http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061031/ap_on_go_su_co/scotus_punitive_damages_2
What I don't understand is that the widow claims that for a decade, the Philip Morris company denied that cigarettes caused cancer, or that her husband never saw any paperwork from them that would say it did cause cancer. Also, she claims that they didn't pay attention to the Surgeon Generals warning labels because the Phillip Morris company said cigarettes were not a health risk. This is where PC crap comes in, I would have that jury on deadlock if they tried awarding her that much money. I think it is a concious descicion of people to smoke, and even a decade ago, cigarettes were know to be fatal in the long term. That's why there are Surgeon General warnings on the damn packs. What do you think, I think she doesn't deserve 79.5 million, maybe 10 grand if that.
2006-10-31
06:43:18
·
10 answers
·
asked by
Enterrador
4