Connect with us

Lifestyle

Terrance Lewis, a Wrongfully Convicted Man, Finds Hope of Starting Anew by Removing Tattoos

mm

Published

on

Terrance Lewis spent almost 21 years in the jail. He was put behind the bars for a crime which he actually did not commit. His imprisonment was over in May and he became a free man. Lewis was being exonerated of second-degree murder.

Post his release from jail, Lewis decided to start life in a new way. To begin with, he initially decided to remove some skin-deep reminders of his past. Recently on Wednesday he was spotted walking into a tattoo removal clinic. He took help from the Center City Philadelphia tattoo removal center. He wanted to permanently rid his flesh of the ink markings and some hair using diode laser, that were representing his old life with a hope that he could start anew.

A special program was conducted on National Tattoo Removal Day. Free tattoo removals were offered by way of I Now Know (INK) program to survivors of sex trafficking, former gang members and also to people like Lewis who were previously incarcerated. Lewis was one among the five people who was in receipt of free tattoo removal treatments at the Finery.

According to Carmen Brodie, owner of the Finery – they could manage to help nearly 100 people through their INK program which was held in four different locations of the center. Brodie is of the opinion that the gratitude shown by the people she helps makes it all worthwhile. She also remarked that the center has often witnessed people coming back and thanking them for returning their life back

Lewis with an intention to clean his closet went for removal of the tattoo. He said that in his journey till date he did carry some luggage. Also there was some unwanted luggage in it that relates emotionally, physically and even mentally. All I am trying to do is clearing it off.”

Initially the laser specialist slowly removed the “Stink” tattoo from the wrist of Lewis. Stink represented his childhood nickname. Then Mob began to disappear. Mob was inked on his wrist shortly after entering prison. Though Lewis did feel some pain but he was still laughing and smiling perhaps with a hope to start anew.

The idea of Bigtime Daily landed this engineer cum journalist from a multi-national company to the digital avenue. Matthew brought life to this idea and rendered all that was necessary to create an interactive and attractive platform for the readers. Apart from managing the platform, he also contributes his expertise in business niche.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Lifestyle

What “Reasonable Person” Standard Is Applicable When Determining Negligence?

mm

Published

on

In order to determine negligence, the reasonable person test asks if a person’s actions are consistent with what would be anticipated of a generally careful and sensible person in the same situation. Stated otherwise, did the accused act in a way that would have been expected of a reasonable person? 

In Florida, determining who is legally liable for an accident depends critically on the issue of carelessness. The “reasonable person standard” is the foundation of this assessment. Your personal injury lawyer can explain the “reasonable person standard” and how it can apply to your case if you are hurt in an accident in Florida. 

The Reasonable Person Standard: What Is It?

Legally speaking, the reasonable person standard offers a yardstick by which someone’s actions are assessed in cases of negligence. “How would a reasonable person have acted under the same circumstances?” is the central question it poses. Jurors and judges are asked this question in order to assist them in determining whether a person’s acts (or inactions) fall short of the expected standard of care that a reasonably prudent person would follow.

Like in many other jurisdictions, Florida does not base its reasonable person criterion on what an especially cautious or risk-averse person would do. Rather, it represents the behaviors of a composite of what the community expects of each individual. A reasonable individual would, for example, observe traffic laws when driving, heed warning signs, and refrain from needlessly endangering other people.

Utilizing the Reasonable Person Standard to Determine Negligence

The activities of the parties involved in a personal injury lawsuit are rigorously examined in light of this reasonable person standard. If it is determined that an individual’s actions do not correspond with what a reasonable person would have done in the same situation, negligence has been proven.

According to the law, proof of someone’s negligence is insufficient; strong, convincing evidence is required. Your personal injury lawyer is essential to this procedure because they have to painstakingly gather evidence showing how the negligent party strayed from what a reasonable person would have done. Piecing together facts, testimony, and any footage or recordings that can definitively demonstrate that their activities were in violation of the recognized norms of safety and care is more important than simply focusing on what they did or did not do.

This proof could take the form of eyewitness statements that refute the version of events provided by the person at fault or security footage that captures the moment of negligence. Something as small as skipping a scheduled maintenance or ignoring a warning alert might have a big impact. Your personal injury attorney seeks to establish beyond a shadow of a doubt that the defendant’s acts were not just improper but directly caused others to be put in danger by providing a thorough picture of their negligence. 

How Does This Impact Your Case for Personal Injury?

In a personal injury case, knowing the reasonable person standard is essential. In the event of an accident, this standard might assist you in proving liability if you think the other person was careless.

You should be aware that your activities will be evaluated in comparison to the hypothetical reasonable person’s behavior in situations where you might be held culpable. It doesn’t matter what you meant or thought was appropriate; what matters is what the community would anticipate from someone in your situation.

Although navigating the complexities of the reasonable person standard might be challenging, Florida’s negligence law heavily relies on this standard. A fair appraisal of the facts is essential when seeking justice following an injury accident, and comprehending this criterion is crucial.

Continue Reading

Trending