Link.
Classic defense. Blame the victim.
So what if she was only 12 at the time.
Really? So what level of fucking outrage is appropriate for blaming a 12 year old for being molested by an adult in a position of authority?
“But it could cost us millions! We have to defend ourselves!”
Gah! And some people wonder where lawyers get bad reputations. I know there are good ones, but I really, really, want to get a pot of tar on to boil.
The lawyers work at their clients behest.
I think the amount of damages should go up and if I had a 12 year old in their school system… well I don’t know what I’d do.
Misplaced outrage. This is standard defense boilerplate. The lawyers could be probably be deemed incompetent if they didn’t assert this.
Sorry, you lose the internet. 
If the school district is saying the girl is “herself responsible for the acts and damages of which she claims.”, then the district officials themselves should be fired. Saying the rape was the fault of the little girl who was raped is disgusting. Anyone in the school system who tells a child that their being raped was their own fault should not be a part of the school system.
An opinion on that from the article itself:
**Projammer **gets his internet back.
When answering a complaint, a pleading should propose every possible defense, even the ones that seem implausible or the ones that might spark recreational outrage.
Standard yes. Necessary? No. Lawyers are allowed to use judgment and think. The mindless insertion of frivolous defenses is probably unethical, although done in practically every case.
What will happen next is the plaintiff’s attorney will serve an interrogatory, asking the District to “identify all facts on which you base your allegation that the plaintiff was negligent and careless.” The Defense will file a response stating “discovery is ongoing, we will supplement our answer as the case progresses.” Nothing will happen for months and months. Finally, the plaintiff will file a motion for partial summary judgment asking the court to through out this affirmative defense, the defense will not oppose it. On the bright side, the defense lawyers have earned fees they shouldn’t have, and the District has a P.R. nightmare on it’s hands.
Indeed, can’t fault the lawyers for zealously representing the interests of their client; that is, afterall, their sworn duty. But if this particular defense was offered up with the informed consent of the school district, then the individuals who gave their blessing need to lose their jobs.
Nope. See Rule 11 (adopted in most jurisdictions)
There is no duty to through the kitchen sink into every Answer, and, in fact, it shouldn’t be done. If something highly unlikely and later comes to light, the defense could move to amend the Answer to add such allegations. Without a factual basis, they should not be thrown in to the Answer.
Yes, you can fault the lawyers.
Who says there isn’t some articulable factual basis here? Just because a pleading states something that turns out to be wrong, that doesn’t mean it was frivolous.
Because, as a matter of law, I doubt a 12 year old can be held to have comparative fault in a school sex abuse situation. What fact can you imagine that would make this defense non-frivolous? If a 12 year old can’t legally “consent,” which is intentionally allowing this to happen, how could she legally be negligent in causing t to happen?
The article doesn’t make clear what damages are alleged. In a negligence case, the plaintiff must show:
The defendant had a duty to the plaintiff.
That duty was breached.
The breach actually caused an identified harm (but for the defendant’s negligence, the harm would not have occurred)
The breach proximately caused the identified harm (the chain of causation is not so attenuated as to make it unjust to hold the defendant liable — the point of the tort is to deter negligence, and it is hard to deter against bad consequences that are difficult or impossible to foresee).
The identified harm is one that the law protects against. Usually, this is physical harm, as it can be difficult to assess to cause, existence, severity, and responsibility for non-physical harms, such as mental distress or consequential economic loss (lost wages, for instance).
So, if the damages pleaded by the plaintiff are: this happened and then I became mentally ill and cannot hold a job as an adult — then the school district would be right to challenge the alleged damages and answer that it will be difficult to apportion out in what measure the school is responsible and in what measure the plaintiff’s troubles result from mental illnesses or poor life choices (just as you can perhaps think of some of your own high school classmates who’ve had a rough go at adulthood) made by the plaintiff, and for which the school is not responsible.
Some guy has an opinion. Wow, I’m stunned.
Nope, he loses the internet again.
I think it is funny that the attorney has essentially offered up their client (the school) for a public PR butt raping in all of this.
I don’t think an attorney can offer a defense that their client has rejected. So, the school could have refused to use that as a defense. So the school (their board or their insurance company) is at fault for blaming the victim.
The attorney may be trying to defend their client, but using “blame the victim” in a rape of a 12yo scenario? In what world would a non-rapist adult be forced into committing rape on a 12yo against their will? How, exactly does that work? Did the 12yo over power them? Blackmail them? I really can’t wait to see the basis behind this defense.
I hope there are massive crowds picketing this school every day for the rest of the school year. They need to be humiliated for ever allowing such a defense to be put forward.
From the linked article:
“Former Joaquin Moraga physical education teacher Julie Correa pleaded guilty to rape and sexual battery of Cunnane over a four-year period beginning in 1996, when Cunnane was an eighth grader. The suit also alleges that Cunnane turned to her science teacher, Daniel Witters, to report the abuse, who in turn molested her. Witters later committed suicide after the allegations against him surfaced.”
Raw Story (http://s.tt/1rQxL)
Apparently she should have known better than to trust a teacher… :smack:
I’m not sure how you having an opinion wins out over the other guy having an opinion, but carry on…
Why is the school fighting this in the first place?
Or two.