roll over comments
- Jill is obviously guilty of drunk driving, but i'd argue that the
_primary_ fault is Jack's for grabbing the steering wheel. That would
probably have caused an accident even if Jill had been sober.
As long as Jill were driving, Jack was gonna grab that wheel. But if Jill let
Mary drive as pre arranged (is that an oral contract?) Jack wouldn't have
touched the wheel and everyone woulda gotten home ok.
First Jill (drunk driver), next the registered owner of the vehicle. If
the R/O was in the car, Jack, Mary, Peter then they would be equal to Jill
for knowingly allowing a drunk to drive. The only sober one Mary, should
have NEVER gotten in the car, once the rules changed, PERIOD. She assumed
the risk. The understanding of a designated driver, is just that, an
understanding. Mary should have taken the keys prior to the first sip of
alcohol being consumed. Now my question is, are they all of age to drink?
Also, Jack should get nailed because his action caused the wreck. What's
unknown is whether the alcohol played a factor. Jack grabbing the wheel
of an otherwise controlled vehicle was the dangerous act.
They're all guilty of at least poor judgment, but Jack and Jill are
way more at fault than the others, and Jack is guiltiest of all. Peter
should sue the hell out of both Jack and Jill. The Jennyland Court's
verdict is in Peter's favor and awards him whatever he asks for. We'll
leave Mary out of it. She's just a wimp.
************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]