Hard Light Productions Forums

Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: karajorma on February 14, 2006, 11:22:07 am

Title: Adding lawsuit to injury
Post by: karajorma on February 14, 2006, 11:22:07 am
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/02/14/swiss_tearaway/

Quote
We're very glad to report that the Swiss are taking steps to ensure kids pay attention when crossing the road - by dragging into court a nine-year-old hit by a car on a zebra crossing.

The unnamed girl was, according to Ananova, "slightly injured after she was hit by the car while crossing the road with her mum and younger sister". The car driver, however, claimed she'd run out from behind a bus and straight into his car, thereby representing "a danger to him and other motorists".

The pre-teen tearaway now faces a possible fine when she appears in Schaffhausen youth court. A public prosecutor's office spokesperson confirmed this was the normal procedure for maintaning order on Schaffhausen's streets since it "shows them what they did wrong and prevents them from being involved in accidents in the future".


Am I the only one who thinks that someone who fails to pay more attention when crossing the road after being hit by half a tonne of speeding metal is unlikely to be swayed by a court case? :)
Title: Re: Adding lawsuit to injury
Post by: Wild Fragaria on February 14, 2006, 11:58:20 am
I know that help 'eliminate' bad seeds outta the smart gene pool  ;7
Title: Re: Adding lawsuit to injury
Post by: Prophet on February 14, 2006, 12:24:52 pm
by dragging into court a nine-year-old hit by a car on a zebra crossing.
I don't know about their laws, but in this country it would be the driver being dragged to court. Here it is the drivers who have to watch out people on the zebra crossing. Not the otherway around. In case of an accident, it is the drivers fault (if zebra crossing was involved).
I imagine it's pretty much the same everywhere. Am not I right? In that case this is just ridiculous. And sad.
Title: Re: Adding lawsuit to injury
Post by: aldo_14 on February 14, 2006, 12:27:54 pm
Do they issue posthumous fines?
Title: Re: Adding lawsuit to injury
Post by: vyper on February 14, 2006, 12:35:13 pm
I'm liking the Swiss more every day.
Title: Re: Adding lawsuit to injury
Post by: Col. Fishguts on February 14, 2006, 01:18:57 pm
Hmmm, I haven't heard of this.

A little searching in todays newspaper reveals:

- The whole thing happened in 2004, today was the court hearing.

- She was not crossing the street with her mum and sister. In fact she was walking some distance in front of them, thus tried to cross the street alone.

- When stepping on the street, she was passing behind a standing bus, thus the car driver couldn't see her.

- As said by her: She saw the car, but tried to get to run to the other side of the street as fast as possible, whic obviously wasn't fast enough.

- The car driver is not guilty, because he wasn't driving too fast and he was actually paying attention

I guess she was called to court, because by law, if there's an accident, it has to be someone's fault, which in this case  would have been her.
Overall, not much happened actually, but the local boulevard papers are having a field day writing shocking home stories about the poor little girl, being abused by the law :/

Latest news: She was found not guilty on all accounts, and she lived happily ever after.
The end.
Title: Re: Adding lawsuit to injury
Post by: karajorma on February 14, 2006, 01:22:05 pm
In the UK the rule is that if the pedestrian has a foot on the zebra crossing you have to stop.

Personally I can't really see how there could be three people on the zebra crossing and it be the pedestrians fault. If they did jump out from behind a bus thenthe bus was stopped at a moronically placed bus stop (In which case it's the bus companies/traffic designers fault for placing the stop so badly) or the driver must have been passing the bus either by overtaking it or by passing it in another lane in which case it's the drivers fault for not thinking there must have been a good reason why the bus was stopped.

I just can't see how the pedestrians were to blame for this.


EDIT : Aha. Fishguts better summary helped.
Title: Re: Adding lawsuit to injury
Post by: Col. Fishguts on February 14, 2006, 01:30:50 pm
@kara: The same rules about pedestrians on zebra crossings apply here too.

The thing is, said zebra crossing was a temporary one, because the whole area was under (re-)construction. So I guess it was hardly visible. But yes, the whole thing is rather bizarre, and by no means standard procedure around here.
Title: Re: Adding lawsuit to injury
Post by: Fragrag on February 14, 2006, 01:40:04 pm
Quote
The unnamed girl was, according to  Ananova, "slightly injured after she was hit by the car while crossing the road with her mum and younger sister". The car driver, however, claimed she'd run out from behind a bus and straight into his car, thereby representing "a danger to him and other motorists".


Ananova's stories aren't that credible if you ask me, most of their stories I've read are just plail silly
Title: Re: Adding lawsuit to injury
Post by: Ford Prefect on February 14, 2006, 02:02:56 pm
Am I the only one who thought this thread was a follow-up on the Dick Cheney story?
Title: Re: Adding lawsuit to injury
Post by: Nuclear1 on February 14, 2006, 02:43:14 pm
Maybe it's just me, but aren't motorists required to stop when a bus stops in two lanes not separated by a median?

At least that's how it is in the US of A...
Title: Re: Adding lawsuit to injury
Post by: Grey Wolf on February 14, 2006, 02:45:29 pm
At least its better than in Russia: http://www.boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2006/02/14/sentencing_in_crash_roils_russians/

If that doesn't work, let me know and I'll post a transcript.
Title: Re: Adding lawsuit to injury
Post by: Flipside on February 14, 2006, 08:04:40 pm
4 Years in a Labour camp for being hit from behind by a speeding car that didn't use it's horn, simply because it was carrying a politician.

What a lovely country...