OCR Text |
Show . THE READER'S COURTROOM Trigger-Happy Cop Was Guilty By Will Bernard, LL.B May a Policeman Shoot His Gun Just Because It is Halloween? It was Halloween and several boys' gathered in an alley to hatch plans for the evening. A passing policeman noticed the little group, and decided to have some fun. He drew his revolver and fired into the ground. Unfortunately the bullet bul-let ricocheted upward, and struck A college student took his father for a ride 'one morning, to show how well he could drive. While speeding around a curve, the youth lost control of the car and crashed into a tree injuring his father. Now, it so happened that the young man was protected by liability insurance. in-surance. The father therefore decided de-cided to sue his son for damages, figuring that the money would be paid by the insurance company anyhow. But the judge threw the case out of court. The judge said such a lawsuit was unnatural. Is a Doctor's Private Life Subject to Public Scrutiny? An unmarried doctor moved into a small town and soon developed a flourishing practice. However, he also managed to become involved in-volved in numerous romantic escapades. esca-pades. His reputation became so notorious that the state medical board finally investigated the situation. situa-tion. The board found evidence of Qk Jx'f Nobody' one of the youngsters in the leg. Arrested on a charge of assault, the officer explained that he "just wanted to give the boys a scare." But the court ruled out his excuse and found the policeman guilty as charged. The judge said that shooting shoot-ing a gun just to scare somebody was not allowed even on Hallo-Ween! Hallo-Ween! A man took his friend for a ride. After awhile they stopped in a narrow nar-row alley and began drinking. When they were good and drunk, the friend took over the wheel and they started driving again. But as they were leaving the alley, the car struck and killed a woman who was walking ahead. Both men were arrested for homicide. The owner of the car tried to shift all the blame onto his friend, but the court found them both guilty. The judge said that the owner's action was reprehensible. 'ross immorality," and promptly prompt-ly revoked the doctor's license. The doctor thereupon sued the board, claiming that his private life was "nobody's business but my own." However, the court upheld the board's action. The judge said that it would be "degrading to the medical medi-cal profession to clothe a grossly immoral man with the authority to enter people's homes in the character charac-ter of a physician." |