I don’t see lawyers as being careless with terminology. In law, every word counts. I think they’re being very deliberate with their wording. Naturally, the ad must have been aimed at the surviving relatives, but who is liable is not established (nor potential liable parties), the only thing that is known is that a person died (hey, maybe it’s nobody’s else’s fault and there’s no wrongful death?). Real life cases are never really clear cut, especially when it comes to pointing fingers of blame. For example, fatal injury has to end in death, but it doesn’t have to be instant death and there may be multiple intervening factors involved, or even multiple liable parties (defenders). A person could have been in coma for a while, or disabled for a while and had to go through multiple surgeries, one of which lead to his death. So, although the immediate cause might have been a complication due to surgery, the original cause can still be traced to the accident, or party (or not). That would be fought over in court between defender (or multiple defenders if multiple parties are identified) and prosecution.
With multiple defense parties involved, you are also likely to get a lot of cross-claims, as everybody will try to shift the blame on each other, or even back on the original claimant. Just imagine a car pile accident with multiple injuries (and possible multiple deaths), who sues who? Everybody’s going to be suing and counter-suing everyone else. Usually, every imaginable party will get picked on. So, even ‘wrongful death’ has to be proven, and ‘killed by’ also has to be proven. In that sense, ‘fatally injured’ sounds the most neutral, since it would be known for a fact. Also remember, there are people who engage in frivolous litigation (usually for money) and lawyers do not want to loose face in court by taking on fraudulent cases. So that way, they also get to cover their own…reputation.
Wide awake… after drinking a coffee this evening but I’m using the time wisely to get our Conservative Federation’s membership records up to date in time for our AGM next month… there’s a lot to do, and events and leafleting sessions/campaigning etc. to attend from now till then.
Good thing I’ve got some nights out and weekends away planned with friends and family, respectively, to offer me reprieve from politics.
I dream of the day I am able to lift weights again, but I will just have to be content with moving for now… it’s at least a step up from my previous state, which was a state.
Well, I’m finally paying a visit to Stormfront and I just wanted to thank the people here who introduced me to that forum.
Unfortunately, from what I’ve seen so far the site is a bit too cuckservative-ish to me. Apparently you can insult whites and call them “rednecks” and “white trash”, but you can’t say the n-word, which is automatically censored with *.
And that is supposed to be a white nationalist site hateful to other races … pffft CUUUUUUUCCCCKKSSSS
If you think that’s hateful you’ve never seen real hate