David Weaving is serving a sentence for manslaughter after he'd struck and killed a Connecticut teenager, riding a bike, with his car several months back. The case is back in the news because after the victim's parents filed suit against Weaving, he's turned around and filed a counter-suit, claiming said parents were guilty of "contributory negiligence" in allowing their son to ride his bike, I'm assuming, in open traffic. Weaving is asking for $15,000 in damages.
Basically, this counter-suit is sour grapes on the part of Weaving, who obviously didn't see the kid until it was too late to slam on the brakes and stop his car in time to avoid contact. But who in their right mind would try something like this? The case is closed, Weaving's doing his time, but apparently, he still feels he was wronged by the system. From a legal standpoint, they're saying "it's just part of the process". Oh, really?
If Weaving paid closer attention to the traffic, he wouldn't be in this fix. He's trying to shift the blame for the accident on the victim. Real swift, pally. NOT! I've got a set of weasel ears for you, direct from mamby-pamby land.