• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

Haskins drugged for blackmail, lawsuit claims

Four individuals, two restaurants, a golf driving range and a hotel… allegedly involved in the conspiracy. FFS.
 
It feels like an ambulance chaser is throwing everything at the wall hoping something sticks… i am a conspiracy theory connoisseur and unfortunately this seems a bit far fetched…
Occam’s razor theory would probably conclude that he was drinking and doing drugs with the woman he was with, and just got hit crossing the street.

Maybe there is something to the truck driver not having a perfect truck, and perhaps he was drunk or high or something… but this really does look like a total stretch looking for anything to sue for
 
Well, I'm not on board with the conspiracy. But, if you read the news release, there are some questions for the truck driver and his company. Like:
1. Why did the driver not see Haskins when multiple other drivers not only saw him, but called 911 to report his walking on the highway?
2. Why was the truck driver driving over the speed limit, on low tread tires that had separated from their sidewalls, with a brake system that was subpar and a cargo that was excessively overweight?
3. Why did the truck driver refuse a BAC test?
Those are all valid questions
As for the "other" claims. I think I'll let them try to prove them before I decide whether or not to throw tomatoes and spit on a woman who lost her husband in such a tragic manner.
 
SteelBuckeye said:
Well, I'm not on board with the conspiracy. But, if you read the news release, there are some questions for the truck driver and his company. Like:
1. Why did the driver not see Haskins when multiple other drivers not only saw him, but called 911 to report his walking on the highway?
2. Why was the truck driver driving over the speed limit, on low tread tires that had separated from their sidewalls, with a brake system that was subpar and a cargo that was excessively overweight?
3. Why did the truck driver refuse a BAC test?
Those are all valid questions
As for the "other" claims. I think I'll let them try to prove them before I decide whether or not to throw tomatoes and spit on a woman who lost her husband in such a tragic manner.
Click to expand...
Maybe he had incriminating evidence about the Clintons
 
SteelBuckeye said:
Well, I'm not on board with the conspiracy. But, if you read the news release, there are some questions for the truck driver and his company. Like:
1. Why did the driver not see Haskins when multiple other drivers not only saw him, but called 911 to report his walking on the highway?
2. Why was the truck driver driving over the speed limit, on low tread tires that had separated from their sidewalls, with a brake system that was subpar and a cargo that was excessively overweight?
3. Why did the truck driver refuse a BAC test?
Those are all valid questions
As for the "other" claims. I think I'll let them try to prove them before I decide whether or not to throw tomatoes and spit on a woman who lost her husband in such a tragic manner.
Click to expand...
In the article I read, the attorney claimed the driver refused a blood test but it did not say he refused a breath. He is mandated to give blood if there is probable cause (smell of alchol, unsteady gate, empty containers etc.)
Apparently there was nothing there for the officer to go on. Many delivery and trucking companies will fire you if a blood or urine test reveals traces of thc, narcotics, etc. Maybe the driver smoked a joint the night before and knew a blood test would get him booted. It didn't say if he refused a breath test or if it was offered.

Many pedestrians who are in the wrong get lucky until that one driver who couldn't avoid them, vision was ubstructed by other vehicles or just wasn't allert. Doesn't make the driver responsible, maybe he was on his phone or was high on pot or another substance, then it's a different situation.

The allegations regarding the trucks condition may have merit but they come from the plaintiff's attorney who also claimed Haskins was just feet from the shoulder. Well, most lanes are 15 feet wide at least and he was struck by the left bumper and reportedly driving in the center lane. If he had already reached the center divider and was now crossing the other side of the freeway, he's at least 30 feet from safety.

I guess further investigation and jury may turn up negligence on the part of the trucking company
because of lack of maintenance etc. and the driver when cell phone records are revealed.The jury doesn't have to be unanimous but the award will be reduced due to Haskins' actions and condition.
 
I should add that the blood test is only mandated if there are serious injuries and/or death which is true in this case but apparently no probable cause. Although the Flordia Dept. Of Transportation is list as a defendent, I didn't see the Flordia Hwy Patrol or other police agency listed which is telling if the attorney felt the investigation was inadequate/neglegent.
 
Last edited:
SteelBuckeye said:
Well, I'm not on board with the conspiracy. But, if you read the news release, there are some questions for the truck driver and his company. Like:
1. Why did the driver not see Haskins when multiple other drivers not only saw him, but called 911 to report his walking on the highway?
2. Why was the truck driver driving over the speed limit, on low tread tires that had separated from their sidewalls, with a brake system that was subpar and a cargo that was excessively overweight?
3. Why did the truck driver refuse a BAC test?
Those are all valid questions
As for the "other" claims. I think I'll let them try to prove them before I decide whether or not to throw tomatoes and spit on a woman who lost her husband in such a tragic manner.
Click to expand...

^^^this^^^

I’m always for letting it play out to see outcome, don’t judge because I don’t know all the facts.

Occasionally I’ll sling hash right off my sleeve and jump all over something only to come back and feel terrible to the short-sightedness.

Truth be told by all and none of this would be necessary.


Salute the nation
 
Man...they suing the signage company, the road barrier company, the line painting company....

"what's the wattage of those street lamps you say?"

"ma'am, he was struck in broad daylight"

"ooohh...so now you an expert in exterior illumination huh?"
 
SteelBuckeye said:
Well, I'm not on board with the conspiracy. But, if you read the news release, there are some questions for the truck driver and his company. Like:
1. Why did the driver not see Haskins when multiple other drivers not only saw him, but called 911 to report his walking on the highway?
2. Why was the truck driver driving over the speed limit, on low tread tires that had separated from their sidewalls, with a brake system that was subpar and a cargo that was excessively overweight?
3. Why did the truck driver refuse a BAC test?
Those are all valid questions
As for the "other" claims. I think I'll let them try to prove them before I decide whether or not to throw tomatoes and spit on a woman who lost her husband in such a tragic manner.
Click to expand...
They're going to have to do better than that.

I saw nothing in this story claiming that other drivers called 911.
Who doesn't go over the speed limit?
I've been in a situation where drivers avoided hitting a deer crossing a highway except for one unlucky *******.
It speaks of both a conspiracy and negligence. So was it negligence or a conspiracy? Can it be both? So they conspired by using a truck with bad tires, be overload and hire a negligent driver predicting that Dwayne would run out of gas and be walking on the highway that day?
Exactly what does the driver refusing a BAC prove? A high level would certainly prove he was negligent. Not being intoxicated would support the far-reaching possibility of a conspiracy but it doesn't mean he wasn't being negligent.
 
Stewey said:
They're going to have to do better than that.

I saw nothing in this story claiming that other drivers called 911.
Who doesn't go over the speed limit?
I've been in a situation where drivers avoided hitting a deer crossing a highway except for one unlucky *******.
It speaks of both a conspiracy and negligence. So was it negligence or a conspiracy? Can it be both? So they conspired by using a truck with bad tires, be overload and hire a negligent driver predicting that Dwayne would run out of gas and be walking on the highway that day?
Exactly what does the driver refusing a BAC prove? A high level would certainly prove he was negligent. Not being intoxicated would support the far-reaching possibility of a conspiracy but it doesn't mean he wasn't being negligent.
Click to expand...
1. Look around the internet. Personally, I don't rely on just one article to help me frame my opinions.
2. And if you are in an accident while speeding, you "could" be found contributorily negligent.
3. It's common when bringing a suit where you allege multiple factors culminated in one event, to sue more than one entity in that suit. The allegations against each are different.
4. BAC - as you say, may have proven nothing; or everything. Failure to take it signifies to some that the driver may have had something to hide.

Let me say this again. These are questions/issues the trucker and his company will have to address during the phases of the suit where they answer the Complaint, and most likely during depositions. They will most likely be brought up at trial. As such, I pointed them out. You don't agree. OK, fair enough. But, any lawyer worth their salt is bringing those questions up and any lawyer on the other side is preparing his client to answer them.
Who doesn't go over the speed limit will not be a valid answer to give - It makes the driver look like a jerk.
Likening hitting a human being to hitting a deer will not be a valid answer - It makes the driver look like a jerk.
Of course, if the driver's goal is to look like a jerk in front of a jury/judge, and thereby lose the part of the trial that is inherently biased by likability ...
 
SteelBuckeye said:
1. Look around the internet. Personally, I don't rely on just one article to help me frame my opinions.
2. And if you are in an accident while speeding, you "could" be found contributorily negligent.
3. It's common when bringing a suit where you allege multiple factors culminated in one event, to sue more than one entity in that suit. The allegations against each are different.
4. BAC - as you say, may have proven nothing; or everything. Failure to take it signifies to some that the driver may have had something to hide.

Let me say this again. These are questions/issues the trucker and his company will have to address during the phases of the suit where they answer the Complaint, and most likely during depositions. They will most likely be brought up at trial. As such, I pointed them out. You don't agree. OK, fair enough. But, any lawyer worth their salt is bringing those questions up and any lawyer on the other side is preparing his client to answer them.
Who doesn't go over the speed limit will not be a valid answer to give - It makes the driver look like a jerk.
Likening hitting a human being to hitting a deer will not be a valid answer - It makes the driver look like a jerk.
Of course, if the driver's goal is to look like a jerk in front of a jury/judge, and thereby lose the part of the trial that is inherently biased by likability ...
Click to expand...
It's a tragedy that Haskins is dead and died the way he did. Having the money that he did, I don't understand why he didn't call someone to his aid. He did call his wife I suppose, so his phone worked. There is no way in Hell I would walk across a busy multi-lane highway no matter what. In fact, I'd get out of the car and go sit on the guardrail, or even better, get behind it and sit in the grass far away for fear the car would get struck as I sat in it dialing AAA or whoever. The fact that so many people are being sued by his wife is partly why so many things in this country are so damned expensive. I guess I just don't understand the lack of common sense these days - I'm out of gas, let's walk across a multi-lane high speed highway. I don't mean to P you off, but surely you can see as a REASONABLE person as I know you are, that this was a terrible accident. You don't go walking across multiple lanes of high speed traffic. If somebody in fact drugged him beforehand causing his actions, then I feel they deserve the maximum criminal penalty.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top