The importance of electrical inspections

[petersonra]

Unfortunately the case was presented to a grand jury and they determined that there was not enough evidence to convict for manslaughter. How they came to this conclusion baffles me.

The answer is that if it was done by someone manifestly unqualified to do so, it is entirely possible that the person doing it was so clueless he did not realize what he had done. The jury may well have taken that into account. I am not inclined to second guess juries when we have virtually no information about what was presented to them.

video was done by a company hired by the Lawrence's attorney for the lawsuit against the electrical contractor.

Who knows what the truth is once lawyers get involved.

 

[369 member]

Thanks for opening this thread. Semper Fi.Buddy

Please feel free to e-mail thie link to this video to anyone who you might feel the information will be usefull to.

Thank You

 

[tomP]

The answer is that if it was done by someone manifestly unqualified to do so, it is entirely possible that the person doing it was so clueless he did not realize what he had done. The jury may well have taken that into account. I am not inclined to second guess juries when we have virtually no information about what was presented to them.


Who knows what the truth is once lawyers get involved.

I would agree to a point, however if I saw correctly (the video is of poor quality and I'm getting old)
this installation was done by an electrical contractor.

If you were the contractor, would you hire or allow a person such as you state
"person doing it was so clueless he did not realize what he had done." to do this work on his own?
I'm sorry sometime I live in my own little world where people do good work just because its the thing to do.

I worked for a contractor who I disagreed with a lot, however he would never have allowed this type of shoddy
unsafe work to be done on his watch by his employees.

 

[realolman]

I'm sorry sometime I live in my own little world where people do good work just because its the thing to do.

Good man. .

 

[petersonra]

I would agree to a point, however if I saw correctly (the video is of poor quality and I'm getting old)
this installation was done by an electrical contractor.

If you were the contractor, would you hire or allow a person such as you state
"person doing it was so clueless he did not realize what he had done." to do this work on his own?
I'm sorry sometime I live in my own little world where people do good work just because its the thing to do.

I worked for a contractor who I disagreed with a lot, however he would never have allowed this type of shoddy
unsafe work to be done on his watch by his employees.

I would point out just a few things.

1. Grand juries routinely indict people on the slimmest of evidence. Since none of us were in the jury room and heard the evidence that was presented, we have no way to know what was presented, or why they declined to indict.

2. Anything coming from a plaintiff's lawyer is tainted and can never be trusted. It never presents a balanced POV, or all the facts in a case. It is designed solely to advance the cause of one side of the case. None of us have even a clue as to what actually happened int his case, and yet we have some who are making pronouncements about it as if they were there when it happened and saw it first hand.

 

[tomP]

Of course I wasn't there, all I was saying was that IF a contractor was involved
it should not have been done the way it was.

Your statement "The answer is that if it was done by someone manifestly unqualified to do so,
it is entirely possible that the person doing it was so clueless he did not realize what he had done."
is a suggestion that somebody had to be unqualified to do work like this.

I suggest that if he knew how to wire a three way, maybe, just maybe, he new better, but wanted to do it the easy and cheap way.

The shame of it all was that a child had to die because of poor work, no matter who did it.

 

[petersonra]

The shame of it all was that a child had to die because of poor work, no matter who did it.

It seems like you have tried and convicted the guy solely on the basis of something that came from someone whose only interest in the case is to make money.

 

[tomP]

It seems like you have tried and convicted the guy solely on the basis of something that came from someone whose only interest in the case is to make money.

What are you attempting to do? I'm willing to argue with you if that is what you wish, however please don't put my foot in my mouth for me, I'm quite capable of doing it for myself.

I realized it sounded as if I was putting down the contractor, so I changed the language in my last post.

What part of "because of poor work, no matter who did it." is placing blame on some particular person?
I said no matter who did it. I didn't name or even suggest who caused it.
I seperated this sentence from the rest of the post so it would be considered seperately.

Your "pronouncement" of evil doing by the plaintiff's lawyer is as if you "were there when it happened and saw it first hand."
Or know him?

It seems you are assuming I meant this "guy" just as you are assuming every attorney
is only out for money at the expense of all else.

 

[George Stolz]

It seems like you have tried and convicted the guy solely on the basis of something that came from someone whose only interest in the case is to make money.

Good point. I would change my sentiment to "based on the veracity of the information presented, I would say the installer was a hack in need of the reception of a book conveyed with due hostility and at a high velocity."

 

[realolman]

Good point. I would change my sentiment to "based on the veracity of the information presented, I would say the installer was a hack in need of the reception of a book conveyed with due hostility and at a high velocity." :wink: __________________

-GeorgeResidential Journeyman, Commercial Apprentice, All-Around Hack , Esq.

 

[petersonra]

It seems you are assuming I meant this "guy" just as you are assuming every attorney
is only out for money at the expense of all else.

Every plaintiff's lawyer is out for money at the expense of all else. That is their job.

 

[tomP]

Every plaintiff's lawyer is out for money at the expense of all else. That is their job.

Sounds like sour grapes to me.

Not all lawyers are liars and misrepresent the truth.
It is their job to win the case by all reasonable means, not at the expense of ALL ELSE.

Just as some electrical contractors are out for money at the expense of the public,
while the majority take their jobs seriously and don't do unsafe work.

You should take some of your own medicine and consider each person
on his record and qualifications.

 

[buildingellicott]

sad stories waiting to happen...

sad stories waiting to happen...

This is a profound thread. Some electrical inspectors would have found the problem, but as some discuss here, others likely would not have. I'm beginning to think that all electrical work must be done by, or done under the direct supervision of, a licensed master electrician. I started a thread called "Burn Danger?" that is related to some issues discussed here, and I certainly would welcome those who have chatted here to send their thoughts on the issue I described. Thanks to Mike Holt who contributes this fine public service, and to all of you who are altruistic with your insights and advice. Mike and his forum are extremely well-respected in the industry and by UL, as I have often heard accolades about mikeholt.com from other well-respected persons in the electrical industry.

 

[Pierre C Belarge]

Not all lawyers are liars and misrepresent the truth.
It is their job to win the case by all reasonable means, not at the expense of ALL ELSE..

I think the percentage you are speaking of is very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, small...kind if hard to even measure.

 

[George Stolz]

This thread is about hack electricians, not lawyers.

We recently had a lawyer-bashing, that should tide everyone over for at least a few more months.

 

[369 member]

On May 24th 2002 Isaac Lawrence was playing in a Yard sprinkler at his babysitters house in Louisville Kentucky when he brushed up against the garage door of a detached garage. He was killed by electrocution by 120 volts that was on the door itself.

No electrical permit had been applied for so no inspection was done. Which would have found the problem immediately with the use of a simple receptacle tester.

Please click on this link to see the computer animation that shows what caused this tragic death.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=2t213B73Yf4

 

[369 member]

I posted the above message because I had the video re-uploaded on youtube and now it is much clearer.

 

[mattsilkwood]

Good point. I would change my sentiment to "based on the veracity of the information presented, I would say the installer was a hack in need of the reception of a book conveyed with due hostility and at a high velocity."

lol, my thoughts exactally