Reply To: Once a sex offender always a sex offender — even beyond death?



“. No attorney would defend a suit against the Kankas, but it wouldn’t be because they are Caucasian. It would be because there are no grounds, at least none that I can think of, that could be the basis of a lawsuit”

No attorney will take it because they don’t have the courage to due to it being a lawsuit against a family who lost a child. We have a programmed standard to follow to always pity them.
HOWEVER…. if the manufacturers of an automobile made a crap automobile and it broke down while you were driving it and risked causing you some injury, are you going to sue the car dealership that sold it to you or the company who physically MADE it?
Which one makes more sense? The people who sold it didn’t know it was defective. And the people who made it didn’t give it a test drive.

The state legislature: They are the salespeople. They were offered an idea to sell to the public and they took it and sold it. They also added some things here and there for which they are also at fault …but….

The Kanka Family: These are the manufacturers of the idea. And without THINKING IT THROUGH (i.e. a test drive to make sure it would work), they just immediately wholesaled it to the retailer and the retailer sold it, also without knowing for sure how it would work.

So my point is – GO AFTER THE SOURCE. And in the suit, give them all these examples of what “sex crimes” are. Throw in their faces the fact that their idea spawned a true monster that is unstoppable and that many have clinged to because they were duped.

Teens sexting, had it been around prior to Megan’s Law would most likely be a parental issue for private punishing of their kids, like taking the phones and iPads away for a week. NOT CHARGING A DAMN CURIOIS TEENAGER WITH AN UNFORGIVABLE CRIME!

Yes, the Kanka’s need a lawsuit with a nice big sarcastic “Thank you! Thank you for making people more afraid of their own shadows than they’ve ever been. Are you satisfied, Kanka family?”