Hot Coffee - What to Do About Frivolous Lawsuits (Graphic Burn Photographs)

      In 1994, a woman named Stella Leibeck famously (or infamously) spilled hot McDonald's coffee on herself in her parked car. She then proceeded to sue the McDonald's corporation and was awarded $2.86 million by the jury. Mrs. Leibeck was then derided internationally and became the "poster child" for frivolous lawsuits and tort reform. Just about everyone knows about this case but many people do not know the details. For instance, Mrs. Leibeck originally asked McDonald's to simply cover her medical costs and loss of income which were approximately $18,000. In response McDonald's offered $800. As the lawsuit went forward many attempts were made by Leibeck's lawyer to settle for between $60,000 and $300,000, all of which were turned down by McDonald's. In addition to this, McDonald's coffee had caused over 700 scaldings all of which had been settled by the corporation. During the Leibeck vs. McDonald's trial, a McDonald's executive testified that the losses to the company caused by these scaldings were not significant enough to warrant any change in company policy. It is also not well known that after the jury awarded $2.7 million the judge reduced that amount to a total of $640,000. McDonald's appealed and then settled for an undisclosed amount under $600,000. For those of you who still feel that this was a huge amount, this is a photo of her injuries.

Despite what many might think the temperature at which McDonald's brewed (and still brews) it's coffee is not unreasonable. The McDonald's training manual states that coffee should be brewed at between 180 and 190 degrees fahrenheit. As this is only 22 degrees off of boiling it can cause significant injury if contact with the skin is made. However, this is actually the temperature at which almost all coffee is made. As I was writing this blog I walked up to the barista at the Starbucks I patronize and asked at what temperature the coffee is held. He said, "It is held at between 180 and 190 degrees, but is brewed at a higher temperature." This, and other similar lawsuits, are the topic of the documentary Hot Coffee. The film goes on to argue that tort reform, monetary caps on damages, and mandatory arbitration are all attempts by powerful corporations and the politicians (and judges) they endorse, to take away the right to civil litigation by the everyman. This is a very powerful film that everyone should see. However, the people who do see it should also do their own research and think critically about what they have learned.
     This documentary talks about several different "Exhibits" as if they were presenting evidence in a courtroom and in a sense they are. They are presenting evidence to the courtroom of your mind, where I hope Reason presides. Naturally, you will have to make decisions about the evidence presented for yourself. I believe that this documentary was really trying to present a balanced case with evidence both for and against tort reform. Unfortunately, much of the evidence presented ended up being flawed when everything was put into the light.

     After discussing Mrs. Leibeck and her case, the documentary went on to talk about Mississippi Supreme Court Judge Oliver Diaz, who was attacked during his election campaign by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce for being anti business and anti tort reform.

Despite the attack Diaz won the election but was then indicted on charges of bribery and tax evasion. As portrayed by the film he was acquitted of all charges but not before he was prevented from serving as judge for over two years. This was shown in such a way as to lead the audience to believe that this delay in allowing him to serve was part of a right wing conspiracy to protect corporations from litigation. What was not shown by the film was that while the judge was acquitted of the charges, it was only because his wife plead guilty and was given two years probation. I will allow you to make your own decision on whether or not he allowed his wife to take the fall for these crimes. This also highlights the importance of voting with care and evaluating the sources behind everything you see and hear. Needless to say, this is especially important when considering political attack ads.

      The final portion of the documentary talked about Jamie Leigh Jones and her alleged gang rape by KBR employees while she was serving as a civilian contractor in Iraq. She had signed an employment contract that prevented her from suing her employer and instead called for mandatory arbitration for any disputes. The film followed her attempts to get out of that arbitration as she fought for her day in an actual courtroom. The film stopped filming before she was able to get her day in court, but it did eventually happen. It turned out that there was overwhelming evidence that much of what Ms. Jones had to say was largely made up and she was held liable for much of Halliburton's legal fees.
       Even though the documentary showed poor evidence of the need for tort reform, I do believe it is necessary. In particular there should be much more transparency involved in these disputes. If the public is able to see settlement amounts for instance they will be able to decide for themselves if it was a fair amount. If the legal proceedings are made public, people will be able to see for themselves if a corporation should be held responsible. Despite what many people think there are not that many frivolous lawsuits and those that are frivolous are usually very quickly thrown out. Many of the famous stories that have become viral over the internet are completely made up. Those that aren't generally have extenuating circumstances that many people are not aware of. Juries and especially judges are generally more intelligent than many people will lead you to believe. If we elect the right judges, they will know the proper damages that are due to victims. 

       By far my favorite portion of this documentary was the advice given just before the end. This advice was so fantastic I will post it here as well.
 1. Be a savvy consumer of media - Question whether or not you are getting the full story.
 2. Know your State Laws (Author Edit) - Make your own decision concerning whether caps on damages are appropriate and make sure your views are represented in the state legislature.
 3. Scrutinize Political Ads - Research the agenda of the organization paying for the ad.
 4. Read your Contracts (Author Edit) - Decide for yourself if mandatory arbitration is right for you as an employee and make sure your views are represented in congress.

What Has Happened to our Community - Craigslist Joe (2012)

                                                         

    Hannah and I chose Craigslist Joe as our documentary of the week. It turned out be a very interesting film to say the least. Craigslist Joe is a film about Joe Garner's social experiment to live entirely off of Craigslist for an entire month. The purpose of his experiment was to see if one could still depend upon the kindness of strangers for sustenance as could be done in the early part of the last century. It was an interesting film but lacked any sort of thoughtfulness about what could be learned and extrapolated from his experiences.

    Without giving anything away Joe ended up travelling most of the country in his 31 day journey and met many of the types of people you would expect that he would. He even met the founder of Craigslist.  Needless to say he spent a couple of nights out on the street and some days going hungry. I believe he would have had much more success if he had been a little more cheery and gregarious. In fact, he may have been so but the film portrayed him as a very quiet and awkward person. It is also fair to say that if he may have had a much different experience if he hadn't been a young middle class white male. Without even considering race, he could never have tried this experiment if he were a woman.
     As his thesis Joe says he is on a quest to see if there is still any sense of community in modern America and I feel that he was able to show that there is significant community. It is just different from what people might expect. After seeing this film it seems to me that community is no longer found in our communities but is instead found within groups that we choose to be a part of. It is found in our followers and in those we follow on Twitter. We find it in our selected church or the clubs we are a part of. In the basketball leagues we are a part of and other social groups. This is all well and good and healthy but the problem is that America as a society is losing a sense of responsibility to anyone but ourselves. We no longer feel any need to curb our behavior to what is considered appropriate by any set group. It used to be that if we upset our community (quite literally the people who lived around us) they would no longer do business with us and we could no longer make a living. As such communities were very self correcting. They would deal with the members of the community who broke the rules both socially and economically. These days if you upset your community you just find a new one. This is why there is so much hate online in places like YouTube and Twitter; there is no longer any accountability to one's community.  People can and absolutely do say incredibly inappropriate things in these areas because they know they will not be held accountable. Community no longer has any sense of permanence.
     This is why online communities are flourishing. We are able to get the sense of belonging that most of us crave but at the same time are afforded anonymity so that our actions in our communities (the things we say and do) have no lasting negative consequences for us. Unfortunately, our actions may have far reaching negative consequences on those we interact with online.

     Craigslist Joe highlights this phenomenon. Many people are eager to have fleeting relationships with very little responsibility. People are willing to give a stranger a ride to New Orleans or let them sleep on their floor but only if they meet the person online. Only if the implied relationship comes with no strings attached. While this was an interesting film, it is difficult to learn anything worthwhile from it. This is one you could skip. 

    

Sync or Swim (2008)

This week we watched Sync or Swim. Since this is more my girlfriend Hannah’s area, she is writing our blog post for the week. You can visit her Google Plus page here. Enjoy - JS

I am Hannah, Jay’s girlfriend. Jay and I thought it would be fun if we mixed it up and have me write this week’s blog. For our documentary night I chose Sync or Swim, a film that follows a group of synchronized swimmers as they compete for spots on the 2004 U.S synchronized swimming team. This documentary offers an intimate look at this sport that is often misunderstood. I was particularly interested in this film because I used to compete in synchronized swimming as a young adult. I was on the Walnut Creek Aquanuts, an elite synchronized swimming club and 12-time National Champions and winners of over 200 national titles; 17 Olympians, 8 of whom are gold medalists have been former members of the Aquanuts.

Sync or Swim follows nine athletes and their rigorous training schedule. These girls practice six days a week and have one recovery day.  It’s essentially like having an unpaid full time job. This film also examines the media storm that took place just before the 2004 summer olympics. Tammy Crow, one of the key members of the 2004 US synchronized team, was involved in a fatal car crash in February 2003. After staying up almost all night, she skidded off a mountain road and crashed into a tree. Tammy's two passengers died: her boyfriend, Cody Tatro, and a 12-year-old boy, Brett Slinger.

Tammy was driving too fast for the snowy conditions (and the California Highway Patrol claimed she had alcohol on her breath). She was charged with vehicular manslaughter. She pleaded no contest and was sentenced to 3 months of prison and three years’ probation to be served on October 25th. The judge ordered her to pay $23,000 in restitution to the family of Brett Slinger. Tammy was allowed to postpone her jail time until after the Olympics. The average jail sentence for vehicle manslaughter is 10 years depending on the state and a maximum of 20 years.

As you might imagine, the decision to postpone her jail sentence until she was able to participate in the Olympics was extremely controversial. Many people felt that the judge was far too lenient especially considering that she may have been drinking. Others felt that the judge had made the right decision as  she had experienced her own suffering through the death of her boyfriend. As she had devoted her life to representing the United States in the Olympics, they felt she should be able to do so. It is the opinion of this author that the judge made the right decision and she rightfully was allowed to participate.

All in all this was a very interesting documentary. Check it out for yourself.

    

    

The Beauty of Mundania

    This week I chose Mortified Nation from a Netflix suggestion and I was pleasantly surprised.
    This is possibly one of the most inane documentaries that Hannah and I have watched so far. It details a current fad of everyday people getting up on stage and reading extremely embarrassing (and hilarious)  portions of their diaries and journals from decades before. I posted a video of this from YouTube below the trailer.  This movement has become popular in several cities including Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Austin and several others.
    My favorite thing about this documentary is that it showed a great perspective of the big picture of life. Through the experiences of these teenagers the audience vicariously relives the emotional turmoil that comes with adolescence and we can all see how temporary even seemingly insurmountable problems can be.  I was left wondering what things in my life now seem like a really big deal but will turn out to be completely inconsequential. It also left me with a feeling of appreciation for the now, an appreciation of the beauty of the mundane.
     Those who journal regularly will tell you that this is the joy that is found in keeping a journal.  Many of us, myself included, are simply trying to get through life and on to the next big thing. The next paycheck. The next holiday. The next new purchase. The next orgasm. In the end we end up missing much of the beauty in life. We miss the beauty in the daily alarm clock, the routine breakfast, the traffic on the way to work, the regular lunch, and forced relationships with coworkers.  Without these things our lives would be void and meaningless. As much as we would like to deny it, we are going to be remembered by the mundane and banal things we do, at least by those closest to us. In my own life I need to remember that my life will not finally "start" when I get a better job. It won't begin when I get married or pay off my school loans. My life is now and I need to live it now and appreciate it for what it is now.
     Hannah and I enjoyed this film so much that we immediately went online and got tickets for the next show. This is definitely a film y'all should check out. I must warn you however, that while this documentary may seem like it is perfect to show your teenagers, it is actually extremely explicit. You were warned.



                                             
                     


     

Jesus Camp Revisited

 

      Hannah chose Jesus Camp (2006) for us this week. I first saw this film when it came out. I didn't like it much then, and I like it even less now. The film is made in such a way as to be very hypocritical about the things we teach our children and left me with the question, why is this considered so wrong?
    This film, for those who have not seen it, documents children and families from Missouri, visiting a weekend summer camp in North Dakota. The weekend is for children and is mostly taught by a woman named Becky Fischer, an outspoken, pro-life, conservative Christian. The film showed several things that were controversial including children moved to tears "by the Spirit", speaking in tongues, and praying for the former President George Bush. This film was, and to some extent still is, extremely controversial. People felt that the children shown were being "indoctrinated" and otherwise brainwashed by the pastors and parents involved. One quote at the end of the film claimed that the camp was creating a "child army for the republican party".

    To be fair, many of these claims, though exaggerated, are true. One man's "teaching" is another man's "indoctrination" which then a social worker might claim is "brainwashing". It is true that the things taught were certainly on the edges of what is considered "evangelical Christian" and many prominent evangelical christians feel that  the theology practiced by the people in this film is poor at best.  Ted Haggard, the infamous former evangelical pastor, who eventually admitted having sex with, and buying methamphetamine from, a male prostitute, is featured in the film, though his exploits are not mentioned in the film. He actually had nothing to do with the Jesus Camp or any of those involved in the film so I am not sure why they chose to include him.
    After seeing this film, I was left with one significant question. So what? Why should we be so upset about this? Why is this controversial? Children everywhere are taught things by their parents. In fact, they quite literally cannot avoid learning things from their parents. These children are taught a religious system that actively promotes the idea of a higher power and that we will be responsible to that higher power when we leave this earth. They are taught that prayer has power and that those in power will need prayer to make wise decisions. The children of "hippies" on the other hand are taught equally controversial things. They are taught or otherwise learn a disrespect for government and authority in general. They are taught that certain kinds of drug use is ok, and that there is no way to know that anything is actually morally wrong. They are taught veganism as the only ethical way to eat and that terminating a pregnancy is sometimes a necessity. I could go on about the things that are taught in public schools, but I won't because my point is not to disagree with these teachings but to rather point out that these things are largely lifestyle choices and opinions that are taught. These things are all opinions, and choices about the way people decide to live their lives. Furthermore these opinions and lifestyle are innately political. You cannot live your life as a vegan without making a political statement about how you view society, equally you cannot homeschool your children or be a Christian without making a political statement. All of these actions say things about you and your beliefs and like it or not people will notice and will evaluate you accordingly. Liberals teach their children one way and conservatives teach their children another and both groups are equally shocked and offended about the how and the what.

     This would be a completely different discussion if the children were being harmed. As a society we need to step in 100% of the time that there is abuse involved in these situations. In reality, these children grow up and when they are mature enough they make their own decisions about what they believe. As it turns out these kids have ended up being just fine. Levi O'Brien is now 20 and is still a Christian.

Check out his Facebook page. He also has many other videos available on YouTube. Rachael Elhardt was more difficult to find but you can see her Facebook page here. Tory Binger apparently does not have a Facebook profile but here is a followup blog from when she was 16. So with abuse as the line in the sand, I want to know why Jesus Camp brought on a wave of negative reactions, to the point that they closed the camp while Sons of Perdition goes on without almost any reaction at all. In fact it is mainly these same Christians who do the most to help the Sons. Let's Think Critically.

   

Burn (2012) or The Fate of the Twentieth Century Motor Company

    This week we saw Burn,  a fascinating documentary about the Detroit Fire Department and the almost fantastical obstacles with which they must struggle on a daily basis. This film is an excellent snapshot of the consequences of our current system of American politics, and is something that everyone should see.
     This film brings to the surface one particular issue; What can and  must be done about the city of Detroit and similar cities such as Chicago Il., Honolulu, Hi., and Cincinnati, Oh., that are also on the edge of bankruptcy?  One of my favorite things about this documentary is that the filmmakers follow people on both sides of the issue, allowing the audience to understand the viewpoints of all sides, to sympathize with the struggles of all, and most importantly to make an informed decision for themselves. According to the documentary, in the city of Detroit, with a population of 713,000 there were 30,000 fire calls in the year 2011. That's almost 100 a day. To put this in perspective, all of Los Angeles County,  with a population of almost 10 million, had 7,549 fire calls in 2011. The reason there were so many fires is because of arson. The citizens of Detroit are literally burning down their own city. There were approximately 5100 fires that were intentionally set in the city of Detroit in 2011. That is almost 9 times the national average. To make matters worse the number of firefighters has halved. In 1954 there were 1900 firefighters in the city, in 2010 there were 919, meanwhile fires per capita has risen 300%.
     The firefighters in this film seem to have a sense of defeat before they even get the call. Their trucks don't run, their safety equipment is shoddy at best and every year they are laying off more employees and closing more stations.
 
These closures are correlated with the population decline of the city. In 1950, Detroit had a population of 1.8 million. In 2010, the population is down to 713,000. This exodus is leaving over 50,000 abandoned homes in the city, homes which quickly become fuel for arson and other kinds of crime.

Things have become so bad that the Fire Commissioner, Donald Austin (who is featured in the documentary but afterwards resigned in 2013 due to "changes in City administration") created a very controversial policy that said that abandoned homes that posed no threat to nearby structures would be monitored by the FD but would be otherwise allowed to burn. This policy was put in place to prevent firefighter injury or death battling conflagrations in unwanted structures.

     A thinking person would ask, why nothing is being done to help these departments. On the surface the answer turns out to be very simple. The city of Detroit needs to budget more money for the Fire Department. The answer becomes much more complicated when we see that Detroit and many other American cities for that matter, are dying, both financially and spiritually. The American people are losing a confidence in their own nation.

   It used to be that people took pride in their work and created products that were valuable when compared to those created by competitors, as a result Americans were paid well for their hard work. Americans bought American products. The world strove to equal our economic prowess. Since that time, in which Detroit had its highest population and was thriving economically (That's probably a coincidence right?)  we, the American people, quite literally you and I, have become complacent with what we are and what we have and as a result are no longer leaders in the world. We are no longer satisfied with well paying jobs like plumbing, or roofing and are instead doing anything to get rich quick by any means necessary. As a millennial, I must unfortunately admit that this is most true of my generation.  As a result our work ethic has become almost non-existent, the quality of our products has become terrible and our wages have decreased and our whole economy has declined. We have become the laughing stock of the world and ourselves to the point that we quite literally burn down our own cities.
    Now, that is a very dim picture of the United States, but it is not the whole picture. The truth is that many people have begun to see the problem and are trying to become part of the solution. Specifically the Technology sector, the hated and reviled, Silicon Valley, is still trying to create the best products and are largely succeeding. People are again taking pride in their work and are reaping the massive financial benefits. As a result Silicon Valley is one of the most economically thriving areas of the United States, and it's success is slowly beginning to expand to other areas. Everyone wants to work for those companies but very few people are willing to do the hard work required to get the jobs that are desperate to be filled.
    Only when Americans again have a pride in their own work, in the fruits of their own labor, in their own communities, in America and American products will Detroit and other cities like it  be able to survive.
   

The Ethical Dilemna of Rescue

    Our latest documentary was called The Summit and documents the tragedy that occurred on August 1 & 2, 2008, on the K2 mountain of Pakistan and China. K2 is the second highest mountain on earth and with a 25% death rate, is deadlier than Everest.
    This documentary was very hard to follow. This was partially due to the way they told the story (starting in the middle) and partially due to the fact that to this day, what happened on K2 is largely a mystery. All in all this is a very interesting and saddening documentary. It seemed like it was trying very hard to be Touching the Void (A similar mountaineering documentary. This one is MUST SEE!) though it was not nearly as good. The film explores the mystery behind accidental deaths and some unexplained deaths and attempts to fill in the blanks. It is shot through a combination of actual footage of the event and what I presume were reenactments (?) though which is which is never made entirely clear.
    The film also underlines the debate amongst climbers of whether there is a responsibility to rescue fellow climbers if there is a high risk of personal injury or death. When several Korean climbers were stranded on the mountain due to injury the vast majority of climbers at the next lowest camp refused (with apparently legitimate excuses) to make the climb to rescue them. Of the five that did attempt the rescue, three of whom were unequipped hired sherpas, three died, including both sherpas.

    A previous generation might have suggested that the only "right" thing to do would have been to risk it all to rescue the other climbers, regardless of whether or not they were part of your group or nationality. I believe that many of today's generation, which apparently includes the climbers on the mountain that day, would say that they knew the risks when they made the climb and it would be stupid to attempt an ill-fated rescue. I am not sure what I would do if put in their position, and I never have to know.  If you were put in a similar situation, would you be able to live or die with the consequences?