PDA

View Full Version : News Phelpses fail to post bond


Lzen
05-06-2008, 12:16 PM
The Associated Press Published Tuesday, May 6, 2008 at 10:19 a.m. CDT
<mcc story=""> </mcc> BALTIMORE — Two members of the Westboro Baptist Church have failed to post bonds needed to stay the collection of a $5 million jury award pending appeal.

U.S. District Judge Richard D. Bennett, on April 3, granted motions by Shirley L. Phelps-Roper and Rebekah A. Phelps-Davis to delay payment of the verdict for protesting a U.S. Marine’s funeral. The postponement was contingent upon their posting $125,000 and $100,000 bonds, respectively.
Bennett also imposed a lien on the properties of the church and its founder, Fred W. Phelps Sr.
The sisters had argued for lesser bond amounts; Phelps-Roper said she wouldn’t be able to offer such collateral to the court.
As of 5 p.m. Monday, the deadline imposed by Bennett, the women hadn’t posted the bonds, according to court records.
Sean E. Summers is an attorney for plaintiff Albert Snyder, the plaintiff. He said the sisters’ appeal of Bennett’s ruling on their motion to stay made it improbable they would put up the cash Monday.
“It would be counterintuitive to do that if they were going to post the money,” Summers said. “It’s hard to cry poor to the 4th Circuit if they’ve already paid the money.”
Phelps-Roper confirmed her refusal to obey Bennett’s order granting a stay and discounted that part of the proceedings.
“All this collection stuff, it’s a lot of fluffy talk,” she said. “If I don’t have no $5 million, you can’t take no $5 million.”
In November, a jury found that the Topeka, Kan.-based church intentionally inflicted emotional distress upon Snyder, of York, Pa. Snyder’s son, Marine Lance Cpl. Matthew A. Snyder, 20, was killed in Iraq in March 2006.
Summers said he will file a motion with Bennett to execute on the sisters’ property — houses and small bank accounts, according to their submissions to the court. But until Bennett rules on that motion and the Richmond appellate court rules on the appeal of Bennett’s original ruling on the motion to stay, that property will remain safe.
“It’s not going to happen immediately,” Summers said. “The wheels of justice turn, but they turn slow.”

Braincase
05-06-2008, 12:22 PM
Yippey-kai-moth**-f*****'-yay!

I hope they live out the rest of their years in a pit of their own feces up to their necks.

Then throw a port-a-potty over the top of the hole.

Mr. Flopnuts
05-06-2008, 12:25 PM
Couldn't happen to a more deserving group of people.

Coach
05-06-2008, 12:26 PM
Fine by me. Don't bother my ass, none. Keep those clowns in there where they rightfully so belong.

mcan
05-06-2008, 12:31 PM
Mixed emotions here...


First off. I don't want a single good thing to EVER happen to the Westboro clan. They're ignorant, fundamentalist pricks.

BUT. We have a right to protest anything we want, and say whatever we want in this country. That's the most basic thing that makes this country great. The precedent set here is that if your speach is in the minority, sounds crazy, and offends people, then you can be prosecuted and forced to pay every dollar that you'll ever make in your life to the government...

Coach
05-06-2008, 12:36 PM
Mixed emotions here...


First off. I don't want a single good thing to EVER happen to the Westboro clan. They're ignorant, fundamentalist pricks.

BUT. We have a right to protest anything we want, and say whatever we want in this country. That's the most basic thing that makes this country great. The precedent set here is that if your speach is in the minority, sounds crazy, and offends people, then you can be prosecuted and forced to pay every dollar that you'll ever make in your life to the government...

While we may have the right to protest, doesn't necessarly mean that you should be protesting, especially to a fallen soldier who got killed in action, for fighting our freedom. It shows how classless those vile f**ks are.

And I'll tell you something else, if someone is protesting at my son's (If he decides to join the military at some point in the future) funeral, you can bet your ass that I will do something about it. I know that my boys at Patriot Guard Riders will rough them up a little bit as well. See how they like it.

mcan
05-06-2008, 12:51 PM
While we may have the right to protest, doesn't necessarly mean that you should be protesting, especially to a fallen soldier who got killed in action, for fighting our freedom. It shows how classless those vile f**ks are.

And I'll tell you something else, if someone is protesting at my son's (If he decides to join the military at some point in the future) funeral, you can bet your ass that I will do something about it. I know that my boys at Patriot Guard Riders will rough them up a little bit as well. See how they like it.

But part of protecting free speach means that we need to protect the speach we disagree with. Otherwise, what good is it? It's easy to protect the speach we agree with.

I agree with you, that the world would be better off without these people though.

trndobrd
05-06-2008, 12:59 PM
Mixed emotions here...


First off. I don't want a single good thing to EVER happen to the Westboro clan. They're ignorant, fundamentalist pricks.

BUT. We have a right to protest anything we want, and say whatever we want in this country. That's the most basic thing that makes this country great. The precedent set here is that if your speach is in the minority, sounds crazy, and offends people, then you can be prosecuted and forced to pay every dollar that you'll ever make in your life to the government...

They weren't prosecuted. They lost a civil case filed by the father of a fallen Marine. The father successfully proved a tort claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress.

In general terms, the 1st Ammendment protects individuals from censorship or punishment by the state for speaking, it does not eliminate responsibility for damages that speech may cause to another citizen. Slander and libel are other examples where people are free to speak, but can still be held responsible for the consequences of their speech by other citizens.

crazychiefsfan
05-06-2008, 01:00 PM
Mixed emotions here...


First off. I don't want a single good thing to EVER happen to the Westboro clan. They're ignorant, fundamentalist pricks.

BUT. We have a right to protest anything we want, and say whatever we want in this country. That's the most basic thing that makes this country great. The precedent set here is that if your speach is in the minority, sounds crazy, and offends people, then you can be prosecuted and forced to pay every dollar that you'll ever make in your life to the government...

Its when you invade other peoples freedom thats when its a problem. Westboro thrives on media attention the more attention they get the more they win. Here in St. Joe MO our local media dosen't even give them the time of day and they haven't been back since.

kaplin42
05-06-2008, 01:23 PM
Its when you invade other peoples freedom thats when its a problem. Westboro thrives on media attention the more attention they get the more they win. Here in St. Joe MO our local media dosen't even give them the time of day and they haven't been back since.


This is true. While the state and federal government can't actually do anything because it is their 1st amendment right to have an opinion and vocalize it, people still have rights as well. And saying slanderous things can put you in some financial peril if the correct action is taken.

Now, granted, I agree with most people on here, that I would beat the ever loven shit out of them if they did that to one of my family members. Chainsaws and baseball bats would be the tools of the day.

Braincase
05-06-2008, 01:49 PM
. Chainsaws and baseball bats would be the tools of the day.

Too quick. Honey & fireants for the upper torso, drawstring pants and hungry weasels for below the waist.

JohnnyV13
05-06-2008, 07:30 PM
Actually,

This incident has been an example of good functioning of the legal system. Westboro has their 1st Amendment rights, but they also clearly calculated their demonstrations to inflict the maximum emotional distress. A five million judgment should shut these people up and tell people you can't abuse your 1st amendment rights by attacking bereaved relatives at a funeral.

DJ's left nut
05-06-2008, 07:49 PM
There's no precedent here.

An intentional infliction claim is extremely difficult to win on. These claims have been around for years and require such egregious conduct that they are rarely winners (I believe the standard is 'extreme and outrageous' which is extremely high). This case hasn't broadened the scope of the tort, nor has it lowered the standard. The law is the same as it's ever been.

Don't worry folks, the justice system worked perfectly on this one. The only thing that would be better is if there was a swap market for body parts where the judgment creditor could sell the Phelps' appendages in order to pay off the judgment.

Hydrae
05-06-2008, 08:06 PM
Don't worry folks, the justice system worked perfectly on this one. The only thing that would be better is if there was a swap market for body parts where the judgment creditor could sell the Phelps' appendages in order to pay off the judgment.

Being heartless and brainless reduces their overall value to the limb recycler. :D

trndobrd
05-06-2008, 08:27 PM
Too quick. Honey & fireants for the upper torso, drawstring pants and hungry weasels for below the waist.


This thread is about the Phelps clan, not your personal 'tastes'...please try to stay on topic.