Beware the fury of a patient man. - John Dryden
Sorry Mr S, but this one makes no sense. The first is not true and the 2nd is irrelevant to the story, damages were being reduced simply if the girls had been drinking, it doesn't say they were apparently consenting as a result of being drunk.
Xoggoth, the point I was trying to make was that the authorities sometimes expect you to be responsible for your possessions whilst at other times, you can be absolved of any personal responsibility!If you go down a dark alley late at night flashing your gold jewellery, don't be surprised if you are mugged!PS I'll try to be clearer in future!
According to PC Bloggshttp://www.pcbloggs.blogspot.comit has been normal to reduce damages for anything if one has been drinking.PS Gold jewellery? me? PPS Nice waspy!
Would they reduce damages for alcohol poisoning if the victim were drunk? That's a bit harsh.
Post a Comment