Terrible headline, it’s honestly kind of impressive that the chronological order of just two events could be screwed up in a single sentence fragment meant to convey information in an entertaining way.

"Well, your honor we did hit her with a bus but she killed a guy later on in an unrelated matter so we shouldn’t have to pay her for the bus thing. "

The appellate court rejected those claims, ruling that her incarceration and criminal charges were not relevant to the determination of damages for injuries suffered years earlier.

I hope they considered my amicus brief: “She’s probably a deranged psychopath, but what she did sounds kinda based tbh.”