Janice Pou, right or wrong?

[Hitcher]

There will be a veritable shitload of dosh in this for learned counsel.

[Jackrat]

Janice Pou's estate is suing British American Tobacco and H O & W D Wills for several hundred thousand dollars for "seducing her into a lifetime of smoking".
Personally I'm in two minds about this; While I think the tobacco companies are lower than pond scum and their product is only legal through fortuitious timing, I have a difficulty with an adult blaming others for their weakness of will.
She started smoking in 1968. Through her life she was exposed to all the information of the dangers of smoking, yet she continued right until her death last year.
Will we see abusers of alcohol suing the suppliers for the strife caused in their lives?

Dang we agree on something,,,,again
I gave up a couple of months ago,,,,,an I know exactly who the dumb fuck was.
Can't blame ANYBODY for your own decisions no matter how easy todays PC bullshit makes it.

[geoffm]

What part of "smoking causes lung cancer" which has been printed on ciggie packets for over 30 years did she not understand. Sorry, but no one forced her to smoke, and she had plenty of time to stop. If you want to play, sometims you have to pay.
G

[Pixie]

apparently thalidomide was not good for you either not that it was proved.

Thalidomide slipped through safety tests in spite of the best efforts of its developers,because it only affects feotal development when the feotus is exposed in a specific two week window in the gestation.

Thalidomide is now regarded as a wonder drug in the treatment of some cancers,endometriosis and other conditions where its effect on tissue development can be used beneficially.

[mstriumph]

it's a frivilous action brought by oppertunistic relatives encouraged by unscrupulous & immoral legal vultures in a publicly-funded system whose lack of public accountability allows it to screw the taxpayer.......

-- hmmm - nothing new here .... moving on :spudbn:

[Hitcher]

it's a frivilous action brought by oppertunistic relatives encouraged by unscrupulous & immoral legal vultures in a publicly-funded system whose lack of public accountability allows it to screw the taxpayer.

At one level, arguably yes. But at another level there is no New Zealand case law covering the ability of individuals or groups to pursue significant damages claims on this type. This is therefore an important test case of important legal significance. As such the investment of some public money is warranted, I believe.

Similar cases have been successfully prosecuted overseas, including the US (subsequently overturned on appeal).
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...121502034.html

[Charlie]

I'm against smoking, but in this situation I'm not even interested in that argument.

The act of suing by the family... is it ANYTHING to do with the mother smoking and causing her deterioration of health and eventual death? It has been said already; what is so special about this family? Thousands of people die all the time from smoking - something they know better than to do.

My 2c (acknowledging I don’t have all the facts and am purely having an emotional rant) is that this smells like a disrespectful family that is taking advantage of their own mothers death to gain what is hoped to be a huge financial reward.
Will they put that money into cancer research? Increasing awareness for the dangers of smoking? Quit smoking programmes? Or are they hoping it will bring back their mother?
Probably not. Then what exactly to they hope to gain from a cash pay out?
Had she died of anything else I'm guessing they would have still looked for blame and financial compensation. The tobacco companies are already hated and the focus of a lot of finger pointing. Their loss seems more of an opportunity.
I bet they have all eyed up some materialistic dream prize to spend their "poor-mother" money on. This family need a slap.

[Lou Girardin]

My 2c (acknowledging I don’t have all the facts and am purely having an emotional rant) is that this smells like a disrespectful family that is taking advantage of their own mothers death to gain what is hoped to be a huge financial reward.

Janice Pou initiated the case before she died. The estate is merely continuing it.

[enigma51]

Like Lou, I am conflicted on this one.

However, this matter is now before the Court, so therefore has been deemed to be worthy of Court time. It is now up to eloquent legal argument to persuade the presiding Judge one way or the other. I will be interested in the arguments and the outcome, but I'm not going to hold my breath.

Think thats we you are wrong the only reason its has courtime is because the lawyers are seeing dollors (or pounds in this case)

[enigma51]

oops only saw mstruiphm post now

[enigma51]

its funny humans want freedom of speach freedom to choice there own "lifes" etc but yet when something goes wrong they want sue everyone that caused them there problems you choice to smoke you take the problems associated with it

[enigma51]

Thats it im sueing honda for the damages I did to myself for trying motocross stunts which i saw on tv hmmmmm i am sueing the broadcasting services as well for warping my fragile mind which made me want to try the stunts out!!!!!!

[Charlie]

Janice Pou initiated the case before she died. The estate is merely continuing it.

Ok, thanks Lou, different story then. Did she say what outcome she wanted from this? Financial or otherwise? What purpose any money won would serve?

[Lou Girardin]

She wanted to punish the companies from the sound of it. I wouldn't know about the family's motivation though.

[TwoSeven]

From the little information I have read on the subject - ie. stuff news etc.

When she started smoking there were no health warnings (didnt start til some time later). One of the warnings from what I can gather is that no-one explained that smoking is addictive. Aparently the lady was so addicted she couldnt give up if she tried.

It made the news I think because its the first time an estate has carried on a law suite and its the first time an estate had applied for legal aid to pay for it.

It does make an interesting ethical case.