3 ms·
I also have a common name. I was once called to the principal's office, where I, confused, started to receive a lecture. THEY: <confusing nonsense> I: Wha
by logfromblammo 10y ago
I also have a common name. I was once called to the principal's office, where I, confused, started to receive a lecture.
THEY: <confusing nonsense>
I: What are you talking about?
THEY: You know what I'm talking about. Don't play dumb.
I: (after 10 seconds of thought) How many people named $NAME attend this school?
THEY: <checking records>
THEY: ... Two. Get back to class! Now!
No apology. No sign of contrition. They acted like it was my fault that they screwed up. If it had ever happened more than once, I certainly would have raised some hell over it.
They truly do not care. If there is a problem, it is your fault, for being an inconveniently irregular person. I shudder to think at how many of us would be inconvenienced if any one of the other people than share my name and birthdate were disreputable or notorious among certain government agencies.
Anecdotally, municipal and circuit court judges could care less about whether you get treated fairly or not, so long as your case does not make their job even one iota more difficult. You could do 110% of their work for them, and they still might rule capriciously, telling you to appeal if you don't like it.
The thing that pissed me off most about the article was the innocent party pleading guilty and paying fines. It made me want to leap through my screen and scream at her in person.
- gpawl 10y agoI think you mean you are being an inconveniently regular person, for having a common name. > It made me want to leap through my screen and scream at her in person. That would be attacking the victim, not the person who deserves to be screamed at.
- lostlogin 10y agoWho is that person? It appears to be the system rather than an individual.
- logfromblammo 10y agoBeing a victim doesn't mean you can't also do something scream-worthy on its own merits while that is happening. I'd like to scream at everyone who pleads guilty to something they know they didn't do. I'd also like to scream at people who take a confidential settlement that allows the other party to continue avoiding ultimate accountability for their actions, possibly creating victims of other people in the future. They may have valid personal reasons for doing it, but "seeking an outcome better for me at the expense of everyone else" is not a strategy that engenders a lot of sympathy in me.
- lostlogin 10y agoif she had gone for the "not guilty option" she would have missed out on a job and faced much higher financial costs. How would that have helped?
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- logfromblammo 10y agoWe cannot say for certain what would have happened if she had done something other than the thing she actually did. I have a common name, and some jobs that required background checks, and the most I have ever had to do regarding felons with similar names to my own is sign a note saying that none of those people were me. If I were in her situation today, I would ask the company for the mailing address of its corporate attorney, and go from there.