It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
A court has ordered the parents of a boy who accidentally kicked a ball into the street to pay nearly $200,000 in compensation after he, in the court’s view, caused the death of an 87-year-old motorcyclist who fell off his bike in an effort to avoid the ball, breaking his leg and later going senile only to die over a year later as a result of an infection stemming from a feeding accident.
According to the Osaka district court, the incident began in 2004 at a public elementary school in Ehime prefecture, where pupils were practising their football skills by making practice free kicks at a goal.
One fifth year elementary student made a kick which went high, going over the goal posts and into the street beyond. There, it so happened that an 86-year-old man was driving down the street on a bike, and swerved to avoid the ball, crashing and breaking his leg.
He survived, but became senile soon after, and then died some 15 months after the accident as a result of pneumonia contracted after some food accidentally became lodged in his windpipe.
5 members of the man’s bereaved family decided to sue the boy for causing his death, demanding ¥50,000,000. As the boy was a minor at the time of the accident (he is now 19), he could not be held legally responsible, but his parents could, and so the family sued them instead.
In their defence, the boy’s side argued “nothing illegal occurred as he was just normally kicking the ball at the goal.”
The court was having none of it – the judge’s verdict was that “he could have predicted the ball would land in the street and cause an accident,” though he did at least stop short of ordering him to pay compensation, saying “the boy was a youth and bears no legal responsibility for the accident, but his parents do have a duty to pay compensation.”
Accepting that the dead man’s life was drastically altered by his encounter with the stray football, the court ordered the parents to pay up to the family, but reasoned that as the man already had neurological problems prior to the incident they would only have to pay ¥15,000,000 of the ¥50,000,000 demanded of them.
“Don’t they normally put up nets around these places?”
“The issue is not the kid, it’s the lack of safety nets.”
“Shouldn’t this responsibility lie with the school which didn’t bother to put nets up and could have predicted the ball would land in the street themselves?”
“If they can sue anyone it’s the school, not the parents!”
“Couldn’t they sue the school and city?”
“Asking 50,000,000 for an 87-year-old man who died as an indirect result of an accident seems a bit much.”
“This old guy was driving a bike at 87? And they sue the boy’s parents? What kind of Japanese are they?”
“Poor parents, suddenly plunged in debt like that.”
“It seems a bit odd that they are attributing his death by misfeeding to this…”
“All ball games in Japan are going to get banned as a result of this, no doubt.”
“Common sense would tell you to expect balls flying out of schools occasionally.”
“Anyone with a car or bike must predict that they could encounter a ball like that. Doesn’t anyone in the court have a driving license?”
“So this 86-year-old man with a known neurological condition was riding a motorcycle around a school?”
“This poor kid and his family have been left worrying about this stuff throughout his childhood for the last 7 years, with no end in sight if they continue to fight the ruling.”
“This verdict is nuts.”
“If he had died right there it might be justifiable.”
“Don’t steal a child’s future for the sake of a dead 87-year-old.”
“I wonder if the bereaved family will be satisfied now the school has banned all ball games?”
“Remember: when you kick a ball you might cause an old man to fall off his bike, go senile and have to be nursed only to be misfed and die.”
pneumonia when food became stuck in his throat
the judge’s verdict was that “he could have predicted the ball would land in the street and cause an accident,”
And this guy is a judge? this man obviously lacks common sense and should be removed from the court position post haste...
Originally posted by jude11
the judge’s verdict was that “he could have predicted the ball would land in the street and cause an accident,”
Tell that to every soccer player out there. If they can predict these things, they'd all be superstar athletes.
And to predict that it would cause an accident? Again...'PREDICT' an 'ACCIDENT'? Not easy to do even when you're an adult.
Ridiculous.
Originally posted by acrux
First of all I cannot supply link as news comes from a site with pornographic images in advertisements on their page. However if anyone wants the link, message me & I will supply link so it can be verified.
Originally posted by acrux
Alternatively if you do a google search using this thread's title it will also give the you the link.
If there is any truth to this story, then I agree with this. Regardless of whether or not it could have been 'predicted,' if this occurred while the kid was playing ball in the area designated for ball to be played in, then it is nobody's fault but the schools.
Originally posted by acrux
Shouldn't it be the school could have predicted a ball would go onto the road so they should have had nets if there is a road directly behind the goals.
Look, if you are going to be riding a bike at that age, you have got to realize your chance of injury is probably going to be pretty high. A small child is kicking a ball around at a school... isn't that what kids do? I don't think the kid's family should have to pay anything, this was just an accident, with nobody at fault, and if anything the old guy on the bike should have known how dangerous it was for him to do so.
One could argue him breaking his leg wasn't a result of the ball, it was a result of him be old, fragile, and too slow to safely ride a bike without getting hurt.
Who would have known that a ball can cause people to break limbs, become senile, get pneumonia, and die. Why are we bothering with guns and bombs if a school-child's ball can cause so much damage!
Originally posted by acrux
reply to post by jude11
Shouldn't it be the school could have predicted a ball would go onto the road so they should have had nets if there is a road directly behind the goals.