Lawmakers approve $20 million for Jaycee

[Natal]

not true. in the suit the complaitants were jaycee, her mom and her girls.

so its not just jaycee getting the money.

The 20 million has nothing to do with the suit. It was granted by passage of a bill in the legislature.

 

[Natal]

Reading the comments in the news, it seems people are quite divided on this, with some people thinking that she deserves $20 million and others saying that that amount is excessive considering the taxpayers will be footing the bill (with possible job and program cuts as well). I can see where both sides are coming from, honestly.

It is excessive, it's a lot more than what you would need to live a decent life and meet the bills she would likely have. With that amount of money you could have a sustainable annual budget well in excess of 500k. Very few people have that sort of income.

 

[BeenaBobba]

It is excessive, it's a lot more than what you would need to live a decent life and meet the bills she would likely have. With that amount of money you could have a sustainable annual budget well in excess of 500k. Very few people have that sort of income.

She may have to pay taxes and attorney fees, so when all is said and done, it could come out to a lot less. Still, it will be more than enough to live on for the rest of her life. I've read that she's thinking of starting a foundation, which is a good move on her part.

 

[kbl8201]

Reading the comments in the news, it seems people are quite divided on this, with some people thinking that she deserves $20 million and others saying that that amount is excessive considering the taxpayers will be footing the bill (with possible job and program cuts as well). I can see where both sides are coming from, honestly.

most people that are upset are not mad at jaycee personally, just at the fact that alot of people are struggling, which i understand.

i would think this actually benifits california in the long term. 20 million sure seems to cut off any chance that terry and jaycee will bring massive lawsuits now, so more taxypayer money on court decisions and court fees have been saved for years to come.

i think it was a brilliant move by the terminator and the legislature, personally.

heck the bill nearly passed unanimously. the last time a vote was that lopsided was when fdr asked for a declaration of war

 

[kbl8201]

The caption to the second photo says:
"Jaycee Dugard at age 11, when she was kidnapped, in an undated FBI photo obtained in August 2009 after she was freed."

which shows right there it is bogus.

seem to remember when she was found she was 'thin and pale'. so that is clearly not a picture of her when she was rescued.

 

[BeenaBobba]

most people that are upset are not mad at jaycee personally, just at the fact that alot of people are struggling, which i understand.

Sadly, there are quite a few comments that are anti-Jaycee, calling her a gold digger and such, which is pretty cruel and unfair, IMO. Thankfully, most of the comments that disagree with the settlement (about 60%-75% of them, to be honest) sympathize with Jaycee personally; they just think the amount is excessive.

i would think this actually benifits california in the long term. 20 million sure seems to cut off any chance that terry and jaycee will bring massive lawsuits now, so more taxypayer money on court decisions and court fees have been saved for years to come.

In a sense, I think it was a strategic move, but on the other hand, I think it could possibly do more damage in the long run. It may have set a dangerous precedent. I am sure that government officials have failed people innumerable times -- even with the end result being death -- and if $20 million is paid each and every time, how will CA, which is $19 billion in debt as it is, pay to fund schools and other programs? What about the teachers, firemen, and police officers who are being laid off? Sadly, the people who will suffer will not be the parole officers who screwed up; it'll be the ordinary taxpayers who are struggling to make ends meet. Not only that, but how can the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation correct its faults and correctly monitor criminals if police officers are being laid off? I hate to say this because I am happy that Jaycee will never have to worry about finances, but I do think it's unfair that one family will benefit from so much while many could suffer as a result. It really pains me to say that because I have nothing but respect for Jaycee and her family, but I feel I have to put my personal feelings aside and look at this objectively.

heck the bill nearly passed unanimously. the last time a vote was that lopsided was when fdr asked for a declaration of war

Bwahaha!

 

[kbl8201]

lol at jaycee the 'gold digger'. some people just lead pathetic lives.

 

[BeenaBobba]

Also, we don't know if the one "No" vote was from someone who felt it should be more.

Actually, I read that the no was from a legislator who thought that this should have gone to trial. I'll see if I can find the link again.

 

[BeenaBobba]

lol at jaycee the 'gold digger'. some people just lead pathetic lives.

I agree. It's one thing to disagree with the amount of the settlement, but it's quite another thing to sling mud at the innocent victim of a violent crime.

 

[kbl8201]

They can hire Gloria Allred, she's already up to speed on the case. They just need to be sure not to get between her and a camera if they want to live to see any of it.

lol

but seriously, how much you want to be our friend kenny and his brood now claim they should get a cut?

 

[kbl8201]

Actually, I read that the no was from a legislator who thought that this should have gone to trial. I'll see if I can find the link again.

does it matter? 92-1 is the overall vote, governer will sign and the budget office approved.

 

[BeenaBobba]

does it matter? 92-1 is the overall vote, governer will sign and the budget office approved.

Not really, but was wondering, so I thought I'd find the link. I haven't had any luck, though, 'cause there are tons of articles about this.

 

[kbl8201]

well if he thought it should go to trial i wonder what he thought the outcome would be?

must be a lawyer. but most politicians are anyways

 

[BeenaBobba]

Don't worry about it, I appreciate the info.

I found it just as you posted that, . LOL. Here it is. Also, here's a quote:

According to the Sacramento Bee, the Republican from Grass Valley said his issue is with the claims process. Aanestad said he objects the process that asks legislators to rubber stamp settlements without being involved in negotiating them.

Burns is not alone in his opinion. An article in the Los Angeles Times generated dozens of comments. Some agreed with the settlement, but most strongly opposed it.

 

[kbl8201]

i would suggest to those who 'strongly oppose it' that they consider for one second that there own family go thru this nightmare for 20 years all because of police/parole/political incompetence, then think its 'unfair' for there family to get 20 milllion dollars to start a life that was stolen from them.

 

[BeenaBobba]

i would suggest to those who 'strongly oppose it' that they consider for one second that there own family go thru this nightmare for 20 years all because of police/parole/political incompetence, then think its 'unfair' for there family to get 20 milllion dollars to start a life that was stolen from them.

Well, from what I can see, it's not the fact that she was compensated that people disagree with; it's the amount she was given. I think the majority of people believe that she deserves some compensation.

To answer your question, though, of course anyone would think they deserved that much if they went through the same thing. I also think they'd be justified in feeling that way. Still, that doesn't necessarily make it right.

For example, if a family member of mine were killed, of course I would want to be compensated. At the same time, I don't think I'd be able to look at the situation objectively. I respect your opinion, KBL, but going by how one would feel is more subjective than objective. Do you think this could set a dangerous precedent that could end up hurting more people in the long run? If not, why not?

 

[Deeemdee]

Have to love the press. Correct me if I am mistaken but at this site there are two pictures of "Jaycee". I swear the second one is NOT Jaycee. http://content.usatoday.com/communi...s-ok-20m-settlement-for-jaycee-dugard/1#Close

It's Natascha Kampusch.

 

[Natal]

In a sense, I think it was a strategic move, but on the other hand, I think it could possibly do more damage in the long run. It may have set a dangerous precedent. I am sure that government officials have failed people innumerable times -- even with the end result being death -- and if $20 million is paid each and every time, how will CA, which is $19 billion in debt as it is, pay to fund schools and other programs? What about the teachers, firemen, and police officers who are being laid off?

It isn't a precendent since it wasn't a decision reached in the courts, it was a bill passed by the legislature. Basically a one time deal, they aren't going to do this for everyone.

 

[BeenaBobba]

what is hurting more people in the long run?

The precedent that has been set -- that is, the precedent that you can be awarded millions upon millions of dollars if a government official or agency screws up. The sad fact is that government officials screw up all the time. I mean, if government officials screw up to the point where five people are hurt, maimed, or killed due to their negligence, that's potentially hundreds of millions going to five people while scores of ordinary citizens are struggling to make ends meet after getting laid off due to lack of funding. I'm not so much against victims being compensated as I am against countless innocent people having to suffer the consequences.

the fact that people have to pay more taxes cause of this settlement?

Yes, but not just because of this settlement. Because of the numerous settlements that could follow based on this example. And I'm sure there will be. After all, why not?

or the fact that the state of california is STILL letting pedophiles and murderers out to do the same thing that people like garrido and garner have done over and over again.

Both. Without a doubt, both. But I just don't see how awarding huge settlements is going to solve this problem. If anything, it could make it worse. Like all government workers, police officers suffer from budget cuts. Less police officers potentially = more crime, which could potentially = more settlements, which could of course = more difficulty for the average citizen. It could be a vicious circle, know what I mean?

its great they have overhauled the parole review. it would be even better if they never let these type of garbage out in the first place. then we wouldnt have to worry about future 'settlements' based on this 'precedent'.

Totally agree. But you need money to overhaul the parole review board and to make real changes. My point is that the state of CA will not have the money to make -- and more importantly, to enforce -- these changes if millions are paid to victims in this manner henceforth.

we can only make things right for the future.

But how? You know I love you to pieces, KBL, but I don't necessarily agree with you on this. It's all good, though. It ain't personal; it's business.

 

[kbl8201]

i think its easy to be objective when its not your family. not so easy when its not.

now some people would say im obssessed with this case (hi song!) and maybe i am. maybe its cause i prefer a happy ending to all the other cases here, most notably, caylee that end in disaster. but the 'happy ending' doesnt negate the horrible 18 years that proceeded it. and 20 million, 50 million, 700 trillion wont ever make up for that lost time. but it will give them a start they all badly need, not just jaycee and her girls, but terry, shayna, carl, all of them.

does it set a precendent? maybe. or maybe it wakes up lawmakers, parole and probation and judges that these slimeballs should NEVER get out in the first place. if you elminate the problem of the criminal, then you dont have the problem of the settlement anymore, right?