Re: Barrett-Jackson Lawsuit
 

[ QUOTE ]
MIdas.........Who cares if the guy is a Judge or a Waiter..........It's a matter of "Right" and "Wrong".......Don't you Get it.....
There are two actions at stake here....The Libel ( Tough to Resolve).....and the Actions of the Seller after the Sale............Why are you Blaming B-J........Were they the ones that Breached the Sales Contract........Remember......After the Gavel is dropped....the car has a New Owner......How would you feel if you had bought the car and this guy comes over and decides that even though you bought the car thru a Legal Venue, that he didn't want you to have it put the chains thru the rims (scratching them) and padlocked everything......what if the next guy decides to sabotage the engine or whatever because they are "UnHappy" with the Results.........Where does it end????
B-J is doing what they have to do........Don't you understand that.........Again.......what if "You" had bought that car

[/ QUOTE ]

Kwizz, I get it just fine. I see your point, and though I don't like B-J, I think you have to look below the surface on this one, as where there's smoke, there's usually some sort of fire.

It would be untrue if I didn't think the chance for B-J to make even more money has corrupted them, but that's not the point. The fact of the matter is that the words "fraud" and "auction" are being used in the same sentences as B-J, and bringing suit will be even more damaging, regardless if they win or lose, as it puts these words out there with B-J in the same sentence even further.

My points are that a judge presumably knows the boundaries of the law, and if you've read any of the background in this case, B-J bringing a case against anyone is a bad move.
Some interesting reading for you:

http://www.classiccar.com/forums/showthread.php?t=8767

Re: Barrett-Jackson Lawsuit
 

There are many things that could be improved with our criminal justice system. OJs trial didn't change or accelerate anything. I was a prosecutor in Vegas at the time of OJs trial and correctly predicted very early in OJs trial that he would be acquitted because as a prosecutor I could see the case was being grossly mishandled by the prosecutors trying OJs case.

OJs defense attorneys did what they were paid to do. They did their jobs. If everyone else had done their jobs properly OJ would be in prison. The OJ jury was overwhelmed due to prosecutor incomptetence and it was an exceedingly simple case. I have presented DNA evidence to a jury many times and even I was confused after watching the DNA evidence as it was presented in the OJ case.

Our country went all the way to the middle east looking for a war. All we had to do was look outside to our city streets and we could have found a war. Last year over 12,000 people were murdered in this country. Imagine if we as a country had invested five years and billions of dollars to fight the war on crime here on America's streets?

In five years we lost over 3000 brave soldiers in the middle east. I wonder how many of those 12,000 murder victims we could have saved if we had fought the American war on crime instead of the war in Iraq.

Re: Barrett-Jackson Lawsuit
 

Les-- All good points, and well-made.

If you don't like our criminal justice system, think about being falsely-convicted in a third-world country, and the list of possible ramifications. Or, watch Midnight Express... Either gives you a new appreciation of lawsuits, the appellate court, and the overall legal process that we have in the U.S.

Re: Barrett-Jackson Lawsuit
 

I don't think I ever said I didn't like our criminal justice system? I think I was commenting on the innocent guy who went to prison. And trying to articulate that the reason the system makes mistakes is based in large part on the overwhelming volume of crime in this country in relation to the resources to fight it, and that rather than invade a country then dismantle it's infrastructure then hope to prevent a 1400 year old civil war from festering I think the money and lives lost could have been better spent in this country on the war on crime that gets relegated to the back pages of the newspaper each day. My two cents.

I think our criminal justice system does a great job even as it functions without the necessary resources it needs. The result of too much crime and not enough reources to fight it is the type of mistake detailed on the dateline episode. Our health care system is in the same state.

Overall our criminal justice system fucntions remarkably well IMHO. Yes innocent people have been convicted but far more guilty criminals have walked then innocent ones convicted, from my experience in the system which dates back to 1983.

Re: Barrett-Jackson Lawsuit
 

Hey Les, I don't think that was aimed at you. I believe king Midas was saying "If a person doesn't like our criminal justice system...", not implying you, per se.

Re: Barrett-Jackson Lawsuit
 

[ QUOTE ]
....OJs defense attorneys did what they were paid to do. They did their jobs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Les,

I'm not going to attempt to debate law with you as I'm not
armed for that fight. However, there is something terribly
wrong with a system that allows defense attorneys to greatly
increase their financial holdings and in so doing, lieing, misrepresenting facts,
manipulating juries, bla-bla-bla, all in the name of defending their
perspective client. Clients, I might add, that can get
away with murder, rape, robery, etc.. It's just wrong!
No other way to make that PC. If they did their jobs, then
I rest my case.

We all learned this when we were kids - wrong is wrong no
matter how to dress it up. https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...ins/tongue.gif

I'm not attacking you personally. I'm just sick of it all!

Steve

Re: Barrett-Jackson Lawsuit
 

Yes Tom, you are correct-- I was saying we have a great criminal justice system here that attempts to be fair. I also think that Les points out issues that our current government has failed us on.

Using the analogy of a third-world country puts this into perspective, as it's very easy to think that the U.S. has too many lawyers.

If people simply got their hands cut off w/o trials, sure we wouldn't need lawyers-- But I don't think anyone here wants that. There will always be problems with anything, but you probably wouldn't think a good lawyer was overpaid if you were a defendant in need of support. Or, a plaintiff in a vice-versa situation.

Re: Barrett-Jackson Lawsuit
 

I thought this thread was about Barrett-Jackson and cars? Some of you guys need a compass to stay on course. Focus grasshopper.

Re: Barrett-Jackson Lawsuit
 

[ QUOTE ]
I thought this thread was about Barrett-Jackson and cars? Some of you guys need a compass to stay on course. Focus grasshopper.

[/ QUOTE ]

What's a matta! Never heard of a segway? https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...s/rolleyes.gif

Re: Barrett-Jackson Lawsuit
 

We all learned this when we were kids - wrong is wrong no
matter how to dress it up.
Quote Steve

But........we grew up in a different "Time".......Remember......."Truth, Justice, and the American Way"..........For you young ones......That was the leadin to the Superman TV show https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...iggthumpup.gif

Ken https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...mlins/flag.gif