Slave descendants to sue Lloyd's

[Bullitt]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/3578863.stm

Descendants of black American slaves are to sue Lloyd's of London for insuring ships used in the trade.

High-profile US lawyer Edward Fagan, who secured settlements from Swiss companies in the Nazi gold case, is taking the action for 10 plaintiffs.

He says by underwriting slave ships in the 1700-1800s the UK's oldest insurance firm played a key role.

The action, which claims defendants still suffer, was lodged on Monday according to Associated Press.

Was just wondering what the opinion might be on this. Personally I find it both unbelievable and pathetic. The idea that a company or individual can sue for the actions that their ancestors did, or had done to them in the past is absurd.

It's a sad state of affairs where everyone seems to be blaming each other for this that and the other thing for vast quantities of cash .

 

[mr.Blacky]

Hehe is that serious?
I don't know how I would take it if I was sued for what my ancesters did.
As for a company being sued, well it is hard to draw lines.
Would you mind if a company, that produced for the Nazi's with slavelabour, got sued? At what time would it be not okay to sue?

 

[Tom]

Its a load of bollocks. If it weren't, about 30 million women in this country could sue because their ancestors couldn't vote 100 years ago.

 

[Frizz]

"Why is it too far fetched to say blacks should be entitled to compensation for damages and genocide committed against them, when every other group in the world that has been victimised in this way has been?"

What a generalisation. I hope Eddy contracts something nasty. :/

Hmmmm, but it would be a sad day if they won their court case. :\

 

[Tom]

Hehe is that serious?
I don't know how I would take it if I was sued for what my ancesters did.
As for a company being sued, well it is hard to draw lines.
Would you mind if a company, that produced for the Nazi's with slavelabour, got sued? At what time would it be not okay to sue?

Why sue the company? The company was operating under the laws that the state provided. Sue the state, they're the ones that said it was ok.

 

[Whipped]

There was a Family Guy episode I watched last night that brought this subject up. Was quite funny. The token black man in the show got reperations from his slave master's descendants, but they were now poor white trash so they just gave him some rice crispie squares.

Would the people sueing llyods still be doing it if the descendats of the underwriters of insurance on the ships were now just a little old couple. Me thinks not. This is just greed, pure and simple.

 

[Jonaldo]

If anyone get's any money for this it will just go to show how much of a farce the legal system is in the world today.

In fact while I've been reading this, my monitor has probably damaged my eyes slightly and I'm considering suing Dell as a result. Just need to find an American lawyer..

 

[Bullitt]

I hope Eddy contracts something nasty.

Ooo wouldn't say that if i were you. This might be archived and then Eddy does get some weird disease and then his ancestors will sue yours in 400 odd years.

Think of the children!

 

[Stimpy]

Lawyer Fraser Whitehead, the Law Society's former head of civil litigation, said the case was not about "compensation culture".

Yeah I'm sure their not just hoping for a big fat cheque, it's mad to think you could be sued for something that happened 200-300 years ago, I can't see them having a hope in hell of winning though.

 

[Scouse]

Surely the lawyer would have to prove some sort of culpability of Lloyds regarding the actual slave trade itself?

I mean. If I sell a knife to a chap who then goes and stabs someone am I culpable?

Insuring a ship does not make you a slave trader......


Must be some sort of bizarre loophole or he wouldn't even take the case (unless he's on some extortionate rate and NOT on a no-win no-fee basis).

 

[old.user4556]

That article: what a fucking crock of shit

Can I sue the Queen then because the Monarch raped and stole my ancestors land?

Infact, i'm suing Freddyshouse for RSI for typing this post; then I'm suing everyone who has replied because i've used the wheel on my mouse to scroll up and down - I'm going to claim off you all to replace my worn scroll wheel.

Where the christing mother of fuck will it end?

Sheesh.

G

 

[Tom]

Thing is, wasn't the slave trade legal? You can't prosecute retrospectively, at least not in this country.

Fucking idiots, I'm tempted to say something sick and controversial for a cheap laugh.

 

[Damini]

I'm going to sue the Romans for invading England and killing my ancestors!! Call it £30 million (would be more, but I'll knock a bit off for introducing plumbing).

 

[nath]

"It's a bit like saying the manufacturer of guns facilitated the killing."

Not that I agree with the rest of the article, but surely it does?

 

[Bullitt]

Well that'd be like me stabbing someone to death with a screw driver and then blaming the screwdriver manufacturers. Although screwdrivers aren't made for that whereas guns are. However it points out a grey area i'm sure people can argue about until they're blue in the face.

Happy Birthday btw Nath

 

[Tom]

One plaintiff, Deadria Farmer-Paellman said the slave trade denied her identity.

"Today I suffer from the injury of not knowing who I am, having no nationality or ethnic group as a result of acts committed by these parties," she said.

Erm, shes American, right? She was born there. She's African-American, right? Does she really think that money will change her perception of herself? Stupid question really, of course she does, which places her IQ well below 50 IMO.

BTW, comparing guns to slavery isn't really valid, as the people making guns are still around, doing business. Just like the people making cigarettes. Not that I agree with sueing them either, they're both legally sanctioned products.

Its all about blame. People don't accept that shit just happens anymore, they feel an almost compulsive need to find justice against those that in some way predicated their own fate. I keep thinking of the opening scene in Denzel Washington's office, in Philedelphia, where he says the guy who walked across a street, ignoring warning signs, who climbed under barricades, and fell into a hole hurting himself, had a valid claim.

This is the one instance where I will generalise and say that the US legal system is plain stupid.

 

[SilverHood]

If you want justice go to a brothel,
If you want to get screwed, go to court.

As a wise man once said.

 

[EvilMonkeh]

what about the whole "organs nicked from babies without consent" compensation thing... how can a monetary gain help any feelings any of the parents would have had? any compensation should be like for like, they are just doing it for the money.

 

[Doh_boy]

what about the whole "organs nicked from babies without consent" compensation thing... how can a monetary gain help any feelings any of the parents would have had? any compensation should be like for like, they are just doing it for the money.

My favourite line is when they say 'It's the principal of the thing, it's nothing to do with money'

heheheh bollocks.

It was in the sunday paper, it gave me a cheap laugh. The lead lawyer is the guy who loads of money of swiss banks who had nazi gold. He has a history of going after cases like these.

 

[yaruar]

My favourite line is when they say 'It's the principal of the thing, it's nothing to do with money'

IF that's true all the people involved (including the lawyers) should be making public declarations that any money they gain from the case will be put into charitable causes such as fighting AIDS in sub saharah africa or similar.

Although i've yet to see a laywer who isn't motivated by a big fat paycheck (our company lawyers recently spent 2 days arguing over the placement of a comma in a legal document, it scares me how much that comma made them)

 

[xane]

The solution is to make slavery legal again, but this time we'll use lawyers instead of indigenous peoples.

 

[yaruar]

The solution is to make slavery legal again

I thought slavery is still legal

*checks work contract*

yup seems that way to me.

 

[DaGaffer]

Hmm, thoughts of deranged American lawyer...

"Who can we sue for slavery, whose got lots of cash, is still around and isn't very sympathetic? Slave Holders? Nope, all dead. Descendents of Slave Holders? Maybe...nah, too hard, too many white trash. Governments? Nah, better lawyers than me. Descendents of the black Africans who sold their brothers to the slavers? Don't be ridiculous (and they're skint anyway).Big fat Limey insurance company? Bingo! Its paycheck time!"

 

[Damini]

It would be very interesting to trace this lawyers family tree back, see if he harbours any undesirable events in his past, and then sue him. Your great great great great great great... (continue for a while) great grandmother TALKED ADAM INTO EATING THE APPLE! It is all YOUR fault we no longer live in paradise, and I'm demanding compensation!

 

[DaGaffer]

It would be very interesting to trace this lawyers family tree back, see if he harbours any undesirable events in his past, and then sue him. Your great great great great great great... (continue for a while) great grandmother TALKED ADAM INTO EATING THE APPLE! It is all YOUR fault we no longer live in paradise, and I'm demanding compensation!

Surely the lawyers' ancestor would have been the snake? Ba-dum tsh!

 

[xane]

You could sue the lawyer on behalf of the now extinct Neanderthals on the basis that his ancestors committed genocide around 30,000 years ago.

 

[yaruar]

I think i'm going to sue both the government and the royal family (and god)

I am a peasant, i come from a long line of peasants.

Half my peasanthood is english peasant, the other half is irish peasant.

The english peasant side have always been poor and never owned a castle or 100's of acres of prime arable land. This is because we were oppressed by the landowners of the country and forced to eat turnips whilst they dined on the flesh of fresh young virgins. Because of this oppression i never got the chance to become the king of england. I will sue the monarchy because they stole my potential right to rule.

After taking my rightful potential place as king of england I will sue the government for the years of oppression and cruelty caused to my irish ancestors by cromwell and other such english despots. They destroyed my nation and kept the people in servitude and made nasty jokes about bogtrotters and suchlike. For this I want reperation for me and my people (all paid to me of course)

Thirdly i want to sue god because I was born as me and not as bill gates and therefore it's gods fault I am not the richest man alive ever.

 

[Sharma]

This is the most sickening, most pathetic thing ever.

Suing someone for an event that happened generations ago is absolutely pointless.
And due to legal loopholes its possible and lawyers who know the system well enough can abuse it.

Great, think ill go sue hollywood for helping me was 2 hours of my life on a movie ive never actually liked, this caused me starvation for 2 hours and ear damage due to loud sounds, great that sounds like £3500 compensation, i think ill persue it.

 

[Nerual]

what about the whole "organs nicked from babies without consent" compensation thing... how can a monetary gain help any feelings any of the parents would have had? any compensation should be like for like, they are just doing it for the money.

The point wasn't about money tbh. I was put into the position, with a lot of other parents, that we had to sue to get the particular NHS Trust involved to accept the fact that what they had done was wrong. We had tried for quite some time through other methods. Unfortunately the only way we could get justice was to sue.

 

[yaruar]

The point wasn't about money tbh. I was put into the position, with a lot of other parents, that we had to sue to get the particular NHS Trust involved to accept the fact that what they had done was wrong. We had tried for quite some time through other methods. Unfortunately the only way we could get justice was to sue.

yeah but for matters of principal you shouldn't accept the money.