'Drunk Boy' brought to you by Applebee's (1 Viewer)

[Chu Gai]

Let's see. You take your kid out someplace to dinner. Kid says the drink tastes yucky. You, the parent ignore it. The kid sips it again. Says it still tastes terrible. You the parent ignore it. Then only after the kid is blasted on alcohol and is now acting erratically do you, the parent, taste it? Glad she's a concerned parent.

 

[MarkHastings]

Looks more like something from "My Name is Earl"

Number 329: "Got Joy's kid drunk at Applebee's".




p.s. The photo is obviously a publicity photo for the N.Y. Times, so I can't exactly rule out fraud due to the "staged" nature of the photo. But, that aside, I also feel this was a set-up.

 

[David Williams]

I have a gut feeling, judging by the pic & the story, that the kid is a holy terror and this was someone at Applebee's idea of how to deal with him. The article more than gives the impression that the child was being very difficult before he became drunk. The mother certainly seems to have exaggerated the details of the story to make herself look better. She was probably too wrapped up in her own conversation that she wasn't paying the slightest bit of attention. The kid probably slurped the concoction down happily. If it was a scam I would have expected to hear, loud and long, from the restaurant/chain that the server/bartender/etc. absolutely did not do this by now. The incident happened in July and the story was first published in yesterday's Post. So where is the rebuttal?

What I find particularly interesting is that the national media hasn't picked up the story yet, except for Fox News Channel whose parent company owns the NY Post. I wonder if the local NYC media has picked up the story. This seems exactly the kind of sensational news that would get picked up fast considering the Ayala Wendy's Chili hoax... Maybe we're just ahead of it?

 

[Paul Padilla]

LMFAO

 

[Paul Padilla]

Yeah...that's the ticket...let's give alcohol to a small child instead of...oh...I don't know...asking them to leave :rolleyes

 

[EugeneR]

Not that weirder things haven't happened, but there just seem to be many problems with that story. I say setup.

 

[Lynda-Marie]

My b.s. detector is going redline on this one.

I commented to my mom when I was three that a french fry looked funny. She picked it up, and saw that the fry had lipstick on it. Needless to say, the manager got an earful from both my parents about it. I don't remember the incident directly, but it was a favorite of my mom's to tell at social gatherings.

I am in wholehearted agreement with everyone else here - the "concerned" mother does not wonder at the very beginning why the child is complaining about a "yuchy" drink until the erratic behavior starts? WTF? With all of the awareness of food borne illnesses [e.coli, salmonella, etc.] it does not bother her that her child is consuming something that tastes wrong?

 

[MikeH1]

And in case you missed it the first time

[url=http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/9669/news010820060037cg.jpg] [/url]

 

[Mark Sherman]

Reading that story and seeing the picture this is all I could think of



Kickin back at Applebees down the street, smokin indo, sippin on gin and juice
Laid back [with my mind on my money and my money on my mind]



this kid could be the new spokes person for barcardi. Yo Change my Diaper BE-ATCH

 

[MarkHastings]

LOL - A young Billy Dee Williams.

 

[Dave Poehlman]

I'm with you on this one, Lynda. Couple that with the fact that it was actually served in a child's cup tells me something fishy is going on. That would mean the bartender would've had to knowingly mix a long-island-iced-tea in a plastic cup.

The only way I think this might have happened is if the bartender was mixing a "to go" cup for one of his/her friends and it got mixed up with the kid's drink. But, for the mother not to check it?!?!?

We frequent a local Mexican restaurant and sometimes will buy our son a virgin margarita because he feels left out not getting a frosty drink like us. But, I always double check it by taking a sip first to make sure it is indeed "virgin" before I give it to him.

 

[Rob Gardiner]

Paul,


I agree. The woman's story sounds highly "questionable".

 

[Dave Poehlman]

Two sips?


I'd like to hear what the kid's blood alcohol level was then... it's not mentioned in the article. I'm sure they tested it.

 

[Holadem]

Uh... That's exactly what she implied.

A Long Island Iced Tea is one of the more potent drinks out there (it happens to be my fav). I have seen women in their 20s get flushed after just a couple of sips from their glasses. I wouldn't out right dismiss the idea that a 5 y/o kid would be affected by a couple of sips as well.

--
H

 

[BrianW]

I agree with the sentiment that damages (including reasonable pain and suffering) alone should be the restitution in a civil suit. However, I would make an exception, in very egregious cases, to award additional punitive damages -- not so the plaintiff can "make money" from the situation, but so the defendant will think twice before doing something so stupid ever again.

Sometimes a civil lawsuit is not just about recovering damages. It's also about teaching a lesson and putting a halt to socially careless or life-threatening behavior.

[Edit: This whole story seems fishy to me too. The "...because of the nasty drink" comment from the kid is just too convenient. Kids don't know why they behave the way they do even in their most lucid moments.]

 

[Ricardo C]

I though that too at first, but then I figured the taste of the drink must have been disgusting enough to the kid that he would "blame it" for how he was feeling.

 

[MarkHastings]

Brian, I totally agree with you. The thing is, while I agree that a stiff fine should be instituted (to make sure the offending party learns a lesson), I also don't think that the money should go to the plaintiff.

There has to be a way for people to teach a company a lesson, without allowing them to profit tremendously from it. You'd see a LOT less 'frivolous' law suits if people weren't allowed to make so much money from these types of cases.

But yes, there has to be a way (in legitimate cases) where the offending company learns a lesson....

Hey, I know! If you REALLY want to make the business learn a lesson, give the money to their competition.

 

[Dave Simpson]

Can't agree with this, Holadem. A Long Island Iced Tea is no more, or less, potent than a rum&coke, 7&7, vodka/soda, etc., assuming the same volume of spirits. From the website of the LLBO, the government body that regulates the sale of alcohol in Ontario, Canada:

" A drink is a drink is a drink. A 12-oz. bottle of beer (5% alc./vol.), a 5-oz. glass of wine (12% alc./vol.) or a 1.5-oz. serving of spirits (40% alc./vol.) – each has the same alcohol content."

The Long Island Iced Tea might taste more potent, but it ain't. In fact, a two-ounce LIIT could be argued to be less potent than a two-ounce screwdriver, for example, because the screwdriver is made with vodka only at 40% alc./vol. (plus the oj). The LIIT is made with vodka, rum and gin, all at 40%, and triple sec, a liquer that is somewhat less strong the other ingrediants (perhpas 20% or 25%). And just because the recipe calls for four (or five, depending on the barman) types of booze, it doesn't mean there's an ounce of each in there. You can bet in a chain joint such as such as Applbee's, that strict liquor controls are in place (but perhaps not so strict, obviously,in this case). Cheers.

DS.

 

[Marko Berg]

How about revoking their licence to sell alcohol (assuming such a licence is necessary) for a month or two? That would effectively do what you want, send the customers to their competition.

 

[MarkHastings]

Marko, that's a really great suggestion. And it would do exactly what the plaintiff wants...make the company pay. Although I'm sure there's a lot of people who wouldn't think that was fair They'd rather have the thousands and millions of dollars.

It's so weird how people can put a price on their loved ones well being. :frowning: