Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not familiar with the laws in this case. Is it true that his parents were within their rights not to speak?
"The lawsuit seeks damages of at least $30,000. An attorney for the Laundries, Steven Bertolino, said in a text message Friday that his clients were fully within their rights not to talk. He also denied the lawsuit's claims in general.
“This lawsuit does not change the fact that the Laundries had no obligation to speak to law enforcement or any third party including the Petito family,” Bertolino said. “This fundamental legal principle renders the Petitos' claims to be baseless under the law.”
$30k? That’s nothing. Make it millions. How is it possible that their silence was not considered obstructing justice. They were holding back information, even if it was their own son they were protecting.
$30k? That’s nothing. Make it millions. How is it possible that their silence was not considered obstructing justice. They were holding back information, even if it was their own son they were protecting.
The Laundries had no affirmative duty to inform either the Petitos or law enforcement of what they knew. This case is DOA.
The Laundries had no affirmative duty to inform either the Petitos or law enforcement of what they knew. This case is DOA.
The full text was not provided to the public. What this filing actually is is a wrongful death claim against Brian Laundrie, but since he's dead, it's his "estate" being sued.
The case is not argued strictly on the basis of what you see in the media report.
The Laundries can still be held liable for wrongful death even if this particular allegation is proven incorrect or not provable in court because it still can be proven Brian Laundrie killed Petito.
What you should learn are that the media is not in the business of educating you and that lawyers will frame statements in a manner most favorable to the client. In doing the latter, the simpleton general populace will usually slurp up those statements hook, line, and sinker with no logical analysis because humans are not logical beings unless they have some autism or psychopathy going on.
The full text was not provided to the public. What this filing actually is is a wrongful death claim against Brian Laundrie, but since he's dead, it's his "estate" being sued.
The case is not argued strictly on the basis of what you see in the media report.
The Laundries can still be held liable for wrongful death even if this particular allegation is proven incorrect or not provable in court because it still can be proven Brian Laundrie killed Petito.
What you should learn are that the media is not in the business of educating you and that lawyers will frame statements in a manner most favorable to the client. In doing the latter, the simpleton general populace will usually slurp up those statements hook, line, and sinker with no logical analysis because humans are not logical beings unless they have some autism or psychopathy going on.
I've read the complaint in its entirety, and you are laughably wrong on everything.
Brian Laundrie's estate is not being sued, his parents are. This isn't a wrongful death claim either, its for intentional infliction of emotional distress, which the Petitos allege that the Brian's parents engaged in when they refused to cooperate or provide information to them.
If you're going to attack people for being simpletons, it would behove you to actually have your own facts straight.
The Laundries knew their boy was going to kill himself likely. Unless he planned on living out in the swamp his whole life.
I think the Laundries have suffered as much as the Pettitos.
So true.
My husband and I have many discussion about this. If the Pettitos knew her daughter was in an unstable relationship (as her friends have said) why didn't they stop her?
She graduated high school in 2017. Why wasn't she in college? Who thought traveling in a van to remote areas was a good idea?
My husband said she was over 21. There was nothing her parents could do to stop her and an instagram lifestyle is seen as a legitimate career/activity for young people.
My opinion is her parents should a way stop her. It was all too risky from the start.
I'm pretty skeptical that such a lawsuit can succeed....
Depends. The art. says, The lawsuit adds that the Laundries were “making arrangements for him (Brian) to leave the country.” It goes on to say that there is no evidence to back up this claim, but if it turns out to be true, and if it can be shown that the parents knew Brian killed Gabby, I *think* that is aiding and abetting a fugitive. Still an uphill battle to prove, however.
My husband and I have many discussion about this. If the Pettitos knew her daughter was in an unstable relationship (as her friends have said) why didn't they stop her?
She graduated high school in 2017. Why wasn't she in college? Who thought traveling in a van to remote areas was a good idea?
My husband said she was over 21. There was nothing her parents could do to stop her and an instagram lifestyle is seen as a legitimate career/activity for young people.
My opinion is her parents should a way stop her. It was all too risky from the start.
It's very sad for both families.
How do you legally stop an adult from doing what they want to do?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
