Dead Teen Sued for Flying Body Parts

[Erttheking]

I...but he and...fucking dead...and...lady two words

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIzqh9UyYNs

 

[BRex21]

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?

You see here's the thing, it wasn't an accident that he was in front of the train, if he had a stroke and ended up causing damage because he was not in control, he couldn't be liable for those actions, however since he was in complete control of the actions that caused his own death and someone else injury, he is at fault.

She should get compensation but not by suing whatever is left after that guy.

Then from who? Sadly i live in the real world where the magic money fairy does not hand out giant cheques to people injured in accidents.

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.

No, an accident would have been him slipping into the path of the train, he deliberately made choices that no rational person could deem safe. Through his reckless and dangerous choices he was the cause of both his own and that woman's injuries.

 

[FernandoV]

http://thestir.cafemom.com/in_the_news/130874/dead_teen_sued_by_victim
"You think you've heard it all until I tell you that an appeals court in Illinois recently ruled that a woman is allowed to sue a dead teen's estate for injuries caused by his flying body parts. The 18-year-old boy was running across the Amtrak tracks to catch another train but didn't make it -- he was hit by an oncoming train going 70 mph and his body was torn apart by the force and flung onto a nearby passengers' waiting platform. The woman, 58, was struck by a sizable chunk of the boy's body and was knocked to the ground, breaking her leg and wrist. The court ruled that the boy's death was "reasonably foreseeable" and that his estate can be held responsible for his negligence.

I'm sorry, but who goes around suing a dead teen whose body was ripped to shreds in one of the most gruesome ways imaginable?"

I... I have no words. Comments & thoughts?

She just has the right to sue him, she is probably not going to win. By taking a deliberately dangerous action he acknowledged the risk of death and therefore any bodily harm it would cause to another person. BAM! *lawyered*

 

[Ooga600]

The moral of the story perhaps should be that she should drink some milk. If being merely falling to the ground causes her to break several bones, something is really really wrong. That's not supposed to happen untill a very advanced age.

Well the train was going 70 mph, enough to tear a person apart, and the woman was 58. According to the law of conservation of energy in physics, the kid's body parts would've been moving really damn fast since all that force from the train had to go *somewhere*.

Also, the lawsuit surely isn't just because the boy was negligent, its because the lady shouldn't have to pay her medical bills for an accident someone else caused.

 

[Ziadaine_v1legacy]

"We're sorry your son died in a horrific accident, however we're also suing you for said son's liability for injury of his corpse upon a bystander, injuring her also."


...Give them a break you swine, Im sure you can manage with a broken wrist and leg, their child just got torn asunder and you want money compensation? I've fallen off a 3 story buiding and walked away unscathed, my nan when she was alive slipped down a flight of stairs at 85 and just had a bruised leg. The fact she broke her leg and wrist from simply falling of a chair at 58? Jeez old people are getting stingier these days.

 

[Pebblig]

I don't know if you've been to an ER room in a hospital recently for a serious injury, but its rather expensive. Think thousands if not tens of thousands of dollars, made up of multiple bills from many companies and individuals including the ambulance company. The processing and appeals and consolidation of the bills and getting insurance approval for each and every one of them takes months if not years.

I can't imagine being injured in a life threatening way, then being expected to pay/have insurance in order for a doctor to save you. Winning with teh free healthcare.

 

[BRex21]

...Give them a break you swine, Im sure you can manage with a broken wrist and leg, their child just got torn asunder and you want money compensation? I've fallen off a 3 story buiding and walked away unscathed, my nan when she was alive slipped down a flight of stairs at 85 and just had a bruised leg. The fact she broke her leg and wrist from simply falling of a chair at 58? Jeez old people are getting stingier these days.

Okay how do you get "fell out of a chair" from hit by a body travelling at speeds that could easily reach the 50-60 MPH range?
When you fell off a 3 story building how many tens of thousands of dollars did your medical bills come to? oh wait, you said nothing. big difference here.

She just has the right to sue him, she is probably not going to win. By taking a deliberately dangerous action he acknowledged the risk of death and therefore any bodily harm it would cause to another person. BAM! *lawyered*

I can't even tell what you think you are talking about.
A woman is suing BECAUSE a man took deliberately dangerous action and hurt her, that's a very easy lawsuit to win. This, This that you have posted, is the opposite of lawyered, this is like, insane-homeless-guy-on-the-subway-rambling-ed.
Edit: got my quotes wrong, fixed it.

 

[FernandoV]

...Give them a break you swine, Im sure you can manage with a broken wrist and leg, their child just got torn asunder and you want money compensation? I've fallen off a 3 story buiding and walked away unscathed, my nan when she was alive slipped down a flight of stairs at 85 and just had a bruised leg. The fact she broke her leg and wrist from simply falling of a chair at 58? Jeez old people are getting stingier these days.

Okay how do you get "fell out of a chair" from hit by a body travelling at speeds that could easily reach the 50-60 MPH range?
When you fell off a 3 story building how many tens of thousands of dollars did your medical bills come to? oh wait, you said nothing. big difference here.

She just has the right to sue him, she is probably not going to win. By taking a deliberately dangerous action he acknowledged the risk of death and therefore any bodily harm it would cause to another person. BAM! *lawyered*

I can't even tell what you think you are talking about.
A woman is suing BECAUSE a man took deliberately dangerous action and hurt her, that's a very easy lawsuit to win. This, This that you have posted, is the opposite of lawyered, this is like, insane-homeless-guy-on-the-subway-rambling-ed.
Edit: got my quotes wrong, fixed it.

Except for our opposing outcomes that's exactly what I said unless understanding sentences is hard for you.

 

[SaikyoKid]

"We're sorry your son died in a horrific accident, however we're also suing you for said son's liability for injury of his corpse upon a bystander, injuring her also."


...Give them a break you swine, Im sure you can manage with a broken wrist and leg, their child just got torn asunder and you want money compensation? I've fallen off a 3 story buiding and walked away unscathed, my nan when she was alive slipped down a flight of stairs at 85 and just had a bruised leg. The fact she broke her leg and wrist from simply falling of a chair at 58? Jeez old people are getting stingier these days.

Umm, just a note that she simply didn't fall off a chair. She was struck by a piece of an eighteen year old guy flying by at roughly seventy miles an hour. Depending on how large said chunk is, that is a HEFTY amount of force to fling at an older lady, specially if she happens to land wrong.

OT: The lady should at least be entitled to compensation for her medical bills. I'd have more remorse for the family, but I seriously wonder what the hell the teen was doing running on the tracks in the first place. They taught us these things in school for a reason.

 

[Elementary - Dear Watson]

And you have once again demonstated you don't know what you are talking about. What do you think happens when insurance gets involved? Oh yeah, THEY SUE. If her insurance covered her then they would be the ones probably initiating this lawsuit.

And if you think a broken finger on a child (treated generally by taping it to the one next to it) has the same impact as a broken leg and wrist... you aren't even close.

Right, lets stick hypothetical situations based on this story in your face...

What if the guy who was hit my the train was mentally challenged, and that was what caused him to misjudge the train coming?

What if these rediculous charges from being sued puts the already bereaving family out of a home? On top of that, what if the father had just lost his job due to recession, and had to sell the amily car, which was why the son was getting a train in the first place...

Chances are it was a hairline fracture, that caused a weeks worth of discomfort. Didn't effect the womans work, because she doesn't, and shes sueing because that is what culture tells her to!

What if the whole situation could have been avoided if there was a bridge installed, or actual rules stopping people being able to cross the tracks...? Then its not the boys fault, but the owner of the tracks/station.

Seriously, stop trying to berate people on the internet when you dont know facts, just by making them up! Its fucking stupid! I stand by my comment, a comment I seem to share with a fuck-load people more than you, and that is that it sounds like this woman is tastlessly money grabbing from a bereaving family... and as you seem to be in a minority, take your assumptions and think tou yourself, 'hey, maybe it is me being morally wrong...?'

Otherwise, just piss off! And when you trip on a curb, and I swerve my car too late, and hit and kill you, causing my car to career into a nearby tree and giving me a concussion, I won't think twice before I take your family down in legal charges... O wait... That would be wrong then...

 

[SaikyoKid]

And you have once again demonstated you don't know what you are talking about. What do you think happens when insurance gets involved? Oh yeah, THEY SUE. If her insurance covered her then they would be the ones probably initiating this lawsuit.

And if you think a broken finger on a child (treated generally by taping it to the one next to it) has the same impact as a broken leg and wrist... you aren't even close.

Right, lets stick hypothetical situations based on this story in your face...

What if the guy who was hit my the train was mentally challenged, and that was what caused him to misjudge the train coming?

What if these rediculous charges from being sued puts the already bereaving family out of a home? On top of that, what if the father had just lost his job due to recession, and had to sell the amily car, which was why the son was getting a train in the first place...

Chances are it was a hairline fracture, that caused a weeks worth of discomfort. Didn't effect the womans work, because she doesn't, and shes sueing because that is what culture tells her to!

What if the whole situation could have been avoided if there was a bridge installed, or actual rules stopping people being able to cross the tracks...? Then its not the boys fault, but the owner of the tracks/station.

Seriously, stop trying to berate people on the internet when you dont know facts, just by making them up! Its fucking stupid! I stand by my comment, a comment I seem to share with a fuck-load people more than you, and that is that it sounds like this woman is tastlessly money grabbing from a bereaving family... and as you seem to be in a minority, take your assumptions and think tou yourself, 'hey, maybe it is me being morally wrong...?'

Otherwise, just piss off! And when you trip on a curb, and I swerve my car too late, and hit and kill you, causing my car to career into a nearby tree and giving me a concussion, I won't think twice before I take your family down in legal charges... O wait... That would be wrong then...

I'm confused, are you saying that he shouldn't make up facts but then make up a slew of conditions to make this story incredibly one sided?

Also, don't assume just because there's a vocal majority that they're morally correct. The general populist thought Japanese concentration camps were a hot idea at the time and look at how morally correct those were.

 

[thereverend7]

That had to be the most attention grabbing title I've seen for a thread in a while.

OT, Yeah, sad, yeah, it sucks, but yeah, that's the way the world works. I can't say I'd do the same thing if I were in the lady's situation (I'd probably just want recuperation for my medical bills, unless thats what the estate is for?) but there's a reason your parents say to be careful around train tracks. Namely, because its a damn mile long death charger. i'd be like pushing your car down a hill to sink it in a lake and it hitting someone on shore. just because you didn't see it, doesn't mean it can't sue the %*#^ out of you.

And yeah, not the best analogy i know, but im tired, and sick, so cut me some slack kthx.

 

[Kopikatsu]

"We're sorry your son died in a horrific accident, however we're also suing you for said son's liability for injury of his corpse upon a bystander, injuring her also."


...Give them a break you swine, Im sure you can manage with a broken wrist and leg, their child just got torn asunder and you want money compensation? I've fallen off a 3 story buiding and walked away unscathed, my nan when she was alive slipped down a flight of stairs at 85 and just had a bruised leg. The fact she broke her leg and wrist from simply falling of a chair at 58? Jeez old people are getting stingier these days.

Derp.

I don't feel like going through the science of it all right now, but breaking bones at an advanced age can very easily be permanently disabling because cells don't really regenerate when you get old.

"We're sorry that you can't walk or write anymore, and can't afford medical care. I mean, you could sue to be able to afford treatment, but then you'd just be a huge fucking asshole, wouldn't you? Yeah, I thought so."

 

[Elementary - Dear Watson]

I'm confused, are you saying that he shouldn't make up facts but then make up a slew of conditions to make this story incredibly one sided?

Also, don't assume just because there's a vocal majority that they're morally correct. The general populist thought Japanese concentration camps were a hot idea at the time and look at how morally correct those were.

That was the point I was trying to make... That its easy just to make shit up to try and make a point! That it doesn't necessarily make you right... It was response to when they did it to me earlier in the thread...

 

[2012 Wont Happen]

All I can say is, the fact that the woman has to sue to get her surgery paid for sounds like third world problems. That feel when living in the only "first world" country as far as wealth that doesn't have first world structures as far as public services.