View Single Post
  #47  
Old 12-16-2015, 03:39 PM
donquixote99's Avatar
donquixote99 donquixote99 is offline
Ready
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 19,928
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeke View Post
But simple things like lack of effective prosecution in a criminal trial would -- certainly -- have an affect on any civil $$$ whether admitted to by a jury or not. These things don't occur in vacuums even if we desire them to.



But it's the ONLY reason you do it, up front. (Well, unless you think you're hand is SO bad that you cannot possibly get any acquittals or mistrials, criminally.)

Proven as fallacy right off the bat.

Dumb.

Baltimore is spewing $$$ left and right over a criminal.
Dumb? Proven?

You are correct that these things do not occur in vacuums. One reason to do a civil settlement is to squelch public disclosure of evidence that could fuel public demand for criminal prosecution.

And if you think a criminal trial may happen, you can hedge your risk by settling before that happens. A preceding criminal conviction can be considered to more or less prove liability in a subsequent civil action.

And there's always the fact that different officials may be in charge of different aspects, with different goals. The police, for example, may have a strong aversion to any members being prosecuted, while having relatively little concern about someone-else's money being drained for a settlement.
__________________
By Any Means Necessary
Reply With Quote