Eye Injury from G-String
 

Another interesting news story.

JUNE 17--As she was attempting to put on a Victoria's Secret thong, a Los Angeles woman claims that a decorative metallic piece flew off the garment and struck her in the eye, causing injuries and a new product liability lawsuit against the underwear giant. Macrida Patterson, 52, alleges that she was hurt last May by a defective "low-rise v-string" from the Victoria's Secret "Sexy Little Thing" line, according to a lawsuit filed last week in Los Angeles Superior Court. A copy of her June 9 complaint, which does not specify monetary damages, can be found below. Patterson's lawyer, Jason Buccat, told TSG that a "design problem" caused the decorative piece to come loose and strike Patterson in the eye, causing damage to her cornea. He added that the eye injury, which caused Patterson to miss a few days of work, will be "affecting her the rest of her life." Patterson is a traffic officer with L.A.'s Department of Transportation. Prior to the lawsuit's filing, Victoria's Secret officials asked to examine the garment and the decorative piece, but that request was rejected by Patterson's counsel. For those unfamiliar with "v-strings," the undergarment is the Victoria's Secret variant on the "g-string," which has long been favored in the battle against visible panty lines.

What crap. This is what is wrong with America.

If a defective can opener malfunctioned due to inadequate quality control in the manufacturing process, and jettisoned shrapnel into the unsuspecting eye of the operator, would any resulting litigation be "what's wrong" with America?

I agree. No 52 year old woman should be putting on a Victoria's Secret Thong. Especially one with sequins or sparkly things attached to it.

What is the world coming to?

The point is people sue at the drop of a hat. Not all all accidents are due to "inadequate quality control in the manufacturing process". But you sure can find some shister lawyer out there looking to make a buck on it.

Everything being made in China is what's wrong with America party member comrade. Only when the workers control the means of production will we be able to safely put on sexy garments in safety.

And not all people are looking to sue at the drop of a hat. And not all lawyers are looking to make a quick, dishonest buck. Sometimes there is legitimate fault that the court systems have been designed to address.

The "funny email" circuit would have the distinction made based on the comedy value of the scenario. Is that a valid legal distinction, or just a quick pat-on-the-back for our confirmation bias?

You never see a "funny email" about the majority of legitimate, albeit not as entertaining, court cases.

First person to mention the old lady who burned her crotch off with McD's coffee gets kicked in the cunt.

:::kicks jinx in the cunt:::

HA-ha

If they sue at a drop of a hat, it's because the corporations you are so proud to defend insist on making defective products, calculating that risk of a suit is less expensive than fixing the damn defects in the first place.

BTW that's shyster.

Bad corps.... Bad!

I think they should all close up shop and move to China!

Oh, wait! most of them did....

Ok, well fuck it than, close some more factories and move THEM to China!

Ok, no problem.

(idiots)

i'm sure this is a case of inappropriate thongage. the woman was obviously too robust to be wearing those kind of undies, and the tension exerted caused a wardrobe malfunction. that eye wound is god's way of telling you to switch to boyshorts, tubbie. she had it coming.......just like those cyclists that got whacked by the Chevy.

Were they wearing boyshorts?

It is a case of when the decorative piece popped, while she examined it or while she tried to put it on? I do find it hard to hit the eye while putting something on, even a shirt button. Things that pop while trying to put things on tend to shoot outward and down. I learned it from some episode of Mythbusters; it's not personal experience!