Kidnapper sues victims who escaped for breach of contract


37 Responses to “Kidnapper sues victims who escaped for breach of contract”

  1. Antinous / Moderator says:

    How do these things not get immediately dismissed?

  2. Hanglyman says:

    How did he find a lawyer who would agree to something so obviously destined to fail? Did he hold the lawyer at knifepoint too?

  3. Roberto Baca says:

    It’s so hard to find good kidnapping victims these days. Another thing illegal immigrants will soon take over.

  4. jarmstrong says:

    It is about to get immediately dismissed, as “the Rowley’s attorney filed a motion to dismiss earlier this month.”  And Dimmick did not find a lawyer to file this case, he is representing himself (per the article).

    Dimmick has probably been incarcerated since his arrest and certainly since his conviction and sentencing.  Some prisoners work out, some read books, some find religion, and some sue anybody and everybody they can think of.  Whatever gets you through the night.

  5. Dan Wallace says:

    He should have sued them for cruel and unusual punishment after having to sit through Robin Williams’ Patch Adams. 

  6. Ianto_Jones says:

    Convicted criminals who bring these sorts of frivolous cases out of stupidity or simply so they can continue to torment their victims should automatically have the length of their original sentence doubled.

  7. Zero Sonico says:

    Sounds like a case for Jim Carrey.

    Oh, Fletcher!

  8. querent says:

    I assumed this was going to be a scientology story.

  9. Davey says:

    For a moment I thought I’d confused BB with The Onion and that this had to be a parody news article but nope…genuine.

  10. Stefan Jones says:

    If this was a side-story in an episode of Breaking Bad, involving Saul the As Seen On TV lawyer, I’d think it was entertainingly absurd.

  11. Palomino says:

    I wonder what kind of contract he thought he had with the individual he murdered. 

  12. Trent Baker says:

    Contracts made under duress are not binding.

  13. Warren_Terra says:

    As has already been repeatedly noted, the article contains the following key sentence:

    Mr. Dimmick is representing himself.

    He’s got nothing better to do with his time than think up legal cases to bring – and in this case, he was already involved in a legal tussle with his victims, because they were suing him for damages. It’s funny, and it’ll get tossed in a hot minute, but it’s probably a better use of his time than watching Patch Adams.

  14. Brainspore says:

    Competent kidnappers know that oral contracts are less binding than rope and duct tape.

  15. Patrick Spargur says:

    Would it be possible for someone here to rewrite this story as a string of facebook updates and tweets? I believe it is the only way to truly grasp the moment by moment drama.

  16. nathanroberts says:

    Further proof that you can sue absolutely anyone over absolutely anything. (Even if it gets laughed out of court in the first five minutes)

  17. bardfinn says:

    My verdict:
    Dismissed with prejudice, plaintiff is fined $60,000.00 plus court costs plus defendant’s legal costs, Plaintiff is hereby ordered to perform 2000 hours of community service.

  18. robuluz says:

    I like the way the article shows the cover of ‘Patch Adams’, as though endorsing it for emergency use in  home invasion hostage situations.

    It could be kept in a glass case beside the DVD player.

    “Heeey there, crazy knife wielding murderer guy who just broke into our house, lets all take it easy now. Why don’t we just chill and watch this movie I have here  (*sound of glass breaking*) Oh wow, ‘Patch Adams’! Honey, grab some Cheetos… (*sound of glass breaking from kitchen*).”

  19. Guest says:

    I’d pay to see the judge’s response to this.

  20. subtle says:

    I don’t know. Suing someone you have horribly wronged for an absurd reason? Sounds to me like this gentleman would have an excellent career arguing foreclosure law on the behalf of US Bank.

  21. benher says:

    Can they afford to litigate though? Maybe they should just settle. He’s only demanding a Patch Adams Blu-Ray and a big gulp of DP…

  22. Jason Crume says:

    The kidnap victims should be requesting attorney fees and sanctions because this is a frivolous claim.  A plaintiff acting pro se has to follow the Rules of Professional conduct and a lawyer cannot file a frivolous law suit.

    • DeargDoom says:

      Any legal expertise I have comes from watching Judge Judy but as far as I can tell from the article the kidnapper is the defendant and the two victims are the plaintiffs. He is counter suing with a claim which will presumably cause nothing other than amusement.

    • blueelm says:

      Hope they filed for damages in addition to the criminal trial. It would be funny. If I were a lawyer I’d honestly have represented the couple for free, just for the chance to write that utterly hilarious motion for dismissal. 

  23. ciacontra says:

    Wow, their attorney was probably just bored and laughing his head off.  Either #3 or #4 is quite enough to toss this psycho’s motion.

    I just have to wonder what sort of damages he was seeking? 

  24. OriGuy says:

    Judges tend to give pro se plaintiffs a little extra leeway. It doesn’t sound like the case has gotten to a preliminary hearing, though. It probably won’t last past that.

  25. Jeremy Wilson says:

    What really sucks is that the couple will have to pay an attorney to deal with it, even though it is completely ridiculous.   When it’s dismissed, will they be reimbursed for fees?

  26. bart says:

    From the original article, last paragraph:

    >Mr. Dimmick is representing himself.

  27. Lobster says:

    “The couple lulled Dimmick with a clever strategy of watching Robin Williams’s Patch Adams with him while eating Cheetos and drinking Dr Pepper.”

    A shared trauma can bring people together. 

  28. Colin Rosenthal says:

    I think this guy is actually being paid by the editors of a new Yiddish dictionary who are trying to improve the definition of “chutzpah”.

Leave a Reply