The real point in this dialog should not be that Pearson is a pant-hugging maniac, but that previous to court, lawsuits should have a common-sense review process.
Pearson surely knew that the Chungs (the owners of the cleaners who supposedly lost Pearson's pants), would end up getting millions from the media, from good-hearted-people sending them money and from the forthcoming book rights. (It's a rags-to-riches story that made headlines.) The Chung's Custom Cleaners will be the most popular cleaners in Washington. And then, counter lawsuits have just begun.
As fun as it is to scapegoat him, Pearson isn't the whole problem, he's just one example. Whether it was intentional or not, he's successfully focused our attention on frivolous lawsuits. Although I would love to hate him too, I applaud the new dialog he started.
2007-06-25 06:29:37 · 9 answers · asked by CHARLES T 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Please . . . Judge Pearson was not trying to start a dialogue, and you are giving him way too much credit. At a minimum, if he was trying to start a dialogue, he would have said something that would have focused on the message you assert he may have wanted to convey. As it is, he has only attempted to justify his outlandish position and has said/done nothing to address the virtuous message you speculate he wished to convey.
2007-06-25 06:43:32 · answer #1 · answered by wolfe_steve 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I agree that he is not the one that we need to take note of. (Although personally I am bothered that a judge would act this way - not surprised though) We need to look at the bigger picture and that is the justice/legal system that allowed such a frivolous lawsuit take up so much time and money in the court system. The system needs to be revamped so suits like this are dismissed right away and time and money not wasted.
The second thing that bothers me here is how much media attention this got. Aren't there more important things to cover.
2007-06-25 06:42:49 · answer #2 · answered by Hockeyfan 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I doubt his intention was to start a dialogue about frivolous lawsuits. I would venture to say that he was trying to line the pockets of the pair of pants that he still had.
2007-06-25 06:49:59 · answer #3 · answered by Jennifer 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Alternatively, perhaps the Korean dry cleaners had bad attitude (as usual), lied about certain details or tried to con the judge when this incident happened?
Perhaps the judge was silly enough to file the law suit so the Chung's Cutsom Cleaners could cash in on their bad attitude/lies, in addition of looking all sad and poor on the TV?
It happened in Korean before, so it could happen here too. Who knows?
2007-06-25 06:45:49 · answer #4 · answered by DeadManWalking 4 · 0⤊ 4⤋
good point. but, you can't sue someone 54 mil for losing a pair of pants. maybe cover the cost of the clothing, and if you stretch it, the days worth of work lost beause you did not have a pair of pants you expected..but that is even cutting it.
2007-06-25 06:34:06 · answer #5 · answered by sobrien 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
he is an idiot. It just goes to prove how sad our justice system has become. In another time, he would have beed laughed and ridiculed into hiding.
2007-06-25 06:32:27 · answer #6 · answered by randy 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
a court room that could be used to try dangerous criminals isn't the correct forum...he's just a publicity crazed douche-bag
2007-06-25 06:34:08 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
pearson is an absolute tool and should be disbarred for his nonsense
2007-06-25 06:35:07 · answer #8 · answered by dr schmitty 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
You can't be serious.
2007-06-25 06:39:59 · answer #9 · answered by open4one 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋