Prosecutor: Janklow on duty at time of fatal crash (taxpayers pay damages)

[UpInArms]

http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/03/15/janklow.ap/

SIOUX FALLS, South Dakota (AP) - - Bill Janklow was on duty as South Dakota's congressman when his speeding car collided with a motorcycle last summer, meaning federal taxpayers would pay any civil damages arising from the fatal crash, a prosecutor has concluded.

U.S. Attorney Tom Heffelfinger's decision came in connection with a wrongful death lawsuit filed against the former congressman and governor by the motorcyclist's family.

In concluding that Janklow was on duty at the time of the accident, Heffelfinger filed a notice Monday asking that the case be moved from state to federal court, and the federal government be substituted as the defendant for Janklow.

<snip>

"I'm not sure what duty he was doing for the taxpayers of the United States or the state of South Dakota by driving 80 miles an hour through a stop sign," Meshbesher said. "And quite frankly, if he was politicking before it happened I'm not sure that's considered to be on duty."

...more...

100 days under the jailhouse would not be long enough for this piece of shit

[jpgray]

1. What the HELL? Are the Bushies going to bat for this asshole? (nt)

[htuttle]

3. They must be

This is a US Attorney making this ridiculous judgement. This is a scandal!

Does that mean ALL members of Congress, and the President and his administration, are fully immune to any liability of any kind for actions THROUGHOUT THEIR TERMS?

Nobody is above the law. I thought we settled this in the '70's.

[snippy]

2. How very republican.

[DU9598]

4. Another fine example

Of a repuke taking personal responsiblity for his actions.

Sickening ... Janklow should personally decline this option and take the hit.

[snippy]

7. Excellent point.

[jpgray]

5. Ten to one they don't mention party affiliation in the article. (nt)

[NoMoreRedInk]

6. A lawyer's dream come true

a $150,000/year defendant is substited with one that can (literally) print money.

Somebody just hit the jackpot.

Edited to say it was the lawyer that hit the jackpot. I wouldn't trade one of my family members for any amount of money, and I feel for the victim and his loved ones.

[DU9598]

8. No

In Federal Court the family cannot seek punative damages - while they could in South Dakota court. Not only that, but South Dakota will cap the non-economic damages ... a bill Janklow probably signed into law.

This has me really ticked. The guy only gets 100 days in prison ... yet he is appealing his conviction and refusing to take personal financial accountability for the death he caused. The prosecutors who got him convicted should ask the judge to reconsider the sentence and make him serve until he takes responsibility.

What a shame. Who appoints these freaking federal prosecutors? Oh, that would be Dubya.

[DU9598]

9. sad

It is sad that you have such a poor view of the lawyer for the family. If it wasn't for the lawyer the family would get nothing for their loss. Sad.

[htuttle]

10. Even if he was committing an illegal act? (ie., running a stop sign)

Most insurance policies that provide full liability insurance include a clause that losses due to illegal activity or extreme negligence are NOT covered. At least the one's I've seen make those exceptions.

My mind is reeling at the potential scope of this decision. I can't believe that a single US Attorney can set this type of precedent. Who would there be to appeal the decision to, however? Who could bring an appeal of this decision?

If a drunk congressman who killed someone when he ran a stop sign while speeding is considered ON DUTY and therefore fully insured against all liability by the federal government, what would an elected official have to do to be considered NOT on duty?

Oh, I know. Be a Democrat.

(Have any other federal officials been sued while in office for actions while in office in recent memory? Can they get their bills paid retroactively?)

[Racenut20]

11. Ask Pres Clinton that one. How many millions has he paid out?

[salin]

12. Ah.... No personal responsibility.

once again - showing what a farce the GOP catch phrase really is.

[nwstrn]

13. Thankfully, there will be some review of the decision

The plaintiff's attorney can file a motion to remand the case to federal court. The federal court will then decide whether to retain jurisdiction. The briefs on this issue should be interesting.

[northzax]

14. why would he?

teh best person avaliable to sue is the government, they have deep pockets, you know. If it is the job of the plaintiff's attorney to get the best possible financial settlement for his clients, why not go for the feds?

on the downside, the US has no incentive to settle, since the money is meaningless to the government, and the defense costs are as well.

[nwstrn]

15. Read the article

"Lawyer Ronald Meshbesher, who represents the Scott family, said he'll try to keep the case in state court where, unlike federal court, the family could win punitive damages."

[AP]

17. Janklow probably has deeper pockets than the US Gov't.

As a congressman, he's been helping the government go bankrupt in order to line his own pockets.

[AP]

16. Breaking the law takes it outside the scope of empoyer-employee

relationship.

Unless SD law is dramatically different from every other state in the country, the fact that there is a criminal conviction proving he broke the law, takes his actions out of the scope of the employer-employee relationship.

If the taxpayer balis him out it's becasue the Federal Gov't (his employer) is refusing to argue a defense that is totally available to him (and if Janklow was a Democrat, you know they'd be arguing the defense).

It is shocking that Republicans would do this.

[Democat]

18. Martha Stewart may spend more time in jail than him

She's a Democrat.

[stevedeshazer]

19. So, apparently, Randy Scott

was killed by the United States?

[htuttle]

20. Collateral damage

...apparently.

[boobooday]

21. Oh my god

What a load of CRAP!

The state should turn around and sue HIM!

http://www.wgoeshome.com

[suegeo]

22. what a load of crap

When I heard about the light sentence, I took a little comfort in the fact that one of Scott's sons was bringing up a case in federal court. (It's to be heard in Minnesota sometime soon).

I thought that they were gonna hit Janklow where it hurt it him the most: his pocketbook.

But now, I hear this. Citizens actually have to pay for this guy's crimes. He gets a light sentence AND he gets to keep his bank account.

Do they WANT us to riot in the streets? Is that their plan?