Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site houxz.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!eagle!mhuxt!mhuxi!mhuxa!houxm!houxz!halle1
From: halle1@houxz.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.legal
Subject: Re: Twisted Legal System
Message-ID: <485@houxz.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 2-Sep-83 10:15:19 EDT
Article-I.D.: houxz.485
Posted: Fri Sep  2 10:15:19 1983
Date-Received: Sat, 3-Sep-83 06:15:33 EDT
References: <2164@utcsrgv.UUCP>
Organization: Bell Labs, Holmdel NJ
Lines: 9
Re: the $75K judgment for the robber

The paper yesterday had an account of what really happened.
The robbee followed the robber out to some swampland where the
robber's car got stuck.  The robber, seeing headlights, went
for help.  Guess who?
Anyway, a warning shot was fired, which accidentally hit the robber in the
foot.  (The robber acknowledged it was accidental.)  The judge ruled
that the robber was 25% negligent and the shooter 75%.  Considering the
limited detail in the newspaper account, the judgment seems fair.
Both of them should be in jail.  Vigilanteism is no answer.