Story from Idaho
http://www.ktvb.com/news/local/Nampa-te ... 86504.html
by Deltaoperator17 » Tue Aug 10, 2010 4:15 pm
by Deltaoperator17 » Tue Aug 10, 2010 6:53 pm
MoapaPk wrote:Bizarre -- what a good outcome for the kid; he was very lucky. I was there that very day, and probably passed that group as we were descending.
by MoapaPk » Tue Aug 10, 2010 7:31 pm
Deltaoperator17 wrote:MoapaPk wrote:Bizarre -- what a good outcome for the kid; he was very lucky. I was there that very day, and probably passed that group as we were descending.
You was in Idaho and didnt get a hold of me?
by splattski » Wed Aug 11, 2010 1:59 pm
by Dan Shorb » Thu Aug 12, 2010 4:42 pm
by MoapaPk » Thu Aug 12, 2010 5:06 pm
d_shorb wrote:How hard is it to say "Don't go in front of the leaders, ever."
by mrchad9 » Thu Aug 12, 2010 7:03 pm
d_shorb wrote:This mom is dumb to not sue the larger organization.
by Hotoven » Thu Aug 12, 2010 9:57 pm
by Dan Shorb » Thu Aug 12, 2010 11:13 pm
mrchad9 wrote: The larger organization is not responsible for this event. You only want to sue them because they have a bigger pocket than the adult who was present.
But he shouldn't be sued either.
The only impact to an action like that would be no one wanting to take someone else's kids outside.
And what are the damages?
You can't sue someone for something that might have happened.
by mrchad9 » Fri Aug 13, 2010 12:30 am
d_shorb wrote:Someone could probably even sue the forest service for not requiring a permit for this trip.
by H2SO4 » Fri Aug 13, 2010 1:00 am
by Dan Shorb » Fri Aug 13, 2010 1:11 am
mrchad9 wrote:No, you are not being too provocative, but in my view it is statements like this that undermine your point of view.d_shorb wrote:Someone could probably even sue the forest service for not requiring a permit for this trip.
I just do not think that is credible. Sure you could file a motion, but I think a judge would thow it out before a trial were even to begin.
And similarly with the organization. Look at it this way... if he was negligent, as you say, and this kid had died, do you really think murder charges would be brought? Even involuntary manslaughter? I just don't think this rises to that level. And with the kid ending up with no injuries, you don't even have anything to sue over.
I own a Toyota, but I cannot sue Toyota because my brakes might not work. Nor can I sue them even if my brakes actually completely fail, but I escape uninjured and without property damage. I can only sue if there are actually some damages to sue over.
To sue the Boy Scouts, or the trip leader, someone has to get hurt first, not just lost, even if they are negligent (and then if they were negligent or not, which I think they were not, is a seperate discussion).
Also... if 99% of trips never come close to this, you really don't have any evidence to support that the organization (and not the individual) should be the defendant.
by MoapaPk » Fri Aug 13, 2010 2:02 am
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests