[Pollster1]

I hear what you’re saying, but laws have been on the books for centuries that punish accomplishes and accessories to crimes. And while the GF didn’t drive the get-away car (so to speak), it could be argued that she did knowingly distract him and in some small way was a part of the crime scene.

I have no problem with punishing a genuine accessory or accomplice to a crime. I have a huge problem with punishing someone financially based on a frivolous or trivial link to a reckless or negligent act. I would not prosecute the hardware store owner who sold Trayvon Martin a screwdriver used in a burglary, even if he should have suspected that Trayvon had little interest in home repairs. I would not prosecute the girl in the skimpy outfit who distracted another driver and "caused" an injury accident. Our laws have carried this concept way too far, and decent people need to push back against the frivolous abuse of our courts.

[Responsibility2nd]

What if he sold him 62 screwdrivers?

Sorry. Don’t answer that. I’m being facetious. I do get your point. We are a sue happy society.