I recall in my freshman English class we had the textbook “Elements of Argument” by Annette Rottenberg. We were supposed to journal about the readings, and in one of them she made an offhand comment about (to the best of my recollection) “minor crimes such as drunk driving and graffiti”. It was pretty tangential to her point, which I no longer recall.
Our journal entries were supposed to be how we could incorporate what we’d learned from the reading into our writing. But my journal entry for that reading was a long-winded rant on the absurdity of Rottenberg likening drunk driving, which kills tens of thousands of people a year in the US alone, to graffiti which kills no one.
I was expecting a reprimand from the professor for not following instructions, but he liked my journal entry so much that he had his TA type it up and distribute copies to the whole class for discussion and praised it effusively.
Suing everybody decreases the merits of any of the individual factors, in my eyes. The allegations of drugging Haskins are completely unrelated to being hit by the dump truck.
It’s a pretty serious accusation, but if it’s true then I would think it’s relevant. A drugged person would be much more likely to walk into traffic on the Highway and be killed than a non-drugged person. I would think that if it could be proven that he was drugged against his knowledge or will (which I think is what his widow is claiming) then that could constitute involuntary manslaughter or negligent homicide or something of that nature.
But whether he was drugged against his will or took the drugs in his system of his own volition… no clue.
I think it’s a desperate attempt to use the civil tort system to get anything that can be gotten.
From what I have read, the main culprit in the events that led to the death of Dwayne Haskins was Dwayne Haskins.
I have not read anywhere how Haskins got to the highway where he was killed. It seems that he likely drunkenly drove himself there. If that’s the case, the dump truck driver did the world a favor.
Does the NFLPA not come with decent life insurance??? That seems like it would be very appropriate.
Wasn’t he with someone? I was thinking that given his condition it was more likely that his companion was driving. Has she (I think it was a woman) said?
Even if he is 100% responsible for his own death, and guilty of drunk / drugged driving (a crime which I abhor and which is punished way too lightly IMO) this is pretty harsh.
He was with a woman. It’s easy to speculate that she was an affair partner. Details about who was driving have not been made public, as far as I know. I will also then speculate and conclude he was driving the car that was his.
I am happy to be harsh. Quoting myself from earlier:
My comment about them being unrelated is the suit against being drugged is unrelated to the suit against the dump truck driver/company. The plaintiff will sue the truck people regardless of the drugged piece.
Oh, yes, I agree. In fact they might work at cross-purposes. If Haskins was drugged (or the widow asserts that he was) that might reduce the culpability of the truck driver & his employer.
