Knowing when to quit
Just when you think someone is doing something for the right reason, the greedy side of human nature rears its ugly head.
Last week I wrote about the mother who was suing Wal-Mart for detaining her for police questioning about snapshots of her 3-year-old daughter playing topless in the backyard swimming pool and lying on a rug with her bare bottom showing.
Initially, the mom was suing the huge retailer for $75,000 in damages, plus an unspecified amount of punitive damages. That $75,000 seemed relatively fair considering the company caused the woman and her children a huge amount of embarrassment.
As a mother who had taken similar photos of my child in earlier years, I thought her concerns were justified and valid. So too, did many others nationwide, who thought Wal-Mart was out of line.
Ah, there's the rub.
Riding the waves of national attention, her attorneys announced Thursday they would amend the initial complaint to include Salina police officers and individual Wal-Mart employees involved in the incident. They're now seeking $5 million in damages.
Oh please.
For the most part, Wal-Mart employees are usually not paid much more than minimum wage. These one-hour photo lab employees were just doing their jobs and following training instructions which require them to report when photos attract attention. Also, the police were doing their jobs — granted, they probably could have found a less conspicuous way to do it than by escorting the woman through the store to the manager's office.
And of course, when you sue the police department, you sue the city — in this case Salina. Most likely, the suit will be settled and the city's insurance carrier will pick up the tab. However, that will eventually translate into increased insurance rates — which taxpayers will foot.
It will be curious to see if the tide of public opinion — which has been mostly supportive of the mothers' side — will shift.
Personally, I think they should have quit while they were ahead.
— KATHY HAGEMAN
