An incarcerated Portland pimp is suing Nike for $100 million dollars. And while he may not have a case, at least he has a point (maybe).
Sirgiorgio Clardy (which is the pimpy-est name in the history of big pimping) was sentenced to 100 years in prison for brutally stomping a “John” with his sneakers (for the record, he also brutally beat an 18-year-old prostitute). Now Clardy, who prefers trolling the legal system to getting sodomized in his cell, has filed suit claiming Nike was remiss in not placing a warning label on its sneakers stating that they could be used as a dangerous weapon. After all, how could he have known that stomping a man’s face in with a shoe would do him harm? He’s a pimp, not a psychic!
While the lawsuit is ridiculous, there is slightly more to it than meets the eye. During Clardy’s trial, the jury classified his shoes as “a dangerous weapon” in order to give him the stiffest possible sentence. Last time I checked, my Air Jordans weren’t a weapon (although to be fair, I have to take them off at the airport). Clardy also didn’t realize he was wearing weapons on his feet, and his ignorance cost him 100 years. As such, his lawsuit claims Nike “failed to warn of risk or to provide an adequate warning or instruction.” Basically, if his shoes are considered weapons, Clardy feels he should have been informed about it before he went around kicking people.
Granted, none of this is really Nike’s fault. The only one to blame is the trash-ball pimp with a long list of priors. But the fact that they classified his sneakers as a “dangerous weapon” in order to give him a harsher sentence is somewhat disturbing. There’s no question society is better off with Clardy behind bars, but what’s to stop prosecutors from using this same tactic against someone who is less deserving?
Does Clardy have point, or is this just a huge waste of time and money?