By Jim Tankersley
WEST DES MOINES, Iowa – Valerie Lakey sat with her thin, blue-jean-clad legs pressed together, her skin a pale ivory, brown hair slipping down past her shoulders, rectangular glasses perched above a delicate nose. Occasionally a tight-lipped smile spread across her face.
"She's lucky to be alive," the young woman's mother, Sandy, told a packed-to-the-staircases crowd at a community college here this afternoon. The man the audience was there to see, Sandy Lakey said, "saved my daughter's life."
In the surrogates-as-highlighters-of-campaign-themes game, John McCain has his veterans, Hillary Clinton her ex-Bush-supporter hurricane victim. John Edwards has the Lakeys, the plaintiffs in perhaps his most famous case as a trial lawyer who today resumed their witnesses-for-the-prosecution roles in his populist pitch for the Democratic presidential nomination.
As a North Carolina lawyer, Edwards fought a swimming pool drain cover manufacturer on behalf of the Lakeys, after the fierce suction from a local wading pool drain eviscerated then-five-year old Valerie and left her with lifelong medical issues. Edwards won them a $25 million judgment and, Sandy Lakey said today, "gave us hope in our darkest hour."
The Lakeys' story isn't new to Iowans or anyone who has followed Edwards' political career. It's the final chapter in Edwards' book "Four Trials"; the former U.S. senator invokes it often on the campaign trail. Today, with Valerie and her family looking on, Edwards wielded it as a metaphor for all the other fighting he wants to do – in the campaign and in the White House.
After diving into his standard indictments of oil companies, drug companies, insurance companies and other "big multi-national corporations" – and sprinting through his promises of alternative energy, universal health care, eradicated poverty, a bolstered middle class and an end to the Iraq war – Edwards spent much of his speech and the subsequent question-and-answer session ruminating on fights past and future.
"I'm not just only ready for this fight," he said, after criticizing candidates (read: Clinton and Barack Obama) who say they'll negotiate with insurers and drug companies for health care reform, "I've been fighting it for 54 years. I was born for this fight."
When he was a young boy, Edwards continued, he came home bloodied from a schoolyard tussle in which another boy "kicked my butt." His father sat him down, he said, and told him never to start a fight. But he added "I don't want you to ever walk away from a fight" – and he told young John to go back the next day, find the boy in question, "and kick his butt."
Later, Edwards prepped the crowd for what he called the coming "epic fight" between ordinary people and rich special interests.
But perhaps his fightin'-est moment of the event came when a man in the audience asked how Edwards would, as the nominee, handle campaign attacks in the vein of the "Swift Boat" ads that infamously hurt John Kerry's 2004 run against President Bush.
"I will fight back with every fiber of my being," Edwards replied, adding: "If they come after me, they will pay in a way they cannot imagine."
The event wasn't all rough-and-tumble. Edwards, whose wife Elizabeth is battling a breast cancer recurrence, hugged a man who said his wife was struggling with bone cancer. And he repeatedly urged the crowd to "stand up" - for the uninsured, for homeless veterans, for those who go hungry – saying that when they do, "America rises."
He final call to "rise up," conveniently soundtracked by Bruce Springstein's "The Rising," brought the cheering crowd to its feet. Valerie Lakey pushed her lips together, smiled wide and stood up, too.
• 
• 
• 
Comments
Okay, now tell us what was John Edwards' cut out of the $25 million verdict for the Lakeys? Was it the usual 33 to 40% contingency fee? If so, then we have to ask: When John Edwards vows to "make them pay," to whom does he expect the money to be paid?
Posted by: John W. | December 21, 2007 7:14 PM
I am for Edwards because he is a fighter who has shown compassion for the voiceless in our country. His fighting spirit and passion reminds me of the late Robert Kennedy. Edwards remembers his moddest beginning as a child of rural America, and has not forgotten the people he grew up with.
Posted by: Mark | December 21, 2007 7:18 PM
Why isn't anyone on the Swamp (Frank, you are included too!) talking about Nataline Sarkisyan? This poor child died as a result of a for profit insurance company making evil decisions (read - makes us more money,and adds stockholder value, the hell with the patient) and denying a transplant. Anyone that still believes private insurance is bad, and all lawyers just are out to milk the system, are true head in the sand dead enders. It's ok to stop stem cell research to save a few eggs, but if the child dies, well that's the free market.
BULL!@#$!
__________________________
This is Rico Fraud:
Is defendant a business engaged in interstate commerce? Yes
Was their a conspiracy to commit a crime(s)? Yes, as put forward in their business plan and policies and consitant practices based upon same.
Were those crimes based upon a violation of one of the crimes listed in 18 U.S.C. § 1961(1). Yes.
Has the execution of the conspiracy resulted in harm? Yes, in this case, death.
Is there a specific criminal activity(ies)? Yes, fraud, wrongful death, arguably, pre-meditated murder, which, industry-wide occurs is perpetrated at a rate of 18,000 deaths per year; murder for profit.
Is the criminal activity an ongoing pattern of criminality? Yes, pervasively so.
Is the pattern of criminality longterm? Yes, going back 40 years, and thus constitutes an “open-ended” pattern. The activities are continuous and related, in that the victims are the entire population of their paying customers who present severe, and expensive, medical challenges(a class of victims all of the same general description or circumstance).
Is the method of commission of each individual crime identical? Yes, and is so uniform as to serve as an “industry standard” set of practices.
Does the criminal activity involve the use of, or is it advanced through the use of, mail or wires Yes, mailed invoices and payment of premiums; use of airwaves for advertising, mail, telephones and internet for denial of promised services.
Is the criminal activity (fraud) more than simple breach of contract, falled business activity, broken promises, negligence or dereliction? Yes, corporate policies, procedures, employee compensation practicies and subsequent corporate acts resulting from same make it clear that, while knowingly making representions to their intended victims that they will provide servies in return for payment of premiums, by their own documents and continuing pattern of practices - which would lead any reasonable-minded person to conclude that - they intended aforethought, never to provide such services.
Has the crime been committed within the court imposed 4-year statue of limitation? Yes, the death resulting from Cigna’s fraud and criminal conspiracy occured within the last 24 hours.
It’s time that anyone (or their survivors) who has been harmed by such criminal practices jointly seek joint criminal prosecution/civil remedies against insurance company criminals under the RICO ACT in Federal courts.
Posted by: rncbs | December 21, 2007 7:43 PM
The Breck girl John Edwards is a deep pockets thinkin trial lawyer. Edwards could careless who he hurts it's all in a days trial day.
Edwards shouldn't be elected dog catcher but, he is running for President.
John Edwards is happy grabbing money from small businesses while he gleefully supported a hedge fund that he was instrumental in foreclosing on 34 homes in New Orleans where he started his campaign. Edwards is a grab anything politician to further his future, a Satanic figure, using a southern drawl just like Jimma Carter--be wary of Edwards he could careless about anything but money. Jerry White, Springfield,IL
Posted by: Jerry White | December 21, 2007 7:52 PM
John Edwards is a revolution that will cease being a revolution once he got into the White House. Nobody with any kind of sense can believe that his rhetoric, passioned though it may be, will translate into concrete action if he wielded presidential power. He may think he will be able to wave a magic wand and all those disparate interests will be brought to their knees. It sounds really bold to say he will fight for the little man. As a president he would more likely have to do a balancing act and it is questionable whether someone with an antagonistic disposition, and a reactionary personality would be the least bit successful leading this country.
Posted by: GW | December 21, 2007 9:19 PM
As a North Carolina lawyer, Edwards fought a swimming pool drain cover manufacturer on behalf of the Lakeys, after the fierce suction from a local wading pool drain eviscerated then-five-year old Valerie and left her with lifelong medical issues.
That's a good right wing nut Jerry,pulling for the Big Company,hoping they could get away with it to make more MONEY!!!!!!!
If wing nuts had any brains,one could only hope you swim where that little girl did and they still didn't fix the drain.Get it.
Posted by: Raving Loon | December 21, 2007 9:26 PM
mcbs...Rico Fraud?
Take your meds and go to bed.
Also, what we don't need now is a slip-and-fall lawyer as our commander in chief. The Breck Girl would shut down Gitmo and give the enemy aid and comfort through his buddies at the communist controlled A.C.L.U.
Paulo
Posted by: Paulo | December 21, 2007 9:30 PM
Jerry White and the rest of the wing nuts.Here's another one where you can pull for the insurance co.
Why do Wing Nuts hate average Americans?
GLENDALE, Calif. - The family of a 17-year-old girl who died hours after her health insurer reversed a decision and said it would pay for a liver transplant plans to sue the company, their attorney said Friday.
Nataline Sarkisyan died Thursday at about 6 p.m. at the University of California, Los Angeles Medical Center. She had been in a vegetative state for weeks, said her mother, Hilda.
Attorney Mark Geragos said he plans to ask the district attorney to press murder or manslaughter charges against Cigna HealthCare in the case. The insurer “maliciously killed her” because it did not want to bear the expense of her transplant and aftercare, Geragos said.District Attorney spokeswoman Sandi Gibbons declined to comment on the request for murder or manslaughter charges, saying it would be inappropriate to do so until Geragos submits evidence supporting his request.
The family’s “loss is immeasurable, and our thoughts and prayers are with them,” Cigna said in a news release Friday.
“We deeply hope that the outpouring of concern, care and love that are being expressed for Nataline’s family help them at this time,” the company said.
Nataline had been battling leukemia and received a bone marrow transplant from her brother. She developed a complication that caused her liver to fail.
Doctors at UCLA determined she needed a transplant and sent a letter to Cigna Corp.’s Cigna HealthCare on Dec. 11. The Philadelphia-based health insurance company denied payment for the transplant, saying the procedure was experimental and outside the scope of coverage.
The insurer reversed the decision Thursday as about 150 teenagers and nurses rallied outside of its office. But Nataline died hours later.
“They took my daughter away from me,” said Nataline’s father, Krikor, who appeared at the news conference with his 21-year-old son, Bedros.
Posted by: Raving Loon | December 21, 2007 9:38 PM
John Edwards' "make 'em pay" attitude is just a domestic version of George Bush's belligerent "bring 'em on" line about Iraq. Just what we need, a domestic economic war which we are bound to loose at great cost. This brand of macho bluster will solve nothing. Let's elect a leader who could bring all parties to the table and tackle problems maturely.
Posted by: Robert Vitaletti | December 21, 2007 11:44 PM
Gosh John W, your right. He should have done the entire trial for free just like everybody else who provides for a family would. I am sure you would do your job for free any day somebody on the Internet asked you to. He was evil to make money from the case he won for that family. Come to think of it, anybody who cashes a check at all from the richest CEO to the minimum wage worker should be ashamed of themselves.
Posted by: Demforchange | December 22, 2007 12:54 AM
I am not surprised to hear some skepticism after what we have all gone through under W, but I think that these comments are probably unfounded. I think that John has the right idea, he may not be perfect, but who is. We have been kept from progress for too many years. Under Bill Clinton we lost the ability to proceed because we were focused on dresses and fellatio. We never fought it; we tried to hide from it. During 2000 we lost our President because we wouldn’t stand up and fight the obvious theft of the election. In 2004 we lost the election because we didn't stand up and fight for the value of every man’s Purple Heart. Maybe John isn't perfect, in fact I am certain he is not, but this country needs a Democrat and the only way it’s gonna get one is through a fight. The Republicans have been running this nation into the ground since 1980, and because they have been willing to fight (and cheat) they have been praised for it. We don't have to cheat our message stands on its own, but we have to fight to get it out there. John, at least now, will fight to get it out there. Every Democrat should stand up and line up behind John Edwards.
Posted by: Aaron B. Martin | December 22, 2007 2:37 AM
NO more Clinton dynasty and corrupted Health Industry.
Its a shame that our country USA, being the most advanced nation on this planet, is continously choosing Bush/Clinton political dynasty for the past 20 years with no change.
SO ITS TIME FOR CHANGE NOW.
!!! VOTE FOR BARACK OBAMA !!!
Posted by: kelly | December 22, 2007 9:14 AM
I have been contributing to John Edwards for about 8 months now and have never looked back-I am certain that he will try to do everything he has promised to do, which is why Big Pharma and Big Oil are so desperate to trash him-I am more satisfied every day in my choice and there are millions of sincere Americans who want a smart, tough and passionate leader again who straighten out the current disaster-I watched the Edwards campaign on c-span last night and am continually amazed at Edward's energy and grasp of what our nation faces-we are lucky to have him in the race.
Posted by: jeanruss | December 22, 2007 10:59 AM
The facts of the Lakey case are a little more complex than John Edwards relates.
It appears that Valerie Lakey's injuries were due to the fact that some kids removed the safety cover to the pool's drain. Naturally (naturally for a PI lawyer, at least) Edwards sued the drain manufacturer and everybody else who had some money, rather than the people at fault, the kids. See
http://www.overlawyered.com/2005/10/valerie_lakey.html
for more facts on the case.
The $25 million Lakey verdict was paid by all of us ordinary Americans, as usual, in the form of higher insurance costs. Just like the taxpayers of California ponied up $55,000 ($31 per person attending) for Edwards to give a speech at UC-Davis on--you guessed it--the "Two Americas".
Why does John Edwards hate ordinary Americans so much?
Posted by: Bruce | December 22, 2007 1:03 PM
Edwards is a grab anything politician to further his future...
_____________________________
Sort of like Presidents that grab entire countries based a hill of lies about WMD's and send decent hardworking American soldiers off to die so their sanctified family can be destroyed?
Posted by: rncbs | December 22, 2007 3:16 PM
Demforchange:
Thank you for the interesting, but nevertheless worthless, non sequitur rant. Never once did I say, or even suggest, that John Edwards should have tried the case for free.
What I implied, without saying directly, is that he proved himself somewhat less altruistic than he claims by taking the standard 33 to 40 percent of the verdict as a contingency fee. Taking the standard cut of a $25 million verdict would have given him $8.25 million to $10 million of the pot. If he was such a "champion of the little man," as he claims to be, he would have let the victims take home more of it. After all, an altruist would think the little girl’s health was more important than his personal stock of shiraz.
The bottom line is that Edwards was just an ambulance chaser whose only interest was John Edwards. The same is true of his one term in the Senate – which he didn’t even finish before running for President. Now he is trying to spin his self interest into a track record of public spiritedness – which is a bunch of rot. I’m sorry I had to spell it all out for you.
Merry Christmas to you, and may the New Year bring you happiness.
Posted by: John W. | December 22, 2007 3:18 PM
I suggest that Bruce study the facts of the Lakey case more closely. The drain cover was designed so that it could be easily removed. Others had been serverely injured in the same manner. The company knew that the drain cover could be redesigned by using three screws to attach the cover much more securely. The company repeately chose to not make this simple change. If this case had injured Bruce's daughter, I suspect that he would be less smug and more knowledgable of the details of the case, including the life-long injuries which were directly caused be the negligence of the company.
Posted by: Mike C. in FL | December 22, 2007 4:21 PM
To Bruce,
Are you seriously saying that John Edwards shouldn't sue the company because it's the kid's fault for removing the drain? Perhaps you should read up on that a little more. 12 other children had been seriously hurt/injured by the faulty drain, the company chose to ignore this fact, instead of making a change that would have cost them about 2 cents per drain.
Mike C is correct in saying that if it had been Bruce's daughter... things would be different.
I also agree with whoever made the point that of course John Edwards got a percentage of the money, it's what lawyers do and by god he deserved it! He worked damn hard on that case and if he'd lost it he wouldn't have gotten a penny, and that girl would likely be dead.
Posted by: Danielle C | December 22, 2007 8:01 PM
Edwards is a grab anything politician to further his future...
_____________________________
Sort of like Presidents that grab entire countries based a hill of lies about WMD's and send decent hardworking American soldiers off to die so their sanctified family can be destroyed?
Posted by: rncbs | December 22, 2007 3:16 PM
Yeah, sort of. Only Edwards will do it to us domestically instead of sending us to a foreign country to accomplish it.
Lose the idea that the election is between the Democrats and George W. Bush. He is finished. He isn't running for office. Except for Giuliani and Romney, his ideas aren't well supported by the rest of the Republican candidates.
The race is between those who are running.
Posted by: John W. | December 23, 2007 3:44 PM