Is Corona Positive Missouri Stylist Liable if someone dies or gets sick

a reply to: JAGStorm

It would depend on several factors. Criminally liable? No. In order to be criminally liable each person would have to be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that their only exposure to anyone infected was with that particular person, and even then they would actually have to contract the illness. That would be impossible, not to mention that each customer was there willingly and knowing there was a chance of risking exposure just by leaving their homes and having contact with anyone really.

Now being civilly liable is another matter and quite possible. It would only have to be proven that "most likely" the stylist was the one who infected them- though they would actually have to have become infected to win a judgement.

There is a third alternative in that existing laws could be intentionally misinterpreted to favor plaintiffs in the situation but if we start sliding down that slippery slope the case(s) would certainly have to start the trip down that long and winding road to the Supreme Court for final, legal interpretation of the law- but right now that line is so long it could take years to get there.

I do think it was wrong for the stylist to be working while knowingly ill and there SHOULD be some sort of repercussions for that, but unless she knowingly had Covid-19 and was INTENTIONALLY trying to give it to others (like those who knowingly have AIDS and have unprotected sex with people without alerting them to their condition) I don't see how she could be successfully prosecuted- especially if she was wearing protective gear.

originally posted by: JAGStorm

We do know you can't join the military if you've had it, and you sure can for the flu.

So if you test positive for the T-cells/antibodies and do not actually have it you still can't join? I don't think that is correct. There is a big difference between had and have,

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

Workers in all industries constantly go to work with infectious diseases. Don't want to ever get sick? Stay the hell home.

We are not talking about something like hepatitis here... it is about 4 weeks max from start to finish, and normally a lot less than that.

a reply to: crayzeed

I likened it to the Aids problem. Men and women knowing they had Aids as a type of revenge went out to infect as many people as they could. As far as I know there were a couple of people prosecuted for knowingly giving some one a "death sentence". I don't know if they were successful in the courts, but technically it could be classed as attempted murder.

That's an apropos example, in my opinion.

a reply to: scraedtosleep

We would have to find case law that ended in a guilty verdict.

A former McDonald's worker in California who is accused of spitting on a hamburger that was served to a uniformed police officer will stand trial, a judge ruled.
Tatyana Hargrove was arrested in November 2019 and faces a felony charge of willfully poisoning food, online court records show.

www.nbcnews.com...

(CBS/AP) IRON MOUNTAIN, Mich. - A 24-year-old former McDonald's restaurant employee who prosecutors say spit into a police officer's sandwich in Michigan has been sentenced to at least 29 months behind bars.

www.cbsnews.com...

These days people are being arresting for deliberately coughing and spitting on people in mask wearing protest.

I think there certainly are lawyers who take a case against the hairdressers, in this case.

a reply to: crayzeed

Let's say that this car company was saling cars, but cars had a 30% percent chance of blowing up and sending the buyer to a firey grave, and all the buyers knew it. How much blame would you place on the customer for buying a car? All the blame goes to the customer.

When you choose to go out in a pandemic the fault rests entirely on your own shoulders.

originally posted by: crayzeed
a reply to: JAGStorm
I had this conversation in an earlier thread. I likened it to the Aids problem. Men and women knowing they had Aids as a type of revenge went out to infect as many people as they could. As far as I know there were a couple of people prosecuted for knowingly giving some one a "death sentence". I don't know if they were successful in the courts, but technically it could be classed as attempted murder.

You would then have to prove malicious intent on the part of the stylist.

The symptoms of COVID-19 are general enough that in its mild form especially you could think you have one of a slew of different illness or even allergies, this being heavy allergy season. Considering that you have a hard time getting testing unless you are really ill, how would you know? The bigger issue is that the stylist was allowed to work while showing symptoms, but again, what were the symptoms? The universal check mark is a temperature, and not every sufferer of COVID-19 symptoms shows a fever right away or even at all.

Being HIV positive is pretty specific.

a reply to: JAGStorm

Its a tricky question legally.

Are people forced to participate? Are we going to start litigation against anyone who ever gets us sick?

Theres also the possibility that "asymptomatic" patients simply have viral pieces of genetic material that arent actually infectious. Due to the nature of PCR tests, it doesnt really discern between benign coronavirus pieces and actual, full fledged infectious virus.

And given how pathogens spread through the atmosphere, things like lockdowns may be completely outdated concepts anyway.

I say we do what we always have; if you are coming down with something, try to stay home. Thats not always possible, but maybe nowadays it will be made more feasible.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: JAGStorm

We do know you can't join the military if you've had it, and you sure can for the flu.

So if you test positive for the T-cells/antibodies and do not actually have it you still can't join? I don't think that is correct. There is a big difference between had and have,

www.militarytimes.com...

If an applicant fails screening, according to the memo, they won’t be tested, but they can return in 14 days if they’re symptom-free. Anyone who has been diagnosed with COVID-19 will have to wait until 28 days after diagnosis to report to MEPS.

Upon return, a diagnosis will be marked as “permanently disqualifying” for accession. Recruits can apply for waivers for all permanently disqualifying conditions, including surviving COVID-19. However, without any further guidance for exceptions dealing with COVID-19, a review authority would have no justification to grant a waiver.

Maxwell declined to explain why a coronavirus diagnosis would be permanently disqualifying, compared to other viral, non-chronic illnesses that do not preclude military service.

“permanently disqualifying”

originally posted by: JAGStorm

originally posted by: iwanttobelieve70
Unless the business you go to is the only human contact you have within the incubation period and you test everyone after every contact with another person or as we have learned animals as well you don’t know where you got sick.

More scare tactics.

Let's assume, they can prove that is where a person got it.
Let's say elderly lady literally only left house once in a month, to get her hair done and got it there.

Only if she's a preper who has refused all guests, mail, packages, and all forms of delivery or human contact since before covid. And it has to be before anyone knew it's existence, last August might work.

a reply to: JAGStorm

Pretty sure they changed that since that particular article was published. Now they are saying only those who spent time in ICU for Covid-19 are permanently disqualified.

The Pentagon has reversed course on a policy barring anyone previously diagnosed with the illness caused by the novel coronavirus from serving in uniform, officials said this week. But COVID-19 survivors could still face roadblocks when trying to join the military.

Guidance issued to recruit processing stations that said anyone with a reported history of COVID-19 would be disqualified from military service has been rescinded, Matthew Donovan, defense undersecretary for personnel and readiness, told reporters Thursday.

Linky

a reply to: JAGStorm

There was a thread about that, and reports there were that it was old news and had already been walked back.

a reply to: GeauxHomeYoureDrunk

Beat me to it.

originally posted by: JAGStorm

We do know you can't join the military if you've had it, and you sure can for the flu.

Not true. That was rescinded almost as fast as it was announced. I wouldn't call it Fake News, though it amounts to the same thing, simply because it was not intentional. But you gotta keep up.

From 4 days ago: www.militarytimes.com...

a reply to: Jason79

And even then.. She could still get infected.

Im also still convinced that statement from the military (now rescinded) has little to do with the virus, and more to do with shaping the non-human future of our military.

a reply to: schuyler

Thanks!
From your link:

For the military’s purposes, whether it causes irreparable lung damage could figure heavily in terms of combat readiness. And as the services brace for a resurgence in infections, it’s still unknown whether COVID-19 antibodies provide immunity to re-infection, or could perhaps make someone more susceptible to a second round of the disease.

“It sort of depends,” he said. “Any infectious disease, we want to make sure they’re not infectious at the time. There’s a lot of unknowns about this virus right now. Are ther are there any long-term, lasting effects? That’s what our health care professionals are looking at right now.”

Not sure if this a green light as much as it is passing the buck/blame to doctors.
I'd be curious if anyone that had Covid has been cleared to go to training....

originally posted by: JAGStorm

“permanently disqualifying”

I wouldn't hold my breath for too long over this. They said they want to ensure there isn't further complications with the virus, so I expect this to be very short live guidance.

originally posted by: Plotus
"
One hundred-forty clients at a hair salon in Missouri may have been exposed to COVID-19 after a second hairstylist at the location tested positive for the coronavirus.

had been exposed after a stylist worked for eight days while showing symptoms.



I'm just curious what everyone's thoughts are on this? I think we're going to see a lot more stuff like this in the near future.

I think it is one thing to go back to work, I think it's another if you go to work knowing you have symptoms."


Well of course... Anyone with a lick of sense should it is completely reckless and criminal to take a possible lethal illness to a place where people will be directly infected in All likely hood. YES CERTAINLY any individual doing such a despicable act with fore knowledge should be held responsible, up to and including prison or jail time.

a reply to: JAGStorm

well at least in jail they dont have to worry about getting food or paying rent right?

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: Plotus
"
One hundred-forty clients at a hair salon in Missouri may have been exposed to COVID-19 after a second hairstylist at the location tested positive for the coronavirus.

had been exposed after a stylist worked for eight days while showing symptoms.



I'm just curious what everyone's thoughts are on this? I think we're going to see a lot more stuff like this in the near future.

I think it is one thing to go back to work, I think it's another if you go to work knowing you have symptoms."


Well of course... Anyone with a lick of sense should it is completely reckless and criminal to take a possible lethal illness to a place where people will be directly infected in All likely hood. YES CERTAINLY any individual doing such a despicable act with fore knowledge should be held responsible, up to and including prison or jail time.

a reply to: JAGStorm

well at least in jail they dont have to worry about getting food or paying rent right?

Well yea-but... they are infectious there too. But it's damn wrong for them to infect knowingly or even suspecting they have the virus....

Well, almost everyone I have talked to around here has had symptoms that could be covid related. For most it is just like a mild flu or cold. Almost all viruses give you a loss of taste, same with a cough. Not all covid patients have a dry cough either, some have a more muccousy cough.

The symptoms are all over the place, similar to multiple diseases. Why should someone be liable for spreading a disease when they think they just got seasonal allergies or a cold? Everyone who had symptoms here that went to the doctor just got told it was not covid because their symptoms did not match...now those not matching symptoms are actually considered symptoms. But not many people died, and even when they did get tested, the vast majority of people did not have covid.

Of course they will have ambulance chasing lawyers suing every business to make bucks. We need to stop the liability of businesses on something like this, I always get muccousy and a cough this time of year....I have allergies right after the snow leaves till rains wash the mold and mildew from the leaves into the grass roots. Am I going to get sued because I cough?

originally posted by: Plotus

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: Plotus
"
One hundred-forty clients at a hair salon in Missouri may have been exposed to COVID-19 after a second hairstylist at the location tested positive for the coronavirus.

had been exposed after a stylist worked for eight days while showing symptoms.



I'm just curious what everyone's thoughts are on this? I think we're going to see a lot more stuff like this in the near future.

I think it is one thing to go back to work, I think it's another if you go to work knowing you have symptoms."


Well of course... Anyone with a lick of sense should it is completely reckless and criminal to take a possible lethal illness to a place where people will be directly infected in All likely hood. YES CERTAINLY any individual doing such a despicable act with fore knowledge should be held responsible, up to and including prison or jail time.

a reply to: JAGStorm

well at least in jail they dont have to worry about getting food or paying rent right?

Well yea-but... they are infectious there too. But it's damn wrong for them to infect knowingly or even suspecting they have the virus....

You cannot be going in for a covid test every time you have a symptom that could be covid....on top of that almost half the covid people have no symptoms at all.