Why is it so diffucult for so many folks to understand that *both* of the following can be true, simultaneously: * Josh Hancock was incredibly stupid, foolish, reckless, and blameworthy; * Other people besides Josh Hancock contributed to the accident, and might bear a portion of the blame. Why are these concepts viewed as mutually exclusive? They're not. I think a lot of people just don't believe point number two is true. he said that they both could be true. if point number two isn't true, then hancock will lose. but that determination has to be made by a judge/jury, not message board majority. And that is what is going to happen. People are just voicing their opinion. I don't think anyone believes that the message board majority is going to overrule the legal system here. Truste me, I know our legal system is the best on the planet and without it the government/police could run amuck. I just think a lot of people were flabbergasted that Hancock's father filed the lawsuit given what everyone had heard about it. I've got no problem with it going to court. I still think they will lose on all counts. Should be interesting.