McDonalds strip search case

A jury in Shepherdsville just found McDonalds liable for $6.1 million in the case of a worker who was basically raped during work hours.  The whole thing was caught on tape.  It went on for hours.  Basically, a prank caller directed a McDonald’s employee and her fiancee to do things to an employee and the other employee complied, with the assistance of her fiancee.  The verdict was bizarre enough, $16.1 MILLION for a basically minimum wage job.  By my calculations, the victim made what she would have made at McDonalds for the next 3,400 years or so.  That struck me as being just a little out of line.  For performing some bad things, the fiancee got some jail time.  But, this is where it starts getting weird.  The girl who directed the fiancee to do these awful things that amounted to $16.1 million in liability, took an alford plea, which means the evidence is so overwhelming there’s no need to prosecute.  THEN, she sued McDonalds and won a million for herself.  Not a bad nights pay for assisting in a rape and assault.  The guy who instigated all this, David Stewart, was found not guilty regardless of overwhelming evidence that he was doing something like this at the very least.  Since his arrest, the calls stopped.

Sometimes the proof is in the pudding.

The accusation against McDonalds was they knew this was happening and didn’t do anything to warn the employees about it.  McDonalds claimed that it not only was in their handbook, but they did do some things to warn employees.  To me that’s irrelevent.  No cop is ever going to CALL and tell someone to detain someone else, much less perform illegal acts.  I think the victim in this case should have been compensated to some degree.  However, how in the hell the supervisor, Donna Summers, could plead guilty and THEN sue for liability is beyond me.  How in the hell a guy can get caught calling fast-food restaurants all over the country that just happened to be experiencing prank calls and NOT be held liable is beyond me. 

This whole case is FUBAR.

Related Posts

  • May 24, 2006 -- Can the FBI search a congressional office? (0)
    William Jefferson is just tickled pink that some lawmakers are distracting his actions by crying foul over the FBI searching Jefferson's office. I'm no lawyer, I don't even play one on tv, so I re...
  • September 5, 2006 -- Wiretapping, datamining, and the Fourth Amendment (0)
    The Volokh Conspiracy looks at a recent judgment in regards to datamining. Specifically, it looked at whether datamining triggers Fourth Amendment protection? Well, here's the Fourth: The righ...
  • June 8, 2007 -- The Supreme Court looks at insurance (0)
    A common practice of insurance companies is giving discounts to people with good credit scores. The adverse way of looking at it is they penalize people with bad credit scores. A couple of people...
  • June 13, 2005 -- Craziest court ruling of 2005 (0)
    David Bernstein of The Volokh Conspiracy makes this observation:My nominee, not surprsingly, is from New Jersey (which provides several other candidates), Canesi ex rel. Canesi v. Wilson 158 N.J. 4...
  • September 6, 2005 -- Confirming John Roberts (0)
    Independent Sources does a nice job detailing the timeline of the John Roberts confirmation process:Today or tomorrow: President€™s formal nomination of Roberts sent to the SenateMonday, Sept. 12 C...

Tags: ,

NAVIGATION