"PJ" <pjmott@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:bdf0f8af-1c2b-4d87-8c81-5a344ecd3604@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mar 16, 4:52�am, "Zac" <please_post_repl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> "Ruby Vee" <rubyv...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
> news:2008031605290650878-rubyvee3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 2008-03-15 22:48:06 -0400, "Zac"
<please_post_repl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > said:
>
> >> No. �She THOUGHT she was alright. �Again, at worst, negligence.
>
> > I get that you like Eliza*****, but this one is just so egregious.
�Liz
> > had taken pain killers and sedatives. �They impair your judgement as
> > well
> > as your reactions. �Liz knew that. �She was impaired, but she
didn't
> > CARE
> > because it was so im****tant to her that she get to "the one person who
> > can
> > soothe away my anxieties." �She was just as impaired at that point
as
> > the
> > person who had taken a few drinks. �(Monica, say.) �Or the person
who
> > was
> > on medication to control blackouts and seizures. �(Nik, for
example).
> > When you add in sleep deprivation, she was probably the most impaired
of
> > the four -- although Carly's generally bad driving skills ought to be
a
> > factor.
>
> > No one is arguing that it's OK for Monica to claim her car was stolen
or
> > attempt to destroy evidence. �I guess I'm just shocked that someone
> > would
> > argue that it's OK to drive under the influence because she *thought*
> > she
> > was OK -- even though it's pretty clear from what she said both before
> > climbing behind the wheel and afterward that she knew she wasn't.
�Was
> > it
> > then equally OK for Monica to be driving because she thought she was
OK?
> > Or Nik?
>
> > And that it's OK to hide evidence such as a bashed in fender and blood
> > on
> > your car because "you might have hit a deer or something."
>
> > As for Liz's reluctance to confess and pay for her crime being only
for
> > the sake of baby Jake -- that's pretty much a non-starter. There's
been
> > no
> > evidence up until now that Baby Jake was the reason she was lying and
> > covering things up. �It's just the biggest hold she has on Jason and
> > Lucky. �He's the means, not the reason.
>
> > Ruby
>
> I get that you hate Elizabeth, and that clouds pretty much everything
you
> say about her, but please don't put words into my posts. �I never said
> that
> it was OK for Elizabeth to drive under the influence. �But her state
of
> mind
> equals negligence. �It was bad judgment. �Don't tell me the hospital
isn't
> liable for letting her leave, knowing she was going to drive, if she was
> impaired. �The hospital is not ****elded from liability because of a
chart
> notation AMA. �That protects the hospital for damage she does to
herself
> regarding the condition she was being treated for.
>
> After thinking about it a little more, I'll take back part of what I
said
> about Carly. �She used bad judgment as well, and her state of mind was
> that
> of negligence. �Nicholas and Monica were at best grossly negligent or
> reckless. �If Sam had died, Elizabeth and Carly might face
manslaughter
> charges, but Nicholas and Monica would face second degree murder
charges.
> What I'm looking for is a little parity in the discussion.
>
> I don't think it's fair to blame elizabeth for Jason's actions; that is
if
> he really did anything to destroy evidence. �We'll have to wait and
see
> what
> Lucky does, but you can't fairly blame Elizabeth for what he does, or
> doesn't do, either.
>
> Zac- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
You go, Zac! You've said it all so well. One thing I would add is that
Liz wanted to tell Lucky, call the police, re****t herself (whichever!)
the very minute Jason told her she'd probably hit something. She has
consistently wanted to come forward and she has consistently been
talked out of it. It's absurd to blame her. Yes, she was driving
impaired but, for God's sake, doesn't the very word *impaired* mean
that she was incapable of realising the degree of her impairment and
therefore unable to make a responsible decision???? Jeez! Liz has not
done anything any worse than Monica, Carly, or Nik. And as you so
clearly pointed out, Sam ran into the road and anybody driving on that
wet road would have hit her. There's no way there was intent! She made
a mistake in judgement, even NURSES do that. We all do that at one
time or another. It's called being human. The fact that Liz trusted in
the man she loved and kept quiet because she so desperately wants to
believe that she was not the one who hit Sam is human as well.
This whole argument is stupid. It's called let's blame Liz because she
draws breath and lives.
PJ
Thanks, PJ. You and I are usually ITA. You're right, though - there's
just
no talking to the Liz-haters club. I give up!
Zac
|
