Woman Gang-Raped by 7 Halliburton Employees "Signed Away" Her Right to Sue? How Justice Has Become

www.alternet.org...

Worried about the influence of money in American politics, the huge cash payouts that the US supreme court waved through by its Citizens United decision – the decision that lifted most limits on election campaign spending? Corporations are having their way with American elections just as they've already had their way with our media.

But at least we have the courts, right?

Wrong. The third branch of government's in trouble, too. In fact, access to justice – like access to elected office, let alone a pundit's perch – is becoming a perk just for the rich and powerful.

Many of us here at ATS have been morning the death of the American Democratic Republic for some time now.
Is this our future where corporations even control the courts? No justice for individuals; truly the first step toward
a police state and tyranny.

She probably signed her right away to sue haliburton. Why should Haliburton be held responsible if male employers rape female emloyers? Who is Haliburton, their daddy? If she wants to sue somebody, she should sue the people who raped her, for damages, the whole nine yards, but wait, they dont have million, so thats her problem.

Nothing she signed prevents her from suing the rapists in civil court individually, so I dont see the issue. Its Haliburton she wants to sue, why should Haliburton be on the stand? Can somebody rationalize that to me please?

reply to post by whaaa


Whoever coined (hehe) the term "money is power" had it right. Now money is privilege and power and even "justice." Such a disgrace.

Well she basically doesn't have a case against these guys.

Look up the specifics of her case and you'll see how absurd it is. She's trying to profit from a company by making unsubstantiated claims so of course the company is gonna throw this in her face.

Well, it's good thing this didn't happen under Bush,. Can we blame Obummer?
2nd line.

My guess is that Haliburton gave her some sort of $$$financial settlement, and she signed away any right to sue them as part of the deal.

The agreement may or may not have waived the right to go after the actual rapists tho.

Why should a company be held responsible for criminal actions of their employees, unless it can be proved was at the direction of that company?

Originally posted by babybunnies
My guess is that Haliburton gave her some sort of $$$financial settlement, and she signed away any right to sue them as part of the deal.

The agreement may or may not have waived the right to go after the actual rapists tho.

Why should a company be held responsible for criminal actions of their employees, unless it can be proved was at the direction of that company?

edit on 5-7-2011 by babybunnies because: (no reason given)

Your assuming she is telling the truth.

Thats a big assumption

There does seem to be a political component as is always the case when it's an individual against a company.

It's sad but it's reality and it's the future we have to look forward to.

www.examiner.com...

I think you're missing the point, this is more about the question, is it legal to give companies the right to hand out contracts that make it illegal to sue that same company NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS.? Isn't that morally terribly wrong?

Sad that justice system is crap nowadays.

Originally posted by Grey Magic
I think you're missing the point, this is more about the question, is it legal to give companies the right to hand out contracts that make it illegal to sue that same company NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS.? Isn't that morally terribly wrong?

Sad that justice system is crap nowadays.

Show me the law that states a company has the authority to ever prevent it from being sued by an employee?

If you can do that I will agree with you that it's bad.

Originally posted by Cassius666
She probably signed her right away to sue haliburton. Why should Haliburton be held responsible if male employers rape female emloyers? Who is Haliburton, their daddy? If she wants to sue somebody, she should sue the people who raped her, for damages, the whole nine yards, but wait, they dont have million, so thats her problem.

Nothing she signed prevents her from suing the rapists in civil court individually, so I dont see the issue. Its Haliburton she wants to sue, why should Haliburton be on the stand? Can somebody rationalize that to me please?

edit on 5-7-2011 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)

Isn't it the companies place to provide a safe work environment for a employee? And it would be nice for someone to rape Haliburton for once they have been raping us long enough.

I knew this sounded familiar - I'd made a thread about it awhile back when it was at an earlier stage..

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Basically I have the same thing to ask now as then - If she really made it all up, why are they so afraid of her?

That does not add up to me.

....since assault is a crime, the criminal courts shouldve handled this... why did that avenue fail?...

...she screwed herself on the civil suit... she signed her employment contract of her own free will... its not the employer's fault that she didnt understand what she was signing - nor is it an employer's responsibility to explain said contract...

...NEVER sign anything you cant comprehend... at 20yrs old, she shouldve known better, especially since she thought she was tough enough to go make the big bucks in a war zone...

...this isnt another bullet in the back of our, allegedly, democratic republic nor is this another example of corporatism run amuck... this is just a case of ignorance and greed getting somebody a lot more than they bargained for...

she signed on the line saying she can't sue, only arbitration. But the Fifth Circuit gave her a victory.

the Fifth Circuit on Wednesday ruled that a Texas woman who alleges she was gang-raped by co-workers while working for military contractor KBR, a former subsidiary of Halliburton, in Iraq will go to court instead of arbitration

blogs.wsj.com...

We need to invade haliburton and launch a missile strike on haliburton to protect the civilians that haliburton is raping. That is what they said about gadaffi when his troops did some rape.

Originally posted by kro32

Originally posted by Grey Magic
I think you're missing the point, this is more about the question, is it legal to give companies the right to hand out contracts that make it illegal to sue that same company NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS.? Isn't that morally terribly wrong?

Sad that justice system is crap nowadays.

Show me the law that states a company has the authority to ever prevent it from being sued by an employee?

If you can do that I will agree with you that it's bad.

Maybe you could just read the article. Then you would see it said that she signed away her right to sue them for anything no matter what, in the fine print of her employment contract. It's also in the fine print of just about everything these days, including those terms you agree to without reading every time you download anything.

Sounds like the US is starting to fall apart on the Universal deceleration of Human Rights with Articles 6,7,8,10 and 12 www.un.org...

Originally posted by Cassius666
She probably signed her right away to sue haliburton. Why should Haliburton be held responsible if male employers rape female emloyers?

Here in Australia, employers are required to provide a safe working environment.

Originally posted by NuclearPaul

Originally posted by Cassius666
She probably signed her right away to sue haliburton. Why should Haliburton be held responsible if male employers rape female emloyers?

Here in Australia, employers are required to provide a safe working environment.

If Australia continues to mirror the American system then it's only a matter of time until the Corpratracracyy reigns supreme down under as well.

The individual is losing power in not only in the workplace but politically, economically or as in the OP...personally and in the courts.