Dead Teen Sued for Flying Body Parts
- Thread starter jimbob123432
- Start date
Recommended Videos
First off I want to say that the chances are pretty good if this woman had insurance to cover this she wouldn't be suing, they would regardless of where you live insurance companies will usually work to recover any amount spent when it was caused by a persons negligence, heck the estate may even include insurance who could be forced to pay. Besides, how do you know that it wasn't long after the fact that she decided to sue, she probably went to the hospital first, probably got handed a hefty medical bill and had to arrange to get time off work for recovery.SilentCom said:
But here i'm going to ask you a question that i hope makes you think about the situation a little more. Lets say hypothetically you wake up in the hospital to find yourself seriously injured by some other persons stupid actions, you are going to survive but you will be laid up for a while and have to take time off work. Then you find out you have a five figure medical bill to pay for getting your bones set, and will likely have pain for a very long time, in fact wrist bones are notorious for causing pain and loss of dexterity for the rest of a persons life when broken. On top of the medical bills there will also likely be pain medication and a little physio too so more bills. But that's okay, because if you are like the average American you can always stop eating and go live on the street for a year to pay for it all. Would you honestly say it would be greedy to choose to sue the estate of the person responsible? and if you were in this situation would you choose to go live in the gutter and slowly starve so that the family could be a little less disturbed during their grief?
Actually that situation does sound premeditated to me, while you can't prove that the individual victims were targeted, going somewhere with the purpose of opening fire blindfolded takes planning. I also think you are full of it, if you were in this situation I would bet you would expect SOMEONE to pay.SilentCom said:
"Well shit guys it sucks your blatant dumb arse of a kid died and all but since I'm an old biddy who apparently squandered all her money on cats or something, disregard health insurance and automatically get the sympathy vote since the Reaper is on my window sill I'm just gonna sick these here ambulance chasing parasites on the fuckwits estate A.K.A. rifle through his shit and flog the good stuff"
This whole story makes me /facepalm all the way to Armageddon. Someone scrape up the dipshit for his Darwin award, smack the parents around for doing a shitty job, smother the old bat with a pillow for encouraging this leech like behaviour, and go medieval on the lawyers for existing. Then we can sweep it all under the rug and pretend this total farce didn't happen.
This whole story makes me /facepalm all the way to Armageddon. Someone scrape up the dipshit for his Darwin award, smack the parents around for doing a shitty job, smother the old bat with a pillow for encouraging this leech like behaviour, and go medieval on the lawyers for existing. Then we can sweep it all under the rug and pretend this total farce didn't happen.
excuse me hippies, but this case is very clear... the boy did something incredibly stupid, and injured somebody of COURSE the estate should have to pay for this woman's medical bills. what if it happened to YOU? i know I DON'T have the money to be paying unnecessary medical bills. Plus, i used to hop freight trains and have almost been hit by a train, i know how easily avoidable it is and how stupid you have to be to actually get hit.
quit thinking so subjectively and be objective here. an object struck and injured a woman, the person responsible for that object should be responsible for paying any medical bills incurred from the incident.
quit thinking so subjectively and be objective here. an object struck and injured a woman, the person responsible for that object should be responsible for paying any medical bills incurred from the incident.
she was only trying to... -puts on sunglasses- sue him back together.
http://mirrors.rit.edu/instantCSI/
http://mirrors.rit.edu/instantCSI/
Well, I'd call suing this guy justified, even if he IS dead. Over here in Canada the criminal code has a line or something about criminal recklessness (been forever since I took law class)that's along the lines of 'taking a action with disregard for the consequences no reasonable person would take' and I'd call crossing a train track pretty reckless.
Wait, the family are suing the train company and this is what you're getting upset about.Stalydan said:
'Our son didn't know not to step in front of the tonne of metal travelling at 70mph, give us money' - acceptable
'I got injured due to something that wasn't my fault, and would like some money to pay for my medical bills, so hand it over' - unacceptable
Do you seriously not see anything ironic (by the internet's loosely defined meaning) in the phrase 'have some compassion you mean spirited *****'?razer17 said:
My god that 18 year is such a retard, who the hell runs in front of a train? i feel absolutely no pity for the guy
This is absolutely horrible. I don't care if it was negligence or that she is suing the estate not the boy, How is this in any way his fault. You can't control your body after death. You can't blame a dead person for hitting you. What a selfish amoral *****.
You can feel bad for both parties. That woman got hurt by the body of a dead 18-year-old, who was trying to run across the train tracks for God knows what reason and got hit.
I've passed train tracks before in the previous town I lived in. The key to not getting hit?
Listen. Come on. The whistle of a train is pretty distinct. You can't confuse that for a nearby car or a dying elephant or something like that.
I've passed train tracks before in the previous town I lived in. The key to not getting hit?
Listen. Come on. The whistle of a train is pretty distinct. You can't confuse that for a nearby car or a dying elephant or something like that.
Can i have some clarity here. The way i see it is that:
She is not sueing the parents. She is not sueing the kid.
Instead she is demanding that they Sell every last monento of their dead son to cover the expenses
This is more fucking sick than sueing the parents! "Your kid died, GIMME HIS XBOX AND T SHIRTS"
I mean cmon. I know she didnt deserve it. But guess what people. Its called a tragedy. Sometimes its no ones direct "fault" and no blame needs to be thrown around. It sucks so hard for everyone involved here youd thing the woman would just think "I dont need the pittyful amount of money some dead kids junk would net me, and i dont wanna add yet MORE suffering to an already shitty scenario." But no. She wants his gameboys and t shirts just like that. Everything he owned she is demanding pretty much, and it probably wont begin to cover the bill. Thats just fucking CRUEL to the parents. Its like erasing him from real life basically.
Terrible shit happens, why do we need to blame someone. Its hard to get hit by a train. But goddamit the kid came off FAR worse as it is. IS there really a need to punish him more?
And while i loathe national bias i must say, only with privitised health care is such a sueing even remotely neccessary to cover bills :/
She is not sueing the parents. She is not sueing the kid.
Instead she is demanding that they Sell every last monento of their dead son to cover the expenses
This is more fucking sick than sueing the parents! "Your kid died, GIMME HIS XBOX AND T SHIRTS"
I mean cmon. I know she didnt deserve it. But guess what people. Its called a tragedy. Sometimes its no ones direct "fault" and no blame needs to be thrown around. It sucks so hard for everyone involved here youd thing the woman would just think "I dont need the pittyful amount of money some dead kids junk would net me, and i dont wanna add yet MORE suffering to an already shitty scenario." But no. She wants his gameboys and t shirts just like that. Everything he owned she is demanding pretty much, and it probably wont begin to cover the bill. Thats just fucking CRUEL to the parents. Its like erasing him from real life basically.
Terrible shit happens, why do we need to blame someone. Its hard to get hit by a train. But goddamit the kid came off FAR worse as it is. IS there really a need to punish him more?
And while i loathe national bias i must say, only with privitised health care is such a sueing even remotely neccessary to cover bills :/
As far as the money is concerned his death wouldn't erase any debt he had while he was still alive, but I would probably not be trying to get the money out of the mourning family right away.Nielas said:If you put a heavy object in the path of a fast train, the object will be propelled away from the tracks at a high velocity. It will hit something and if it hits a person it can cause serious damage. The guy had control over not putting a heavy object (his body) on the tracks and thus creating a situation where a person might be injured.Makhiel said:I would understand if something happened to the passengers of the train and they sued, because the guy had control over jumping in front of the train. But the court saying it's okay to sue for this is kinda saying he had control over which direction his body parts flew. What if I got hit by a dead duck, do I sue the hunter who shot it?
What if the guy was instead moving a piano on the tracks it was hit by a train and a piece of it hit them woman. Would he not be liable for the damage?
On a general note, what if the guy borrowed $10,000 from you a then got killed by the train. Would you just forget the debt or would you try to recover as much as you could from whatever money the guy left behind as his legal estate.
If he was moving a piano he will be responsible because the piano was his possession and his responsibility. I don't see how he can be held responsible for his body parts, he was already dead.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that him hitting the train happened pre-mortem and as such he can be held responsible for whatever happened to that train afterwards even if it crashed and injured the lady (a direct result of his action). But I fail to see how he can be held responsible for whatever happened to his dead body, he was already dead in that time (and it's not like it is common knowledge what exactly will happen to one's body after being hit by a train).
What if he were to die of natural causes (stroke or something) and then he would get hit by a car (a train won't work in this scenario) and his dead body would hit someone, would he still be responsible?
She should get compensation but not by suing whatever is left after that guy.Mr.Pandah said:
We need to blame someone because a financial burden has been created, this is not about punishment. While I agree its pathetic that a nation like the US of A does not have public health care, but does being born in a country that wont pay your medical bills somehow make you liable for the actions of others? If her insurance wont cover this, then it is very likely the bills will pass the $10,000 dollar mark, then you have to factor in lost income and recurring expenses like painkillers and physiotherapy, that sort of financial burden can easily bankrupt someone, if this woman is out there earning an average salary, and lets face it wealthy people don't take public transit, there is a very good chance that this could leave her starving and homeless.BiscuitTrouser said:
Okay hypothetically if he were to leave say, a piano on the train tracks, and pieces of that injured her, would it be more his fault? because he couldn't control where the pieces of that went either. But seriously, the family is suing the train company, who are somehow responsible for this guys suicide, If we can somehow find them negligent for failing to stop an adult from purposely getting in the way of a train, why is it so hard to believe we can find someone negligent for actions they took that harmed others.him over there said:
Wait what? this is no ones fault, this is an accident not a suicide, cause and fault aren't totally the same thing. Seems pretty frivolous and litigious.BRex21 said: