View Single Post
Old 06-16-2006, 09:32 PM  
Kevsh
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: TO
Posts: 8,619
Up here in the North land you actually have to prove damages to even get a sniff of a courtroom. Now this lady, it would seem, is arguing that but this case wouldn't see daylight here and for good reason.

To put it as simply as possible, you cannot sue *anyone* for something that led to your being charged with a crime *unless* you can prove willful intent. For example, a cop plants evidence against you, comes out in the trial and you're found innocent. Yes, you can sue.

On the other hand, something like this cannot be litigated as the company obviously had no malicious intent. Another e.g. would be a complainant destroying evidence that would have implicated you (for whatever reason, perhaps it implicated them as well) - and assuming you're found innocent/charges dropped, etc. due to this.

Of course, you could speak to a civil lawyer here and they may something different, but essentially it's akin to suing someone for *helping* you get off the charges. After all, if the camera worked properly she may have been found guilty.
Kevsh is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote