• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

New York child sued for woman's death after bike crash

Andalublue

Hello again!
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2010
Messages
27,097
Reaction score
12,352
Location
Granada, España
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Compensation culture passes a new milestone as 4-year-olds become fair game for litigation lawyers...

BBC News - New York child sued for woman's death after bike crash

My attitude would be, ¡f they're old enough at 4 to be liable for any damage they cause, they are old enough to be financially responsible for the reparations. Not their parents. Them and only them.
 

Your Star

Rage More!
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
May 15, 2010
Messages
27,246
Reaction score
19,928
Location
Georgia
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
Really, suing children! What the **** is wrong with these people.
 

Kandahar

Enemy Combatant
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
20,688
Reaction score
7,320
Location
Washington, DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Why couldn't they just sue the parents for not properly watching the kids, instead of suing a CHILD for this bull**** about being "negligent in the operation and control of their bicycle." Sigh...

People can be so dumb.
 

Mason66

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2009
Messages
26,017
Reaction score
6,160
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
So let's say there will be a settlement in this case, and the child, and not her parents, is being sued, how can the child legally sign the settlement as a child cannot legally sign a contract?

An 87 year old woman dies. The story said nothing about there being a connection between the accident and her death.

I didn't understand what the child was being sued for, and how long it would take her to pay it off as I am sure she has a high paying job.

None of this makes sense and the judge needs a break from his job to re-evaluate his outlook on things.

A 4 year old cannot make the connection between cause and action, and how fast could they have been going? A 4 year old is not on a 10 speed bike with a high top speed.

Crazy stuff.
 

Kali

Stigmatized! End R Word!
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 8, 2008
Messages
13,334
Reaction score
1,835
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
It does not matter they are suing the kid as the parents will be held legal in whatever-if anything- happens.

So look at it as the parents are being sued.
 

Black Dog

King Of The Dog Pound
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2008
Messages
36,230
Reaction score
8,358
Location
Georgia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,893
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
So let's say there will be a settlement in this case, and the child, and not her parents, is being sued, how can the child legally sign the settlement as a child cannot legally sign a contract?

An 87 year old woman dies. The story said nothing about there being a connection between the accident and her death.

I didn't understand what the child was being sued for, and how long it would take her to pay it off as I am sure she has a high paying job.

None of this makes sense and the judge needs a break from his job to re-evaluate his outlook on things.

A 4 year old cannot make the connection between cause and action, and how fast could they have been going? A 4 year old is not on a 10 speed bike with a high top speed.

Crazy stuff.
As noted in the other thread on this, this was not about whether the child did anything wrong. This was a threshold issue, simply to address the claim that the child could not legally commit a negligent act. The court said that a child over four could conceivably be capable of such. This is not out of the ordinary at all, nor is it a deviation from long standing precedent.
 

Andalublue

Hello again!
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2010
Messages
27,097
Reaction score
12,352
Location
Granada, España
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
As noted in the other thread on this, this was not about whether the child did anything wrong. This was a threshold issue, simply to address the claim that the child could not legally commit a negligent act. The court said that a child over four could conceivably be capable of such. This is not out of the ordinary at all, nor is it a deviation from long standing precedent.
I see, so precedent exists that 4-year-olds can be held responsible for committing a negligent act, does it? Are you saying that this 'threshold' issue will not lead to any negative consequences for the child? Is it just a matter of setting, or reinforcing, legal precedent?
 

PeteEU

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
34,914
Reaction score
11,921
Location
Denmark
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
I see, so precedent exists that 4-year-olds can be held responsible for committing a negligent act, does it? Are you saying that this 'threshold' issue will not lead to any negative consequences for the child? Is it just a matter of setting, or reinforcing, legal precedent?
Hey look at the bright side.. at least the kid was not arrested and charged with man slaughter and put in jail for X years when convicted.... They still have some standards over there :)
 

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,893
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
I see, so precedent exists that 4-year-olds can be held responsible for committing a negligent act, does it? Are you saying that this 'threshold' issue will not lead to any negative consequences for the child? Is it just a matter of setting, or reinforcing, legal precedent?
1) Yes.
2) It could, but by no means is it certain.
3) Yes.
 

PeteEU

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
34,914
Reaction score
11,921
Location
Denmark
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
One word, "lawyers". They're the scum of the Earth.
Then I wonder why the Republican party did not do something about it when they had absolute power... 6 years ... oh yea, the lawyers paid them off :) Does that mean the Republicans are cum of the Earth too? And yes the same applies for the Democrats.
 

molten_dragon

Anti-Hypocrite
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
10,114
Reaction score
4,744
Location
Southeast Michigan
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Juliet's lawyer had argued Juliet was too young to be held negligent.

The judge disagreed, ruling Juliet's lawyer had presented no evidence she lacked intelligence or maturity.
This is the most ridiculous part of the whole article.

Being 4 years old is not evidence that one lacks maturity?

I agree with whoever said that if the little girl is old enough to be sued for her actions, she's old enough to be solely responsible for paying the settlement. I'm sure the $4.19 in her piggybank will make the scumbag son feel a lot better over his mom dying.
 
Top Bottom