This makes me want to puke

This is outrageous.

David Weaving is a repeat drunk driver who was finally put away in December 2008 after a jury convicted him of manslaughter. The crime for which he’s doing time?

Prosecutors say Weaving was recklessly passing another car at about 83 mph in a 45-mph zone when his car hit Matthew Kenney on Route 69 in the Waterbury suburb of Prospect on April 27, 2007.

Matthew Kenney was “a well-liked seventh grader” and riding his bicycle along the side of the road when Weaving hit and killed the boy.

Here’s the part that gets me: The criminal is suing Kenney’s parents for “contributory negligence” because Kenney wasn’t wearing a bike helmet. Weaving has endured “great mental and emotional pain and suffering,” wrongful conviction and imprisonment, and the loss of his “capacity to carry on in life’s activities.”

Not only that, while Weaving’s legal fees are waived because he’s indigent, Kenney’s parents have to hire a lawyer for their defense.

More in the Sac Bee in an Associated Press story: Driver in fatal Conn. crash sues victim’s parents. Via Biking In LA, who editorializes on blaming the victim with numerous other examples.

14 Comments

  • Anonymous
    November 15, 2010 - 6:05 pm | Permalink

    I bet the kid wasn’t wearing a life jacket either! (Which would have been equally effective at saving his life when hit by a car doing 83 mph). Sickening.

  • Jessi Hance
    November 15, 2010 - 6:08 pm | Permalink

    Apt post title. Me too.

  • November 15, 2010 - 6:13 pm | Permalink

    There is something wrong with a system that allows a drunk driving fool to inflict even more emotional and financial anguish on a family who’s lost their son. I hope the judge on this case throws it out and prohibits him from any further offensive lawsuits.

  • November 15, 2010 - 6:27 pm | Permalink

    the whole helmet debate needs to stop. this is stupid.

  • Andy
    November 15, 2010 - 7:05 pm | Permalink

    why’d you have to go and ruin my day like that?

  • Anonymous
    November 15, 2010 - 9:08 pm | Permalink

    i hope those attorneys get sanctioned for filing a frivolous lawsuit.

  • November 15, 2010 - 9:15 pm | Permalink

    Possibly a pro se lawsuit; filed without a lawyer. The fees that were waived are those charged by the court.

  • November 15, 2010 - 9:15 pm | Permalink

    Possibly a pro se lawsuit; filed without a lawyer. The fees that were waived are those charged by the court.

  • Anonymous
    November 15, 2010 - 11:46 pm | Permalink

    ah yes, i just read the article you linked to. well, i still say it should be thrown out as a frivolous lawsuit. i believe that prisoners should be entitled to file lawsuits, but still need to be held accountable to the same sort of standards that those not in prison are held, including not filing frivolous lawsuits.

  • Tlalmimilolpan
    November 16, 2010 - 2:46 am | Permalink

    me too. it makes me wanna punk!

  • Sundaydiver
    November 16, 2010 - 4:06 am | Permalink

    This is so fucked up there aren’t enough “fucks” in the English language to describe just how fucked up this is.

  • art
    November 16, 2010 - 2:37 pm | Permalink

    How are you getting, “riding his bicycle along the side of the road” from “jumping their bikes off a ramp at the end of a friend’s driveway and landing in the middle of the two-lane road”? It’s not a small difference, and just because we love bikes and this guy happens to be an asshole doesn’t necessarily justify a prison sentence.

  • November 16, 2010 - 9:18 pm | Permalink

    I agree and I had looked into the details (but can’t find them now) — turns out it was crime scene facts vs the driver’s statements, and his statements didn’t line up with the evidence.

  • Pingback: DA Defends Rich Man Not Getting Felony Charge | UltraRob's Adventures

  • Leave a Reply