Why do you think that the opinion of the probation department (who actually recommended no prison time) and the judge with over a decade on the bench, who saw all the evidence and were thoroughly familiar with the record was wrong?
I can’t speak for all journalists but in my experience a “large inaccuracy” is something that’s inaccurate and actually important to the story (or likely to result in defamation/contempt proceedings if not corrected). This is where I suspect journalists and lawyers differ in their views on the matter. 
To an extent, I understand where he was coming from - BUT (and I stress the but part of this) it depends what the correction is, and whether it’s genuinely factual, or technical/stylistic.
It’s really hard to stress just how busy and overworked modern journalists are. You’d also be surprised how few of them there actually are nowadays. So in a sense, yes, he’s right, journalists would prefer it that people don’t complain to them asking for corrections for stuff that - be totally honest - doesn’t matter to anyone who isn’t a lawyer. Obviously refusing outright to correct something on principle as “punishment” is unprofessional, however. There’s lots of reasons not to correct something but “I don’t feel like it and you’ve displeased me” isn’t a highly ranked one on the cromulence scale.
And just to clarify: I’ve never been a dedicated court reporter; I’m speaking from general media experience.
The 3 million did not get McDonalds to lower the temperature of the coffee. They still serve it at the industry standard at 180 degrees plus or minus 15 degrees, which is the same temperature as Starbucks serves their coffee at. This is because people prefer drinking hot coffee and so that is how it is sold. If it were really a huge danger to the public to sell hot coffee, there would be huge numbers of injured people.
I assume this is addressed to me?
Given America’s proclivity for comparatively lengthy sentences, I have difficulty considering this as an apt sentence for his actions.
Also, maybe my memory is faulty, but didn’t the probation department recommend a “moderate” custodial sentence?
Serious question - I would be genuinely interested to know what type of crimes (first-time youthful adult offender) would generally result in an effective custodial sentence.
That means McDonalds did change the temperature of the coffee. They were serving it at a lot higher temperature than the industry standard. It meant coffee stayed hotter/better longer and therefore less waste. They were actually fined for this before the case.
No, they were serving it at about 180 degrees, which was within the industry standard (the evidence showed that the industry standard was in the 165-185 degree range). They still do. They rely on more prominent warnings to avoid liability now (and no doubt to some degree on the Liebeck case serving as its own warning).
[QUOTE=WilyQuixote]
Also, maybe my memory is faulty, but didn’t the probation department recommend a “moderate” custodial sentence?
[/QUOTE]
A moderate jail sentence (i.e. less than one year), as opposed to a moderate prison term.
Didn’t McDonalds change their cups after the Liebeck case, to make it harder to spill (and hence cause fewer injuries)?
It was the insurance claim side.
I also saw the aftermath of a McD employee falling into a 15-20’ wide meat flenser.
The videos of folks trying to scam Montgomery awards were hilarious however.
Isn’t America well known for eccentric judges? Take Roy Bean, for example.
How about the fact that said judge is no longer allowed to try criminal cases? How about because we learned about this because of the justice system, with someone else reporting it? How about the fact that the jury and the probation people said he needed longer? How about the fact that the judge specifically quoted the “20 minutes of action” rationale in choosing the lowest sentence he legally could? Or the fact that California passed a law to prevent this from happening again, forcing a minimum because we can’t trust the judges?
This is a rapist–yes rape, even though the law uses a different name–who got six months. He came upon a passed out woman and put his dick inside of her, even taking pictures to show others. We know the fucking details.
And yet you ask how do we know that three months is not a long enough sentence?
Following the law doesn’t cut it in this case. We do have the details. And we do know that the judge had the ability to give a longer sentence while still following the law.
We also know that afluenza, cited by the judge, is not something in the law. And indifference to what you do is not a mitigating factor. The fact that the judge bought it shows that he didn’t just follow the law. (Personally, I think he was paid off.)
I don’t get why people who work with the law seem to have an intrinsic desire to defend other people who work with the law. It’s the same problem we have with the police. When one of your own acts badly, why not denounce them entirely, so they don’t bring you down?
I know nothing about the specifics of this case but do you? All I can say is, if you do, that would be highly unusual. There has never been a case I have worked on that the *details *were published widely. Certain seemingly outrageous details when taken in isolation were published widely but that is all. Have you read the whole transcript of everything relevant? If not, you don’t know.
Also, you point to the judge having been restricted as a consequence of this case as evidence the perp’s sentence was insufficient. I don’t know; maybe that was appropriate. Or, it’s equally likely that a politician needed a fall guy to satisfy the mob, so the judge had to be pushed. And if so your argument amounts to “the mob brought the guy down, so the mob must have been justified in bringing him down, otherwise they wouldn’t have brought him down.”
Yeah, normal coffee does not cause a person’s clothing to melt, nor does it create full-thickness burns on the skin.
I know this because I drink coffee at home and I’m a klutz.
Have you ever made coffee then immediately afterward poured it on your crotch?
Coffee is made with boiling water. Immediately after it’s made it’s not far off boiling. If you pour a lot of normal hot coffee into your crotch in a car seat where you can’t easily get away, you will be very seriously burned. There’s nothing magical about McDonalds coffee.