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.

 

Parents Must Pay $200,000 After Son Kicks Ball Into Street

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 12:44 PM
link   
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.

Alternatively if you do a google search using this thread's title it will also give the you the link.

The case of sueing a family of a boy that kicked a ball onto the street, whilst at school, caused an 87 year old man to crash his bike & break his leg. He then go senile & 15 months later dies from pneumonia when food became stuck in his throat. The family must payout the equivalent of $200,000



From Osaka, Japan


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.


Some comments on the case from Japanese citizens.

“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.”


edit on 28-6-2011 by acrux because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 12:48 PM
link   
So broken bones leads to senility? Is this a medically proven correlation?



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 12:51 PM
link   
$200000 is a grossly large number for this type of incident. Perhaps they should compensate if there are medical costs the man had to pay, but I doubt it was in excess of 200k. Its not their fault he chocked to death, that was a separate event.

A ploy to make some easy cash? hmmmm . . . . . . .
edit on 28-6-2011 by mattime because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 12:57 PM
link   
reply to post by mattime
 


the rest of the worlds sure catching up to the American spurious claim culture.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by mattime
 
They originally want ¥50,000,000.00

By todays exchange as of 29/06/2011 that would be

¥50,000,000.00 JPY = $615,783.63 USD

www.xe.com...
edit on 28-6-2011 by acrux because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 01:09 PM
link   
OMG hogwash, symptoms showed up way after the accident.



pneumonia when food became stuck in his throat


That has nothing to do with the bicycle accident. I would find a good lawyer. Total BS.




posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 01:21 PM
link   


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.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 01:29 PM
link   
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.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 01:31 PM
link   
You've got to be kidding me. An 87 year old man going senile and then dying from a feeding related incident has nothing at all to do with this child..

To be fair, Perhaps the repaying of the medical bill relating ONLY to the broken leg and whatever minor reparations to the bike should suffice. The rest of this charge is ridiculous. I also agree fully with many of the Japanese replies. This issue could have been avoided by a net, or a fence, or any combination of the two in an open area away from streets..



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 01:32 PM
link   
This is just insane. It is obvious that the one incident has no association with his death. I fell of my bike when I was 10 and I skinned my elbow, does that mean I can sue the bike manufacturer when I'm 60 if I have a heart attack?

Another thing to take into account... this will sound rude but how much is an 86 year old man worth? In cases where a person dies, at least in the US, it is common to look at their expected earning potential over the course of their life as a measure to attach monetary compensations. So is the court suggesting that at 86 years old this man still had an earning potential of $200,000? If so, I'm moving to Japan.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 01:35 PM
link   

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.
And this guy is a judge? this man obviously lacks common sense and should be removed from the court position post haste...



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 01:41 PM
link   

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.


I have serious doubts about this post: no link because the news source has pornographic images? Not a very reputable or professional news source...sounds like a hoax or satire to me.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 01:43 PM
link   
It's unfortunate that other countries have these same sue-happy scumbags that the US does.

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!

This is just stupid, that old man, his family, or whoever is responsible for the lawsuit should be ashamed of themselves. I thought people always talked about the Japanese being a people of honor? Doesn't seem like much of that here.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by acrux
Alternatively if you do a google search using this thread's title it will also give the you the link.

I tried this. It didn't work for me.
This was my 1st result- www.abovetopsecret.com...
This was my 2nd- www.abovetopsecret.com...
and this was the 3rd - www.powerball.com...


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.
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.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by James1982
 



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!


In Oz we a law that if you drive past a pub & a drunk walks out in front of your car, you can be liable because you should know drunks come out of pubs.

If you put that logic to the case the old man was riding past a school & kids play with balls, so it was his fault for hitting the ball.
edit on 28-6-2011 by acrux because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 01:56 PM
link   
reply to post by BrokenCircles
 
I U2U the link to you.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 02:17 PM
link   
I broke my foot a while ago at a hotel, if I choke and die on something does that mean those two are somehow related and I can sue? w000ttt



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 02:18 PM
link   
reply to post by acrux
 


At least in the US, it seems that if a pedestrian gets hit by a car, 99.99% of the time, it's automatically the driver's fault, regardless of if it's in front of a pub or a random stretch of street somewhere.

That doesn't seem right to me, nor does the law you are discussing about hitting drunk pub-goers. If an automobile has a reasonable amount of time to stop, before hitting a person, and they don't for whatever reason I feel it should be the motorist's fault. But honestly there are times where complete idiots of pedestrians get hit, and it's not the fault of the driver. I mean, if someone is standing on the side of the road, and jumps out at the last second and gets hit, there is not any possible way the driver could have stopped before hitting them.

Anyway, I'm getting a bit carried away here, but I don't think those types of laws really have much to do with what I was talking about.

Those laws put people in jail because they hit someone, what I'm talking about here is an old, slow, fragile man riding a bike around at his own will, when pretty much anything could cause him to fall and get injured.

When I was a kid I would often play around with the neighbor children, riding bikes, playing basketball and kickball. I can remember countless times getting hit with a ball while I was riding my bike, not once did I fall over. If I did fall over, and get hurt, I am sure my mother wouldn't have blamed the kid with the ball, because this kind of this just happens, it's not someone's fault.

It's not as if the child was trying to kill this guy by kicking a ball at him (or maybe he was? Not sure actually...) he was just a kid playing ball at school. Balls get thrown and kicked out into the street, or over people's fences into their yard all the time. There is even the story of Osama's compound, that when kids would kick or throw balls over the wall, they would just pay them money for a new ball, instead of letting them into the yard. This stuff happens, it's not malicious, and a little kid (or his family in this case) shouldn't be held responsible for a blame-less mistake. But if we are going to start placing blame, I'd put some of it on the old man, because it was his physical state that caused him so much injury, not the kid's ball.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 03:05 PM
link   
The only predictable thing in this story is that some #head would sue for such spurious reasons. I had no idea the Japanese were as ridiculous as we are in the US concerning tort liability. Between this and TEPCO they are beginning to lose my respect.
And I may have eaten my last sushi too!



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 03:14 PM
link   

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.



The school can anticipate the need for a net, yes.

The child predicts the ball will go in the net...Everytime!

That's what I was getting at.




edit on 28-6-2011 by jude11 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join