blank'/> Liberally Lean From The Land Of Dairy Queen: Ka-Ching

2.15.2006

Ka-Ching

If you are an apartment owner and hire a 20-something year old with two shoplifting convictions on his record, should you be liable if that guy sexually molests a child in the apartment complex? A Tarrant County jury says 4.85 million times that the answer is yes. Incredible.

17 comments:

Anonymous said...

yes incredible? I hope that evey penny finds it's way to the little girl and her family. an yes they should be held accountable, with the the ability to gain access to families and thier property background checks are reasonable.

Anonymous said...

We live in a liberal world with dumb greedy lawyers!

gofish said...

If the property owner did a background check, they should be covered. I think they would be stupid not to do a background check considering they are hiring someone who I would assume has keys to the apartments. The check may not have alerted them to this problem but I can't imagine they want a shoplifter managing their property.

Anonymous said...

We live in a world with sick people that prey on innocent children!

wizard said...

I'll take the world w/ dumb greedy lawyers over the current world where the government "defends" the defenssless any day of the week. (They would put a cap on the award the victim would receive.) And if you can get by your obvious bias towards lawyers and the legal system, you would too!

Anonymous said...

....dumb apartment complex owner for hiring this idiot.

...insane mother for NOT watching out after her child.

..put HER in jail or at least fine her.

comment4U said...

Mom SHOULD have herded her daughter more responsibly...heck, not only do I keep my kids away from service men in my house, I'm cautious to never get stuck in a room alone w/them! Always keep a phone in my hand...

That poor child. Just his mugshot is creepy...the apartment owners were idiots about not checking into whom they hired--I'm not sure 4 mil. is 'fair,' but they certainly are responsible to some degree for their management negligence. The renters -- all renters -- should be able to expect a certain level "safety" within their purchased living areas. I would say, anyway....

Now, who's got a gun?

Anonymous said...

How is shoplifting related to child molestation? Someone commits one crime and can be assumed to commit all kinds of others? Hiring a shoplifter was stupid, though

Anonymous said...

it makes no sense at all! so people with a small crime in their past shouldn't get any jobs? and why should the apartment owners expect a shoplifter to be a child molester as well? it's unfortunate, but the blame rests completely on the guy who molested the child.

Anonymous said...

My heart, thoughts, and prayers go out to that family, and that little girl. However, I do not understand the connection between shoplifting and child molestation. They are to totally different crimes, usually comitted by different types of people. Should the appartment management staff be expected to forsee such a unexpected crime????

Anonymous said...

I never could understand how juries could give away that kind of money but after reading some of the post I now can understand better (you're nuts).

If someone commits a crime should we lock him or her up and throw away the key? If no one is going to hire them what do you do?

How is 4 million going to make this girl feel better? Is it going for counseling or a new Escalade and 60" plasma TV? If it’s counseling then make the payments to the shrinks direct.

If this guy is so bad then why is still on the lose? Maybe some of the money should go to track him down.

Last point that has already been made several times, where was the parents? If it were my little girl the guy wouldn't be alive.

By the way, who do you think in-directly pays for this?

Anonymous said...

I think the whole point is that the apartment complex did not do a background check...if they had, then they would have seen the theft charges and probably not hired the guy since he is a thief (among other things obviously because maintenance people are inside people's apartments with their things. Should they be held responsible to the tune of millions, I don't know. But if it was in their policy to perform background checks and did not do so, then that's probably why they were found negligent. Just observation...

Anonymous said...

From the linked article:

An initial background check run on Lowder by the apartment management revealed two counts of shoplifting in McKinney in 1999, said attorney Scott Campbell, who represented the apartment complex owners.

Anonymous said...

That is absolutely insane!!!!

Anonymous said...

ANON 8:22 am.

You are kidding me.........you are going to put blame on the mother for this, MY GOD, do you have children?

Anonymous said...

Absolutely nuts to hold the employer responsible. Hey, what if a coach molests a student. Why, you the taxpayers are the employer...and therefore you are responsible and should be sued as a homeowner.

Anonymous said...

This whole thing is insane. First, how can you hold an employer responsible for this when there was no indication that he was going to be a molester? If this is the standard to be set, then no one with the smallest criminal record can work in the public. Hell, lets execute all the shoplifters. How many of you on this blog took a piece of candy when you were a child. Are you child molesters now?

Second. Consider that lawyers are getting probably 40% of the awarded ammount. That in itself should explain the juries decision. Lawyers in this case probably fed on the juries compassion for the child that was molested. Nothing to do with the legal responsibility of the apartment owner. Complete injustice done here. I have compassion for the family and girl, but they were used by the legal system in the name of greed to fill the pockets of trial lawyers!