You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Fifth Column
Saint Pancake's parents appeal ruling throwing out Caterpillar lawsuit
2006-03-26
I seem to remember a stock photo of pancakes and syrup. Can't find it, though.
Try this one...

The parents of a 23-year-old who was killed trying to prevent the demolition of an occupied Palestinian bomb factory used to murder children days before home have appealed a judge's decision to dismiss their lawsuit against Caterpiller Inc., the company that made the bulldozer that ran over her. "He applied the wrong legal standard and ignored the facts," said Maria LaHood, a lawyer with the New York-based Center for Constitutional Rights.

Rachel Corrie was killed three years ago by an Israeli soldier driving a bulldozer. She was trying to stop him from demolishing a Gaza Strip home while the family was inside; though witnesses said she was clearly visible, the army claimed he didn't see her.

Her parents sued Caterpiller on the grounds that for years, the company has provided bulldozers to the Israeli army, knowing they would be used to destroy civilian homes in violation of international law. They were joined in the lawsuit by five Palestinians who say their relatives were killed or injured by Israeli-driven bulldozers. "This has been a challenging time for our family, since we just marked the three-year anniversary of Rachel's death without justice," said her mother, Cindy Corrie. "Caterpillar chooses to support these illegal activities with continuing sales and service of its equipment. It must be held accountable for its role in human rights violations, both past and present."
Posted by:Greremble Thearong9675

#15  So, following this twisted logic....

If they can charge CAT with the death of their daughter. Can criminal 1st degree murder charges be filed against the parents for spawning a terrorist enabler?

And, yes, I *am* serious! If the 9th circus reverses this then Israel should immediately post capital murder charges against the parents - multiple counts!. Is there an extradition treaty?
Posted by: CrazyFool   2006-03-26 15:25  

#14  When you Google our girl Maria, most of the hits contain the line "an appeal is being planned".
I think that means she loses. A lot.
Posted by: tu3031   2006-03-26 14:13  

#13  hope CAT sues for atty's fees
Posted by: Frank G   2006-03-26 12:22  

#12  Sounds like a RICO problem.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2006-03-26 09:35  

#11  What amazes me is that the whole case against CAT relies on the following tenuous arguments and that it has gotten this far, namely:

1. The structure being demolished was only a home and not a terrorist smuggling point.

2. The operator clearly saw St. Wallboard and chose to crush her.

3. CAT clearly knew that their product was being used for demolishing homes. ("Mind if we use 'em for destroying homes of peace-loving Palestinians?"... "Um, sure, go right ahead!")

Posted by: Slarong Flirong5626   2006-03-26 09:35  

#10  Listen's point suggests that we sue Rachel Corrie's parents for being party to a terrorist organization. We can start by freezing their financial assets.
Posted by: Perfessor   2006-03-26 09:30  

#9  Their legal arguments are so.....one dimensional.
Posted by: Slarong Flirong5626   2006-03-26 09:29  

#8  An Oregon train engineer whose vehicle ran over the leg of a participant of an illegal tree-hugger protest, sued the protester for trauma. Personally, I would not want that unpleasant memory on my mind, without some closure. The only victim in the Corrie incident is the bulldozer operator. Her parents have already admitted to financially supporting their warped daughter, in her pro-terror enterprises. Who knows a good civil tort lawyer?
Posted by: Listen to Dogs   2006-03-26 08:41  

#7  Nimble -
"... the 9th Circus if it screws up."

IF???
Posted by: Glenmore   2006-03-26 08:37  

#6  Her parents didn't win? I'm....crushed. But, I blame Maria & Co. Obviously their legal argument fell flat.

(Yeah, yeah, I know....done a thousand times already. But I couldn't resist.)
Posted by: Desert Blondie   2006-03-26 07:42  

#5  The Supremes will take this only to reverse the 9th Circus if it screws up.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2006-03-26 07:37  

#4  
"He applied the wrong legal standard and ignored the facts," said Maria LaHood, a lawyer with the New York-based Center for Constitutional Rights.
I don't know specifically about New York's Code of Professional Conduct, but that statement would probably be a (borderline) ethics violation in many states. You don't get to publicly badmouth the judge and question his/her competency, though you may say you disagree with his/her decision.

Ethics questions asides, Maria better hope she doesn't appear before that judge again. Or any of his friends.

The fact that she's attempting to try this in the news tells me she probably doesn't have a very good case to try in the courts. (As evidenced by the dismissal.)

Now where'd I leave that nano-violin....?
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut   2006-03-26 00:51  

#3  Watch this moonbattery make its way to the Supremes.

Typical gun abuse meme. But guns and Cats don't kill people, people kill people.
Posted by: Captain America   2006-03-26 00:51  

#2  I thought it was a smuggling tunnel, not a home.
Posted by: Danking70   2006-03-26 00:19  

#1  So now the 9th Circus gets the appeal...oy vey. Coincidence that St. Pancakes mother is named Cindy? I think not.
Posted by: Inspector Clueso   2006-03-26 00:16  

00:00