Austin Nesties
Dear Community,
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Huh. WDYT of this "Toyota Defense" article?
Obviously every single detail is not included in a CNN.com news story, but given the information provided, I'm curious what others think.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/03/02/toyota.recall.appeal/index.html?hpt=C1
Re: Huh. WDYT of this "Toyota Defense" article?
What I'm wondering about are the two experts who examined his vehicle after the accident and certified that the accident wasn't caused by a mechanical problem. Maybe I am just not understanding the recently revealed Toyota acceleration problem very well, but isn't it something that a trained mechanic would notice?
Rarely Updated Blog
i was thinking BS the whole article til i saw this "Relatives of the victims, who asked the judge to give him the maximum sentence, now support him, said Bob Hilliard, a Texas lawyer who is preparing a lawsuit against Toyota on the family's behalf."
i don't know what to think! you'd think the mechanics would have been able to tell but then again, i don't think i know enough/understand exactly what's going on with the recall.
it would suck to be in prison if that was the case though
so i guess if the exonerate the guy and say that it was the car's fault = sue Toyota
Yeah that part was weird to me. I doubt Toyota would have to pay for the dude's lost wages, pain and suffering, etc. The part that got me thinking was when they pointed out that he had his whole family and pregnant wife in the car. It's unlikely he would intentionally ram someone. Even if he mistakenly held down the accelerator vs the brake, wouldn't that be some sort of manslaughter vs homicide?
I was wondering about the manslaughter vs homicide thing, too, so I did a little googling and found out that vehicular homicide and vehicular manslaughter are used interchangably. They seem to indicate that the charge is used in the case of accidental car accidents, so that makes sense to me.
I think they may have some trouble winning a lawsuit against Toyota, especially since the article says his vehicle isn't part of the recall.
Rarely Updated Blog
A search of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's online complaint database revealed 526 incidents listed for the 1996 Toyota Camry. Among the complaints concerning air bags, tires, steering and visibility were at least two dozen related to "vehicle speed control," some dating back to 1997.
Based off that statement, I think the guy could be innocent. I wonder if his own family testified? Couldn't they back up his claim that he tried to stop the car? But there's no mention of them.
I think it's possible.
However, the first thing that struck me was the number of people in the car with him. There are only 5 seatbelts in a Camry, but there were 6 ppl in the car. How did none of THEM get hurt since they obviously weren't all strapped in??
I just found this in another article about the same case:
The wave of recent Toyota recalls connected to cases of sudden acceleration led Lee's lawyers to discover that some 1996 Camrys had been the subject of a recall because of "unintended acceleration" caused by a flaw in the cruise control ten years prior to the accident.The fact of the recall was not presented at the trial.
Sounds like Lee might have a reasonable complaint against his defenders as well.