Really? Sueing someone over a fight you started

  • Thread starter Grayfox
  • 49 comments
  • 4,388 views
Grayfox

Grayfox

11,985
Australia
Australia
I_Grayson_Fox_I
A US woman who admitted jumping over a counter at a McDonald's restaurant and starting a fight is now suing a cashier who beat her with a metal grill scraper.

Myika Darbeau and Rachel Edwards both pleaded guilty to starting the fight on October 13 in New York under a deal that saw them avoid jail time, NY Daily News reports.

Darbeau has now filed a suit with the Manhattan Supreme Court alleging that McDonald's cashier Rayon McIntosh used "unnecessary, excessive and unlawful force" when he retaliated.

Mobile phone footage of the incident shows the women initiating the fight with Mr McIntosh and jumping over the counter before he fights back using the metal grill scraper.

Darbeau suffered a fractured skull and broken arm.

She is now also suing the owner of the McDonald's franchise, saying there was inadequate security in the restaurant and the store should never have hired someone who had such "brutal, dangerous, vicious propensities".

Police initially arrested Mr McIntosh, who was recently released from jail on manslaughter and assault charges, believing he assaulted Darbeau and Edwards.

A jury opted not to indict him after seeing the mobile phone video.

The fight was sparked after Mr McIntosh inspected a $50 note the women gave him to pay for their food.

After the women were sentenced to probation in September, Mr McIntosh said he was pleased with the court's decision and did not want them to go to jail.

"I'm not angry at them, I'm hoping these two young ladies learn something from this and stay on the right path," he said.

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/world/8544085/woman-suing-after-starting-mcdonalds-fight
 
I hope she loses the case and has to pay every penny of the other guy's court and legal fees. Pieces of trash like her give everyone in America a bad name.
 
Welcome to the world of McDonalds Employees!

What a bogus case, people need to be set straight. Hopefully there will be more intelligent people making the news instead of nitwits, like her, in future. :nervous:
 
I mean, the use of unnecessary force is a problem in some cases. If the cashier had shot and killed her in self defense when there was no real risk of being seriously harmed, that would not be okay, and the cashier would deserve some punishment.

However, I agree that this is pretty bogus. A fractured skull is pretty serious but also totally understandable when someone is attacking you. Someone defending themselves is totally within their bounds to attempt to knock them out or otherwise disable them, which is pretty consistent with a fractured skull and broken arm. Unless the cashier was trying to slit her throat, or had continued beating her after she had stopped fighting, there should be no punishment for the cashier.

And even if the cashier was reckless, the woman starting the fight does not deserve compensation because she started the fight in the first place. She brought about the situation, so she has to take responsibility for the outcome.

It think it's pretty obvious this case is silly, but I also think it's important to understand why, because with slightly different circumstances it might not have been so silly.
 
Just goes to show, certain people will do anything for a dime.

I hope these ladies lose their ass, and then some.
 
That's why you shoot to kill. Not shoot to maim.

Wrong thread? Whoops. Silly me.
 
But then everyone loses, because the entire known universe would do a cosmic facepalm which will inevitably lead to the Heat death of the universe.
 
"The defense calls 1,546 witnesses your honor, all of whom received no injuries while visitng the same McDonalds that day. Witness #1... Did you receive a skull fracture while at McDonalds that day?"

"No"

"Did you jump over the counter, attack, or start a fight with anyone?"

"No"

"Thank you. Witness #2, same question... How are your bones? Any broken?"

"No"

"Interesting. What does it look like behind the counter?"

"No idea."

"Witness #3...."




And on and on and on...
 
Public'sTwin
I hope she wins. I love arbitrary lawsuits against megacorps.
Click to expand...

No you don't. Every time a frivolous lawsuit wins most companies introduce some asinine restriction in an effort to avoid being sued. Then all of us reasonable people are forced to deal with whatever that restriction is.

Rooting for big companies to lose is one thing, but you can't argue that a victory for this woman would be a good.
 
Zenith013
No you don't. Every time a frivolous lawsuit wins most companies introduce some asinine restriction in an effort to avoid being sued. Then all of us reasonable people are forced to deal with whatever that restriction is.
Click to expand...

AUP
You will not knowingly post any material that is false, misleading, or inaccurate.
Click to expand...

*With possible exception re: our definitions of "asinine".

Zenith013
You can't argue that a victory for this woman would be good.
Click to expand...

I could, I'm sure, but I would never do something so wasteful of my time.
 
Last edited:
TVC
Why do you hate corporations?
Click to expand...

You inferred too much from my comment. I said I love arbitrary lawsuits against megacorps, not that I hate corporations (which is a possibility that I do, but unrelated).

Much like one enjoys seeing, say, a man get hit in the groin with a football—it does not imply that I dislike mankind in general.
 
Public'sTwin
You inferred too much from my comment. I said I love arbitrary lawsuits against megacorps, not that I hate corporations (which is a possibility that I do, but unrelated).

Much like one enjoys seeing, say, a man get hit in the groin with a football—it does not imply that I dislike mankind in general.
Click to expand...

Good point. I guess I did read into it too much. But if you do want a corporation to be sued (even if they don't deserve it) it does make it sound like you dislike corporations. At least to me. But I do see what you are saying.
 
TVC
Good point. I guess I did read into it too much. But if you do want a corporation to be sued (even if they don't deserve it) it does make it sound like you dislike corporations. At least to me. But I do see what you are saying.
Click to expand...

It's OK—sing 10 hossanas, and you may be saved. :):):):):):)
 
Public'sTwin
*With possible exception re: our definitions of "asinine".
Click to expand...

My definition of "asinine"? Here's my definition of asinine.

as·i·nine
Adjective:
Extremely stupid or foolish.
Synonyms:
foolish

I'd say that it is not against the AUP for me to describe restrictions brought on by frivolous lawsuits as "asinine."

I could, I'm sure, but I would never do something so wasteful of my time.
Click to expand...

If you're unwilling to explain the opinion you voice in a post, especially one that disagrees with the majority opinion, then consider not posting it in the first place.
 
Last edited:
Zenith013
My definition of "asinine"? Here's my definition of asinine.

as·i·nine
Adjective:
Extremely stupid or foolish.
Synonyms:
foolish
Click to expand...
First of all, "asinine" has a debatable region of its' applicability and meaning, also known as a "matter of opinion". The joke was that I cited the AUP in defense of my own thought, which you obviously cannot possibly know, and so would be a "violation". (This is why "asinine" was an exception.)

Secondly, the AUP citation was also referring to your assertion that companies inevitably enforce asinine restrictions (so I was only half joking), which is plainly false.
But . . .
I'd say that it is not against the AUP for me to describe restrictions brought on by frivolous lawsuits as "asinine."
Click to expand...
. . . I guess humour should be clearly indicated by warning signs.


If you're unwilling to explain the opinion you voice in a post, especially one that disagrees with the majority opinion, then consider not posting it in the first place.
Click to expand...
How is my opinion different from the majority opinion here? I believe everyone acknowledges she's being an idiot. My amusement at her lawsuit does not preclude such an opinion.
 
Last edited:
Wtf.

Why is it before even watching that video you could picture what the woman was going to look like?

I'm glad she got smacked about and she deserved it.

So what next if she wins her case? Every fast food place in America would then have to have security guards? (and probably armed) just because she got busted for rying to use a dodgy $50? (Well probably dodgy as why else even try to go behind the counter?)
 
You can sue someone for whatever you want. That doesn't mean you're going to win. Good luck finding pro-Bono lawyers willing to take up a case like that.
 
I've seen the cell phone footage of this fight (or another one exactly like it - pretty sure it's the same). The dude goes ham with that grill scraper. :lol:
 
The only one that can sue in my view is the grill scraper.

I am sure it was stressful for it being hit against a skag women like that.
 
Public'sTwin
Umm, I sure didn't.

...Just what exactly do you mean, there, priesty?
Click to expand...

It doesn't mean anything.

I read the report, thought about the person it was going to be then watched the video and I was right.

You've read my post, and posted a link.

So my question to you would be what do you mean?
 
Given that some other idiot dumped hot coffee in her lap, sued McDonalds and won, I'd say it's a pretty fair chance she'll win her suit too.
 
BobK
Given that some other idiot dumped hot coffee in her lap, sued McDonalds and won, I'd say it's a pretty fair chance she'll win her suit too.
Click to expand...

That's only half the case.

The reason why McDonalds lost that case and lost so much was because this wasn't the first time it had happened. McDonalds worked out some time ago that if they super-heat the water they use to make the coffee, they can make a lot more coffee from the same amount of coffee grounds. This meant that they were handing out coffee that would cause 3rd degree and full-thickness burns within seconds. After a few people got severely scalded by their coffee, McDonalds were told in court to change this practice. McDonalds then did a bit of maths and worked out it would be cheaper to pay off people who were maimed by their coffee than it would cost to buy more coffee grounds. The told the courts to shove it, basically.

So when the case in question happened, the courts made it so that it was suddenly cheaper to buy more coffee grounds than it was to pay off the lawsuits. Thus stopping it from happening again. It was actually quite a good judgement.
 
Alright...

***Language and Violence Warning, Not for kiddy eyeballs to watch***

ttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rIGMR0leCk


Don't forget to put an "H" at the front of the URL.


I'm pretty sure this is the footage.
 
Hmmm...after seeing the footage, i think the cashier pretty much overreacted.

She may have started the fight, but seriously? She was on the floor and he kept hitting her with the grill scraper.
 

Similar threads

Dotini
Phil Spector, Famed Music Producer and Convicted Murderer, Dies at 81.
Replies
21
Views
2K
Dotini
Dotini
Suzumiya
The New Blood - A story based off of a GT4 Spec-II playthrough.
Replies
3
Views
2K
Suzumiya
Suzumiya
Grayfox
  • Locked
What a pussy
Replies
7
Views
1K
AMG.
AMG.
Dotini
The US War in Afghanistan
9 10 11
Replies
329
Views
14K
Liquid
Liquid
Dotini
Wars against native tribal leadership - in general
Replies
24
Views
1K
Rallywagon
Rallywagon

Latest Posts

Back