argument will be that as they were drunk they MIGHT
have dome something wrong that caused the collision... and the Judge
will allow it.

--
Cheers,

John B.