Not Just Our Two Cents 

Casino Sues Because It Broke Law - 5 Cents
Posted by: Paul Nichols

26 Sep 2007

A friend alerted me to this story:


Des Moines Register Article


A casino is suing a couple of underage gamblers because the casino got fined for letting them in. My thoughts?


I'd sue them, too, if I were the casino. It's like when an uninsured driver gets into a car accident, the one with insurance has to pay as if it's his fault for someone else doing something illegal. At least with the car example the uninsured driver can be carted off to jail. Granted, the casino isn't without liability (it probably gets its license while crying to the high heavens about how responsible it will be in keeping underage gamblers out), but those willfully breaking the law should be punished, too. If the women weren't prosecuted criminally, then the casino is justified for pursuing civil charges (if that's what's happening here; I don't know law). If it's not a law for which the women could be prosecuted criminally, then it's just a law wasting space for other, more worthy bureaucratic measures. Not sure what my point is, I guess. Perhaps all this to say that the gambling age should probably (along with the drinking age) be reduced to 18.

© 2007 Dime Brothers
Category: Uncategorized    

Reader Comments:

Speaking of Lawsuits
Check out this doosy.

I'm indirectly named in this lawsuit, because I'm a member of the Derby Republican Town Committee. If you check out my political site and click on Commentary, you'll see I posted a story about someone emailing me. That person, probably, was this guy filing the suit. He has horrible spelling, grammar, and obviously thinks the world is out to get him. I haven't been notified of this suit, though, and I imagine it'll get thrown out soon.

What's hilarious (well, there are many things to laugh at about this lawsuit), is that he thinks his free speech rights are getting violated, yet he names in the suit people who are posting on a blog. How do blog-writers' opinions have anything to do with his inability to fill out paperwork? And isn't writing on a blog protected by the First Amendment? (I'm not a legal expert, but it seems like it's free speech. And having read almost everything on the blog before it was taken down at the end of August and re-started, I don't remember seeing anything that was attacking him. So if I didn't see anything, either it wasn't there, or the owner of the blog, also named in the suit, removed the offensive content. How would removing hateful comments be hateful towards him? Why is the owner named?)

What you may not understand from the article, is that the Derby town clerk says nothing would be notarized when he left. I checked the Connecticut guidelines for notaries, and it seems they have to notarize something with the person there. So this guy being a lawyer should have known the rules about notarization, and the clerk, being a notary, would probably NEVER have gaffed in such a way.

At least Derby might make the national "stupid news" headlines.

People like this should be barred from costing taxpayers and the system time and money. Their property should be repossessed or something. Ridiculous.
27 Sep 2007
I wonder why the article mentions that he's black. That doesn't seem to be pertinent unless the guy is claiming harrassment based on that fact. Unfortunately, the article doesn't clarify this.
27 Sep 2007
You're right, the article doesn't mention it. But his comments on the blog which he is suing are basically paraphrased here:

"Don't you people know you can be sued for racial comments? Why are racist comments being allowed to be posted on this site? No one's is giving that Mel Thompson a fair shake. This is his intern writing."

Now take what's written, switch all sorts of letters around, taking care to omit some, and you'll have what he wrote. The problem is, nothing racist was ever posted that I could tell. And if it was it must have been removed by the blog owner because I never saw anything.

Really amazing stuff. The Derby Board of Alderman tonight at the end of the meeting went into executive session (where no one is allowed except who's invited), I imagine to talk about the lawsuit.
27 Sep 2007
More Links
Thompson Press Release

Actual Complaint Filed

Thompson's campaign website

His campaign website, after a brief glance, has been updated.

This just continues to amaze me. It's not like Mel isn't known around town. To think people for some reason hate him when everyone around here grew up with him and knows his family... just amazing.
28 Sep 2007
Judge Won't Hear It
A federal judge won't hear the case because he thinks it's a state issue. So Mel will have to re-file stuff with the state if he wants to keep this up.

Link to Article
05 Oct 2007

Leave a Comment:





Message:  Bold Italics Underline Insert Hyperlink

Web Development by Steve Black