I don’t usually chime in about the poor editing in IJ articles, but this is ridiculous. According to the headline the WI court says HO policies don’t cover negligence. If you read the article, you realize the court made the decision based on the intentional nature of the acts, and intentional acts are almost always excluded. so the court made the right decision and the headline is slanted to make it seem like there is no point in buying insurance to protect against negligence.
The court was correct as the policy excludes coverage for intentional acts by any insured and not just intentional acts by the insured seeking coverage. You also have to wonder if the court didn’t suspect that the wife was aware of what was going on even if the level of proof didn’t justify a criminal charge against her. The civil complaint alleges that the wife “knew or should have known”what was going on. I think the court feels it is more likely any liability will result from her actual knowledge versus what she “should have known”. You can find the case at :
In Texas until the mid 1980’s we had people giving each other AIDS then the two guys would live off the settlement. They excluded sexually transmitted diseases decades ago. As far as the kiddie rapist. Chemical caturation is a nice alternative to the death penalty. In Texas that is 1 gallon of sulpheric acid poured slowed onto the privates. This stops repeated abuse of more kids and keeps the leftwing nuts happy too since you aren’t putting these bastards to sleep.
IF they can prove she knew what he was and didn’t turn him in to the police, she protected him, therefore allowing him to continue molesting children, then she should have been found negligent.
She should also be sitting in a jail cell if that’s true.
But they can’t prove it. And even if they could, HO policy wouldn’t cover liability for it.
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
Again, the only three judges that voted against the majority, liberal leaning, law-making, losers.
Pedophiles CAN’T BE CURED OR REHABILITATED.
How many more children will suffer because they’re going to let him out in a few years.
Hope he dies in prison.
Seems to me if it could be proven that she knew what a sicko he is she should be in a jail cell beside him. Hope they don’t have kids.
But I don’t see where the insurance company would pay.
I agree with Dawn,completely, and wholeheartedly. Join me in leaving a message at the DA’s office about our feelings in the matter!
I don’t usually chime in about the poor editing in IJ articles, but this is ridiculous. According to the headline the WI court says HO policies don’t cover negligence. If you read the article, you realize the court made the decision based on the intentional nature of the acts, and intentional acts are almost always excluded. so the court made the right decision and the headline is slanted to make it seem like there is no point in buying insurance to protect against negligence.
The court was correct as the policy excludes coverage for intentional acts by any insured and not just intentional acts by the insured seeking coverage. You also have to wonder if the court didn’t suspect that the wife was aware of what was going on even if the level of proof didn’t justify a criminal charge against her. The civil complaint alleges that the wife “knew or should have known”what was going on. I think the court feels it is more likely any liability will result from her actual knowledge versus what she “should have known”. You can find the case at :
http://www.wicourts.gov/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=33435
In Texas until the mid 1980’s we had people giving each other AIDS then the two guys would live off the settlement. They excluded sexually transmitted diseases decades ago. As far as the kiddie rapist. Chemical caturation is a nice alternative to the death penalty. In Texas that is 1 gallon of sulpheric acid poured slowed onto the privates. This stops repeated abuse of more kids and keeps the leftwing nuts happy too since you aren’t putting these bastards to sleep.
I like Texas!
I’m confused on that one.
That’s like saying the BTK killer’s wife was negligent in preventing her husband from being a serial killer, isn’t it?
I have zero experience in homeowners liab, sorry if this was a ‘duh’ question.
IF they can prove she knew what he was and didn’t turn him in to the police, she protected him, therefore allowing him to continue molesting children, then she should have been found negligent.
She should also be sitting in a jail cell if that’s true.
But they can’t prove it. And even if they could, HO policy wouldn’t cover liability for it.
Ahhh… Ohkay. That makes sense. Thanks for the explanation.