Reddit user smellslikeurine is seeking advice for a "friend of a friend" who recently pulled a clever prank on an evil bully, and may now be legally liable:
"A relative of a close friend (we'll call him Todd) carried Mountain Dew in his backpack to school every day. For a few weeks, this bully ("Brian") would go in his bag, say f**k you, and drink the Mountain Dew.
Fed up with this and being a cunning lad, last Tuesday Todd drinks the Mountain Dew before class, and pisses in the bottle. Brian drank the piss, shat brix, and Todd emerged the victor that day.
Now, Brian's family is threatening to sue, claiming Todd endangered Brian's health. Todd's family is apparently sh*tting and scrambling to collect character references for Todd from teachers, letters from doctors saying urine isn't harmful, and generally thinking their son is a psycho.
I applaud Todd and think that he should walk into court holding a bottle of piss, it's freedom of expression, some people like piss filled bottles, but IANAL."
Is "Todd" liable? We all have to fight our bullies somehow, and unless urine contains drugs, it appears to be relatively safe to drink. (WonderHowTo has urine purification HowTo's, though Todd clearly didn't go through such a painstaking process.)
"Todd" needs your advice. Please post your stance below.
Just updated your iPhone? You'll find new Apple Intelligence capabilities, sudoku puzzles, Camera Control enhancements, volume control limits, layered Voice Memo recordings, and other useful features. Find out what's new and changed on your iPhone with the iOS 18.2 update.
28 Comments
Todds the man! he can carry what ever he wants, brian's a fool and took the wrong #$%@. He shouldn't be taking peoples MD neways thats a CRIME IN ITS SELF. I think if a judge would let brians pain in the a$$ parents win he would be a fool! i do remember reading about a case were a robber won over the home owner because he hurt him self while robbing the house. Judge was a idiot though, you would have to be. thats like the whole mc Dz hot drink thing
Todd had every right to do what he did. Brian is the one who should be in trouble. Stealing is nothing to be taken lightly. I think his parents are just ashamed to admit they have a thieving son, so to counteract that point, they thought they'd bring all of the bad attention on the innocent Todd. This, and the possibility that they're just in it for the money, makes Brian's parents just as big a bully as Brian himself.
Oh, and wait a minute… WTF is Brian ratting out Todd for? What happened to the unsaid school rules, the ones where you lost respect amongst the other kids for being a tattletale? Since when has the courtroom drama hit the playground? Too much television. Brian needs therapy.
I doubt they have anything to worry about it court. Any judge would laugh this case right out of court, and Brian's parents would probably foot the bill for everyone's legal fees. Pathetic.
@tenebrism i agree with your point about bringing courtroom drama to school. pretty silly/ unnecessary. that kid was a bully and he was one-upped. he should deal with it. unless he had a strong physical reaction, which would incite some level of drama.
hmm. i wonder how old these kids are.
I'm getting a middle school vibe, but nowadays... who knows. Could be high schoolers.
Katko v. Briney, 183 N.W.2d 657 (Iowa 1971): "[T]he law has always placed a higher value upon human safety than upon mere rights in property."
Hard to argue with that. i suppose if he's asking for advice, the best advice would be to get a lawyer.
I don't think the judge had urine (safety) and Mountain Dew (property) in mind. That decision seemed somewhat fair. Briney may have gone a little overboard. A less extreme booby trap might have worked.
Well, yes, obviously not. But this was a premeditated reprisal. Can "Brian" really steal something that "Todd" explicitly meant him to receive? (Barring proof to the contrary, I think it's safe to assume that the names aren't the only phony part of this story.)
but doesn't Brian's intent (theft) still matter, regardless of Todd's foreknowledge?
It matters in the narrative, certainly. Does it do anything to mitigate Todd's liability? I would say that it doesn't.
i understand your point. but i still have a hard time believing todd is liable if A) despite the set up brian's intent was still theft B) todd didn't directly give the pee to brian.
That Katko v. Briney case reminds me of that booby trap thing down in Florida a couple years back...
http://www.clickorlando.com/news/13408018/detail.html
I just read the update - wtf is up with the principal advising Brian's parents to press charges? Shouldn't there be some sort of conflict mediation before it gets to the lawsuit point?
BLAME THE VICTIM! I mean, if it weren't for the victims (Todd in this case), there would be no crimes, right? It's victim's fault!
On a serious note, though, the school's stance is unacceptable.
I bet Todd was pretty pissed off...
For all the people who are on Brian's side.. think again. Todd has the freedom to carry urine with him around. i will not go steal your coffe and sue you because it was too hot. i don't think matters like this should even be considered to go into court. plus it's not like Todd went and gave Brian the Mountain dew, Brian stole it!!
Exactly. Say, if I had a condom in my pocket and it got punctured somehow, then you stole it, used it and got a sexually transmitted disease (or worse… got your girlfriend pregnant), would I be held responsible? Would I be getting sued for endangering someone's health? Am I responsible for the medical bills? These days... I could be, even if I didn't know about the hole. I don't know… it's kind of the same thing. Maybe not. Probably not.
wait are you saying that getting your girlfriend pregnant would be worse than getting diagnosed with an std? anyway...i think intent matters in a case like this - so since todd knew he was carrying urine, he could be liable (he should check with his lawyer). however, he could also try countersuing brian for inflicting harm on him everyday by stealing his mountain dew.
but how do you weigh todd's intent against brian's? brian's intent was to steal. todd's intent was "just in case" brian wronged him first. they both had an "immoral" intent, but brian's enabled todd's.
In the end one could say that Todd only acted in self defense. The incident in question could be said to be an act of self defense to stop a pattern of aggression towards him. All you have to do is convince the judge (if it actually gets to trial) that Todd acted only with the intent to protect himself from future acts of aggression by Brad. You can use Brad's previous attacks as evidence of a pattern for aggression. If you really wanted to stick it to him, have Todd then ask the judge if it would be possible for a counter suit for harassment under the statue of bullying: harassment (every state has some statute about it, just google your state's harassment statues).
Not Responsible because Todd didnt tell the bully to drink the mountain dew, lol
I hate to game the system, but based on what little I know of the case, Todd could say there was no intent to have the MD consumed. That he simply likes to port his urine in a container. I agree that this case will be thrown out of court.
Just imagine if a bank robber robs a bank, takes the bills, and has a 1-methylamino-anthraquinone (red dye pack) explode in his face: is he going to sue Chase Manhattan for staining his face and clothing?
agree. no way is todd liable. this would never hold up in court. i mean, i guess the bully's lawyers could try to say that todd had a reasonable expectation that the bully would drink it, but i think every judge would be laughing too hard. and besides, the kid didn't actually get sick, did he?
its todds bottle. brian made a choice to STEAL and he paid his price.
people need to praise todd at least he didnt take a gun to school like kids are doing now days he choose a clever and safe way to seek revenge
Todd didn't *give* the bully the bottle. The bully took it. So it's his own damn fault.
Tood got "caught short" on the way to school, used bottle, didn't get the opportunity to dispose of the bottle as Brain drank it first.
Tada~ no intent to harm, just lots of theft and assault from Brain. Call the law get him charged/ warned if his parents are that stupid, and can't be reasoned with.
I'd have to agree with MorganRook, Todd got caught short on the way to school, used the bottle, and didn't get the opportunity to dispose of the bottle before Brian took it an drank it. If the Judge actually entertains this b.s. and listens to this case, Todd's parents should consult their lawyer and see if they can counter sue and say that the mental torment received from Brian caused Todd to not be "in his right mind" when he did this. Use the "he made me do it" stand point and sue them from all court costs and attorneys fees. I would have also gone to the police department and filed charges again Brian for theft. This would be a slap in the face of Brian and his parents. One last point I'd like to say (as a mom of three boys, who has dealt with bullies) WAY TO GO TODD, that idiot got what he deserved!!! Hopefully Brian will use some of that common sense the good lord gave him before he tries this crap again.
Share Your Thoughts