Can't upvote cause this is the first time that I think Adam got it totally wrong just like the jury did.

The show's team of researchers and fact checkers got it wrong, but you know differently? How so?

Yeah, how is this incorrect, @nanrod? The only thing I noticed was that woman "reenacting" the presumed sequence of events didn't match my misconceptions.

*related http://videosift.com/video/Burned-by-McDonalds-Hot-Coffee

Burned by McDonald's Hot Coffee has been added as a related post - related requested by eric3579.

yeah..i held the misconception for years until i actually was shown the full story...

and it was a fucking horror show.just the pics alone of that poor womans groin and the burn damage../cringes
if you did not have a compassionate reaction or an empathetic response.

you are a sociopath.

not to mention mcdonalds response.which was so drenched in inhuman corporate speak,that it just left me cold,and dead inside...or maybe that was just the mcdonalds representative which basically admitted that the company was playing the ratios.they KNEW how hot the coffee was,because they set the standard.

they just viewed the small percentage of customers that DID burn themselves as acceptable losses,and they used a tried and true tactic of ignoring the complaints,which usually led to people giving up.

so the jurors damage was less about the actual burns,but more about mcdonalds knowing how hot the coffee was,because they set the temperature,and the negligence on how they responded.

so while mcdonalds did settle without actual admission of guilt,they lowered the temperature by 20 degrees.

@nanrod you should check out the video here on the sift regarding this lawsuit.i am sure you will change your attitude.

hold on..lemme go find it for ya.

found it!

*related=http://videosift.com/video/Burned-by-McDonalds-Hot-Coffee

The specified related post, Burned by McDonald's Hot Coffee, is already associated with this post - bypassing related request by enoch.

haha..@eric3579
beat me to the punch while i was writing my comment.
sneaky bastard!

Maybe the rest of you were unaware of the facts of this case until you watched some video but I researched this story in the 90's so this video by Adam didn't tell me anything new and Adasm didn't ruin anything for me. I simply disagree with the emotional bias people seem to bring to the case. In my opinion there is one issue. Was McDonald's negligent in serving coffee at 180F. The answer regardless of botched testimony is no. The proof is in the fact that virtually all major vendors of coffee from Starbucks to Dunkin Donuts serve their coffee at that temperature to this day. The difference now is that they are more careful about warnings and labels to let their customers know that, you know, their coffee is hot.

They could have made a case that the cup was too fragile but that wasn't the problem. The woman even made a point of saying that she opened the cup away from herself to avoid spilling but spilled it anyways which to me indicates that she was aware of the risk.

Were the woman's injuries horrible. Yes. Was McDonald's response and testimony incredibly douchy? Yes. Does that in and of itself make them liable. No

And @enoch thanks for the link to the video I watched 3 years ago. You'll notice I didn't upvote that one either. You could have linked me to the documentary "Hot Coffee" that I watched 5 years ago. Here's a new one for you but maybe you've seen it.
*related http://videosift.com/video/The-Truth-About-the-Infamous-McDonalds-Hot-Coffee-Incident

Also, I may not be as much of a bleeding heart as you but no, not a sociopath.

The Truth About the Infamous McDonald's Hot Coffee Incident has been added as a related post - related requested by nanrod.

As I mentioned in your related post, they knew they were at fault and made significant changes to cup safety features/warnings, as you yourself mention. A company not at fault would not bother making these changes.

You are welcome to your opinion, but 12 people who were there decided otherwise.

@nanrod
you stated that the injuries were horrible,so yep..not a sociopath.
you can empathize or sympathize and still disagree.i have no issue with disagreeing.