When you cut through all the baloney here you'll realize that this lawyer used the courts to transfer this elderly mans money into his own pocket. This is what lawyers do.
Where have you read or heard anything to prove this?
From what I read in the court documents posted at TheSmokingGun, his main complaint was that the trustee was not paying for medical treatment (painkillers) that HE felt he needed.
He constantly restated that he was in such great pain. Sounds like my roomate's mother who is convinced she needs something stronger than a morphene drip for a hangnail.
He also said he was in such great pain that he couldn't walk.
From that video it sure looked like he was walking just fine. Of course I am not a doctor but I did play one on radio once.
It is amazing to me that so many people who can have such a logical discourse on .45 vs 9mm or revolver vs semi-auto can jump to the obvious conclusion that, because a lawyer was involved, that the nice old guy MUST have been a victim.
Usually in the case of an accident settlement the money goes to the unjured party. In this case the courts determined that the kindly old codger was not responsible to mind his resources and therefor set up a trust to manage it. It even seems that the 'victims" own sister may be reluctant to accept the responsibility?
Anyone in here ,except me, think that there just MIGHT be a valid reason for this? Or is the entire court in on the conspiracy to deprive this poor old gentleman his Extra Strength Tylenol?
Has anyone considered that perhaps that mistreated elderly man is just your basic NUTJOB? Or at least acknowledge the possibility that there may be more than a few neurons that aren't firing?
And since so many in here have appointed themselves onto the morality jury, shouldn't y'all at least wait to hear more, if not all, of the evidence before you condemn anybody?