And don't race your golf cart on the road.
Legally Smoke Kills a Stoner
- Thread starter timdunkandthefunk
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
And don't race your golf cart on the road.
And depending on how much tolerance this guy has to THC, he may not have even been high when he was driving.
Wakeforest22890
Snowpom
It's hard to frivolously prosecute a civil case.
deacondamo
El Jefe
Not really.
deacvision7
Mod Emeritus
Challenge Accepted.
dartsndeacs
THE quintessential dwarf
nonsense ninja strikes again
ChrisL68
Riley Skinner
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Messages
- 31,284
- Reaction score
- 3,756
Thc stays in your system long after any mood altering effects have passed.
Buttermaker
Well-known member
I could see TS taking a civil suit to trial. He has the $ to defend, and that marijuana evidence will certainly support a strong contributory negligence case.
Ball State Deac
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2011
- Messages
- 10,531
- Reaction score
- 1,359
Ehhhh... I dunno. You open yourself up to civil discovery which has some negative consequences. If you can stomach stroking a check to make this go away, that's probably a good idea. Depending on the size of the demand, of course.
Buttermaker
Well-known member
True. If you are concerned about what might come out. You also send a message to others that you are willing to take a suit to trial.
Ball State Deac
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2011
- Messages
- 10,531
- Reaction score
- 1,359
Not really sure the message would be important. It isn't like there are a number of people out there that TS has run over and are waiting to sue.
deacondamo
El Jefe
Also, he is probably covered by insurance for "negligent" driving that causes an injury. He obviously wouldn't have to cut a personal check for this situation.
wakelaw13
Well-known member
New York is not a contributory negligence state. In NY the rule is comparative fault, which means your recovery is reduced by the amount you were at fault. So if TS was 60% to blame and this kid was 40% at fault, his damages are reduced by 40%.
Buttermaker
Well-known member
Well, yeah. But when you are a public figure with $, you can be a target for all kinds of shake downs and bs suits. If people know you will take a case to trial and not settle out quickly, they may be less inclined to bring the suit in the first place.
Buttermaker
Well-known member
Yes. Unless conduct is deemed reckless or intentional v. merely negligent.
Buttermaker
Well-known member
#youknowit
forensicdeac
Well-known member
The latest literature coming out of the NIDA labs does seem to reflect that THC can stay in the system longer than initially thought. However, that is a pharmacokinetic issue versus a pharmacodynamic one. The discussion now is trying to relate an amount of impairment to a specific THC level like the per we 0.08% ethanol BAC.
I think most are confusing the long detection window of THC-A (non active compound) traditionally found in chronic users because of its lipophilic tendencies. However, we are learning more everyday it seems.
wakelaw13
Well-known member
The question I still have is do the medical examiners actually know that he was high, or impaired, at the time of the accident?
forensicdeac
Well-known member
Generally speaking, once a person dies their body stops metabolizing drugs. So if a person dies pretty close to the time of the incident (homicide, traffic fatality etc) then toxicology tests should be able to indicate what was going on in the body at the time of death/incident. Autopsy samples taken after the person was in the hospital for three days doesn't give too much information about the time of the actual incident. If tests show that a person had levels of active drugs in them that are consistent with impairment, then it is assumed that the person was impaired at the time of the incident. For instance, if it was reported that a dead person was hit by a car and immediately died and their BLOOD had 5ng/mL THC, that it would be assumed that the person was under the influence of marijuana. However, if the blood only had 5ng/mL THC-COOH (inactive metabolite) then not much can be said about marijuana use at the time of the incident.
Remember, terms and word choice are very important here. Under the influence, impaired, and unable to safely operate a motor vehicle can mean different things. If a person has therapeutic levels of drug in their blood, then the receptors in the brain are being activated and there is a physiological response. The question then becomes if the influence of that drug causes impairment (judgement, reaction time, vision/audio etc) and for DUI purposes does that impairment prevent you from safely operating a vehicle (versus sitting on your couch minding your own business).