Driver kills boy, sues family for 1 million dollars

chinangel

New member
Sep 25, 2009
1,680
0
0
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/04/27/driver-who-killed-teen-is-suing-dead-boys-family-for-1-million/

WHAT. THE. HELL!?

Okay so umm...how does this even work? I mean is this really a thing? I just don't get it...who has the balls to kill someone's kid then sue the family!?


update:

Now the driver of the SUV, Sharlene Simon, 42, a mother of three, formerly from Innisfil, is suing the dead boy for the emotional trauma she says she has suffered. She?s also suing the two other boys, as well as the dead boy?s parents, and even his brother, who has since died. She?s also suing the County of Simcoe for failing to maintain the road.

http://www.torontosun.com/2014/04/25/driver-that-struck-teen-suing-dead-boys-family


Update 2:

Then last December, Simon filed a $1.35-million lawsuit against Majewski's estate, and against the other two bicyclists, for "great pain and suffering." Simon claims she has suffered from depression, anxiety, irritability and post-traumatic stress, and that the "enjoyment of life has been irretrievably lessened" since the accident

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/27/sharlene-simon-brandon-majewski_n_5224094.html

"She relives the terror of this incident every day. Ms. Simon has been unable to return to work since the collision. She has been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder. She is also a victim," Ellis said, according to CTV News.

http://rt.com/usa/155456-cop-wife-killed-brandon-majewski/

I know that there are people who say that the kids should've been doing things and whatnot, defending the driver.

However. It is my belief that the driver of the SUV is trying for a pay day. If this was simply about getting the family to drop their lawsuit then she wouldn't also be suing the other two families and the county.

Furthermore, there are reports that her husband, a police officer, was following behind her during the accident.

Ultimately, some people may defend her lawsuit as justifiable but I think it's disgusting.
 

Joos

Golden pantaloon.
Dec 19, 2007
662
0
0
Humanity at its worst. I hope she dies painfully in fire.
 

Mangod

Senior Member
Feb 20, 2011
829
0
21
... throw her in the slammer for depraved-heart murder; she's obviously guilty.
 

Colour Scientist

Troll the Respawn, Jeremy!
Jul 15, 2009
4,722
0
0
Not that this could be excusable in any situation but the articles do only express the side of the grieving parents.

They state that the driver was intoxicated and on her phone even thought that was never tested or proven and they aren't written in a particularly neutral manor, the driver is very much the villain of the piece.
While I understand why they're going for that angle, it doesn't present any information on behalf of the driver, only snippets of her claim, all the while discussing how the parents think that she wants to make a profit from killing their child. It's definitely trying to provoke a specific reaction in the reader and completely demonise the driver.


I'm not defending the lawsuit by any means, I just think it's worth noting that this is an incredibly one-sided story.
 

Ninjamedic

New member
Dec 8, 2009
2,569
0
0
Colour Scientist said:
It's definitely trying to provoke a specific reaction in the reader and completely demonise the driver.


I'm not defending the lawsuit by any means, I just think it's worth noting that this is an incredibly one-sided story.
You mean like every other article that gets posted here from most major news networks? People have to impotently rage at soemthing they have nothing to do with instead of doing something actually worthwhile you know.


It's alnmost like it's Fo-


Dear God it's actually Fox. Well then.


OT: "Grr, take this person, kill them for all to see an"- actually I'm sick of this, do we have to lower ourselves to this level anytime someone does something morally questionable?

Alright then, go ahead. I'll be sitting here remembering that the past 100 years actually happened.
 

Erttheking

Member
Legacy
Apr 23, 2020
10,845
1
3
Country
United States
For the love of fuck, how can we live in a world where people can get away with this stuff? If you hit a kid and kill them, it's kinda YOUR fault isn't it. In fact, with the lawsuit she's basically confessing to hitting the kid...why are we even entertaining her? She's guilty of manslaughter! Case closed! Sentence her! Don't let her sue people!
 

Colour Scientist

Troll the Respawn, Jeremy!
Jul 15, 2009
4,722
0
0
erttheking said:
For the love of fuck, how can we live in a world where people can get away with this stuff? If you hit a kid and kill them, it's kinda YOUR fault isn't it. In fact, with the lawsuit she's basically confessing to hitting the kid...why are we even entertaining her? She's guilty of third degree murder! Case closed! Sentence her! Don't let her sue people!
The parents actually say that their children were cycling on a wet, dark country road at 1.30am without any reflective gear apart from some reflectors on the actual bikes, they admit that was a mistake. They don't actually argue with the claim that the boys weren't cycling safely.

Murder doesn't come into it.
It's tragic but there's nothing to suggest that it was intentional.
 

Ubiquitous Duck

New member
Jan 16, 2014
472
0
0
I understand that it would be traumatic to accidentally kill someone.

But I don't see why there is always money being attached to these experiences. It's always money..

Also, what lawyer would ever take this case, surely its nigh impossible to bring a jury round to your side on this one?

erttheking said:
For the love of fuck, how can we live in a world where people can get away with this stuff? If you hit a kid and kill them, it's kinda YOUR fault isn't it. In fact, with the lawsuit she's basically confessing to hitting the kid...why are we even entertaining her? She's guilty of third degree murder! Case closed! Sentence her! Don't let her sue people!
I don't imagine it would be 'murder', as I don't think anyone is suggesting premeditated, purposeful killing of this teenager (required for murder).

If anything, it would be manslaughter, on the grounds of her negligence. So I guess the trial would be around, who was the most negligent. Who is to blame? Could you argue that she should've seen them and should've acted differently? (Her fault). Or did she have no chance of avoiding the incident? (Their fault).
 

GundamSentinel

The leading man, who else?
Aug 23, 2009
4,448
0
0
If I were a judge in this case my only response would be "no u" and have her pay a million dollars. People are exploiting society's tolerance for this bullshit and I don't like it. Stop it.
 

Savryc

NAPs, Spooks and Poz. Oh my!
Aug 4, 2011
395
0
0
I've seen this one doing the rounds, the driver was cleared of all wrong doing by the police, those dumbass kids were riding three abreast on a main road in the middle of the night with dark clothing and only the crappy built on reflectors you get on bikes.

But despite their now deceased children's stupidity and the police outright stating she did nothing wrong the family are now suing the driver. The driver is counter suing in the hopes they drop the case. I know this is perfect bait for the crowd that like to rip their dicks off in rage fuelled hate masturbation but could you at least do your research before calling for an innocent woman's head?

Oh who am I kidding? Of course you wont.
 

Amaror

New member
Apr 15, 2011
1,509
0
0
Colour Scientist said:
The parents actually say that their children were cycling on a wet, dark country road at 1.30am without any reflective gear apart from some reflectors on the actual bikes, they admit that was a mistake. They don't actually argue with the claim that the boys weren't cycling safely.
Murder doesn't come into it.
It's tragic but there's nothing to suggest that it was intentional.
Now i don't know how the law is in the united states, but over here in germany people are responsible for their driving.
A car is a weapon and highly deadly, if your driving one, your responsible 100%.
If your hitting or killing a person with your driving it's YOUR FAULT. It's not the dead persons fault.
If your riding your bike not safely, then your endangering yourself.
If you drive irresponsibly then your breaking the law.
I am just baffled that i even have to explain this.
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
15,464
1,153
118
Carsus Tyrell said:
I know this is perfect bait for the crowd that like to rip their dicks off in rage fuelled hate masturbation but could you at least do your research before calling for an innocent woman's head?

Oh who am I kidding? Of course you wont.
Eh, just wait and see how many people keep doing it after you've gone and pointed that out...
 

White Lightning

New member
Feb 9, 2012
797
0
0
Colour Scientist said:
erttheking said:
For the love of fuck, how can we live in a world where people can get away with this stuff? If you hit a kid and kill them, it's kinda YOUR fault isn't it. In fact, with the lawsuit she's basically confessing to hitting the kid...why are we even entertaining her? She's guilty of third degree murder! Case closed! Sentence her! Don't let her sue people!
The parents actually say that their children were cycling on a wet, dark country road at 1.30am without any reflective gear apart from some reflectors on the actual bikes, they admit that was a mistake. They don't actually argue with the claim that the boys weren't cycling safely.

Murder doesn't come into it.
It's tragic but there's nothing to suggest that it was intentional.
It's interesting that you're saying part of the blame could fall upon the dead teenager for cycling that late. I don't know if you drive but one of the first things you're taught is to always watch out for pedestrians, yes it's annoying to have some punks J-walk across the street but it's your responsibility as the operator of a large heavy and fast moving piece of metal to make sure you don't hit them. When you're speeding at night and you hit someone you have no one to blame but yourself. If she had been paying attention and driving appropriately for the time and weather this wouldn't of happened.
Ubiquitous Duck said:
I understand that it would be traumatic to accidentally kill someone.

But I don't see why there is always money being attached to these experiences. It's always money..

Also, what lawyer would ever take this case, surely its nigh impossible to bring a jury round to your side on this one?

erttheking said:
For the love of fuck, how can we live in a world where people can get away with this stuff? If you hit a kid and kill them, it's kinda YOUR fault isn't it. In fact, with the lawsuit she's basically confessing to hitting the kid...why are we even entertaining her? She's guilty of third degree murder! Case closed! Sentence her! Don't let her sue people!
I don't imagine it would be 'murder', as I don't think anyone is suggesting premeditated, purposeful killing of this teenager (required for murder).

If anything, it would be manslaughter, on the grounds of her negligence. So I guess the trial would be around, who was the most negligent. Who is to blame? Could you argue that she should've seen them and should've acted differently? (Her fault). Or did she have no chance of avoiding the incident? (Their fault).
You should take a look at the above as well. People who say they couldn't avoid the accident just aren't good drives. There is always something you could of done to prevent the accident. The only victim in this is that kid and his family, stop blaming them.
 

J Tyran

New member
Dec 15, 2011
2,407
0
0
Ubiquitous Duck said:
I understand that it would be traumatic to accidentally kill someone.

But I don't see why there is always money being attached to these experiences. It's always money..
There could be money involved, especially in countries without nationalised healthcare. The driver might have the costs associated with any counselling and psychiatric treatment as well as time off work possibly, so they would be out of pocket in having to pay for a psychologist and any anti-depressants and if they missed time off work to have recover or attend treatment all that adds up.

I will come down on the side of a driver receiving compensation to recover losses for any accident they didn't cause, not in this case as I don't have time to fact check but in principle.
 

Ubiquitous Duck

New member
Jan 16, 2014
472
0
0
White Lightning said:
You should take a look at the above as well. People who say they couldn't avoid the accident just aren't good drives. There is always something you could of done to prevent the accident. The only victim in this is that kid and his family, stop blaming them.
I'm afraid that that is what the court would have to look at in a case like this, hence why I brought it up as this topic is about the lawsuit against the family.

The heat was brought by this woman to their doorstep, not by me.

And the judgement they would have to make would be around whether she could've 'reasonably' (it always is around that word in courts) been expected to avoid the accident.

Your assertion that it is 'always' possible to prevent an accident as a driver, I think is just too naive. Sometimes an error is forced upon you or, as a driver, you have to make the best out of a situation. Until you know the most details possible, it isn't sensible to make a judgement call on who is to blame, but you can't say it 'has' to be the fault of the driver.

A court would need to be that cold to look at the facts and ask whether they had entered the road in a sensible manner. It is not just down to drivers to avoid people on the roads, people have the need to act safely on foot or on bikes or whatever when they are travelling on roads too.

The fact that the woman wants money from the parents of the child she killed is horrible. Why anyone would want money from these people, I don't know. I get that you could be traumatised from it, but that kind of action is reprehensible.

But we do need to look at what could happen in the case though. I really doubt the power of such a lawsuit, considering the morality of the situation needing to get past a jury, so who knows if it will get anywhere. Hopefully, it won't.
 

snekadid

Lord of the Salt
Mar 29, 2012
711
0
0
White Lightning said:
Colour Scientist said:
erttheking said:
For the love of fuck, how can we live in a world where people can get away with this stuff? If you hit a kid and kill them, it's kinda YOUR fault isn't it. In fact, with the lawsuit she's basically confessing to hitting the kid...why are we even entertaining her? She's guilty of third degree murder! Case closed! Sentence her! Don't let her sue people!
The parents actually say that their children were cycling on a wet, dark country road at 1.30am without any reflective gear apart from some reflectors on the actual bikes, they admit that was a mistake. They don't actually argue with the claim that the boys weren't cycling safely.

Murder doesn't come into it.
It's tragic but there's nothing to suggest that it was intentional.
It's interesting that you're saying part of the blame could fall upon the dead teenager for cycling that late. I don't know if you drive but one of the first things you're taught is to always watch out for pedestrians, yes it's annoying to have some punks J-walk across the street but it's your responsibility as the operator of a large heavy and fast moving piece of metal to make sure you don't hit them. When you're speeding at night and you hit someone you have no one to blame but yourself. If she had been paying attention and driving appropriately for the time and weather this wouldn't of happened.
Ubiquitous Duck said:
I understand that it would be traumatic to accidentally kill someone.

But I don't see why there is always money being attached to these experiences. It's always money..

Also, what lawyer would ever take this case, surely its nigh impossible to bring a jury round to your side on this one?

erttheking said:
For the love of fuck, how can we live in a world where people can get away with this stuff? If you hit a kid and kill them, it's kinda YOUR fault isn't it. In fact, with the lawsuit she's basically confessing to hitting the kid...why are we even entertaining her? She's guilty of third degree murder! Case closed! Sentence her! Don't let her sue people!
I don't imagine it would be 'murder', as I don't think anyone is suggesting premeditated, purposeful killing of this teenager (required for murder).

If anything, it would be manslaughter, on the grounds of her negligence. So I guess the trial would be around, who was the most negligent. Who is to blame? Could you argue that she should've seen them and should've acted differently? (Her fault). Or did she have no chance of avoiding the incident? (Their fault).
You should take a look at the above as well. People who say they couldn't avoid the accident just aren't good drives. There is always something you could of done to prevent the accident. The only victim in this is that kid and his family, stop blaming them.
No, They broke the law. What they did was illegal even if it didn't cause an accident. Even a pedestrian walking on the side of the road is required to have some form of reflective gear on so that they don't suddenly appear in front of a moving vehicle.
You obviously either don't drive or only drive in well lit cities as anyone that's driven on unlit country roads knows that visibility begins and ends at your headlights and anything non-reflective doesn't show within a meaningful amount of time. Why do you think deer get hit so often? They aren't jumping into your car directly for the most part, they think they can make it and we just can't see them until swerving makes no difference.