Indrapoera

Hi,
I am after some kind of report or any pointers to use in a lawsuit
against Ford. Basically, whilst being car hijacked and in an attempt to
escape, the Ford Focus bumped the curb and the inertia switched killed
the engine and that led the perpetrators to calmly walk up to the
driver, pull him from the car and cold bloodily shot him which
paralyzed him.

I know in UK the police sierras had a huge problem with this in the
1990's.

Please, someone help and point me in a direction.

sleepdog@optonline.net

The fuel cut-off safety feature did what it was designed to do.
Unfortunately so did the hand gun that the perpetrators used to
paralyze your friend. Are you going to sue the gun mfg too?

Its amazing what bad things humans can do with the things around them
but if your friend was on foot and tripped over the curb and the
hijackers then hit him/her with a brick who would you be suing?

Ed White

I have to wonder, if you friend had driven the car into a tree, would
it still be Ford's fault? rying to transfer the blame from the crimilas
to an uninvolved third party is just wrong.

Ed

Bill 2

<sleepdog@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:1121955804.101855.75830@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> The fuel cut-off safety feature did what it was designed to do.
> Unfortunately so did the hand gun that the perpetrators used to
> paralyze your friend. Are you going to sue the gun mfg too?
>
> Its amazing what bad things humans can do with the things around them
> but if your friend was on foot and tripped over the curb and the
> hijackers then hit him/her with a brick who would you be suing?

The city?

Backyard Mechanic

This is sad... and there's no salving the grief. But why dont you try suing
the killers themselves?

Suppose that your friend had been walking by an alley and gunmen forced him
into that alley, and your friend tried to escape ... but blocked from
getting to a street, he tried door after door only to find them all locked
as a precaution against burglary.

Would you then find an attorney who would try to sue the building occupants
for having doors locked?

Note that the inertia switch has saved many more lives from collision fires
than it has cost.

If you do find an attorney who will take this case, BEWARE, he's really
after YOUR money, or notoriety, and likely YOUR interests come second or
third.

Not to mention your friend violated the first rule of robbery victim: GIVE
IT UP!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - -
What's even sadder is the concept that has been fostered in the new society,
that when bad things happen, someone should be liable and sued.

Heard an example the other day... lawyer advice talk-show. elderly lady
wants to sue store because after her hubby parked in handicap slot, she got
out, lost her balance a little and tripped over the wheel-stop curb.

She said... if it's a handicap spot, there shouldnt be a curb to trip over.
Lawyer, while being nice, implied she was an idiot and voiced same as I
write above. But he didnt point out the obvious cases of 'seasoned citizens
running their cars INTO stores!

I wanted to phone lawyer and ask him to blame the responsible parties for
this... his own brethren in the bar.


"Indrapoera" <indrapoera@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1121953126.981080.290710@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Hi,
> I am after some kind of report or any pointers to use in a lawsuit
> against Ford. Basically, whilst being car hijacked and in an attempt to
> escape, the Ford Focus bumped the curb and the inertia switched killed
> the engine and that led the perpetrators to calmly walk up to the
> driver, pull him from the car and cold bloodily shot him which
> paralyzed him.
>
> I know in UK the police sierras had a huge problem with this in the
> 1990's.
>
> Please, someone help and point me in a direction.
>

Mark

On 21 Jul 2005 07:53:08 -0700, "Ed White" <ce.white3@gmail.com> wrote:

>I have to wonder, if you friend had driven the car into a tree, would
>it still be Ford's fault?

Of course it would. Anyone who thinks Ford should not have been able to
detect the oncoming tree and force the car to activate it's breaks is a
fool. They can just put one of those fancy rear-detecting bumpers in the
front and hook it up to the brakes with a big cable. Ford should be sued
if you ever run in to anything.

Mark

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 16:53:26 GMT, "Backyard Mechanic" <pettyfog@yaywho.com>
wrote:

>This is sad... and there's no salving the grief. But why dont you try suing
>the killers themselves?

Because Ford has money and the thief has none. See the motive now?

Don't laugh too hard. It's the ONLY reason people extend blame beyond
reasonable expectations.

DustyRhoades@mailcity.com

Don't waist time on money in that endeavor, WBMA You have little
change of winning in litigation. On can not prevail in a action
when a product does what is is intended to do. Fords engineers
need only show that the inertia switched is designed to disengage
in a collision that produces at least one 'G' force to deactivate
the fuel pump. Striking a curb will not produce a 'G' in any
event. You would have a better change bringing an action if the
switch did NOT disengage at one 'G' force. LOL

Why not did it the right way and sue the perpetrator for wrongful
death instead?



mike hunt



Indrapoera wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I am after some kind of report or any pointers to use in a lawsuit
> against Ford. Basically, whilst being car hijacked and in an attempt to
> escape, the Ford Focus bumped the curb and the inertia switched killed
> the engine and that led the perpetrators to calmly walk up to the
> driver, pull him from the car and cold bloodily shot him which
> paralyzed him.

Jim Chinnis

DustyRhoades@mailcity.com wrote in part:

>Why not did it the right way and sue the perpetrator for wrongful
>death instead?

Obviously because the guilty party (perpetrator) has no money but
the innocent party (Ford) does.
--
Jim Chinnis Warrenton, Virginia, USA

Tom Adkins

DustyRhoades@mailcity.com wrote:
> Don't waist time on money in that endeavor, WBMA You have little
> change of winning in litigation. On can not prevail in a action
> when a product does what is is intended to do. Fords engineers
> need only show that the inertia switched is designed to disengage
> in a collision that produces at least one 'G' force to deactivate
> the fuel pump. Striking a curb will not produce a 'G' in any
> event. You would have a better change bringing an action if the
> switch did NOT disengage at one 'G' force. LOL
>
> Why not did it the right way and sue the perpetrator for wrongful
> death instead?
>
>
>
> mike hunt
>
>
>
> Indrapoera wrote:
>


Hey mike hunt,
WTF happened to your spelling and grammar? Were you just incensed by this post or is
there something amiss. I'm asking seriously, out of concern. You are usually very
articulate. Just wondering.

Regards,Tom Adkins