Family sues Nissan over toddler's death (suing over Infiniti FX)
#31
Moderator
iTrader: (8)
Originally posted by mikeloc24
My feelings exactly. Bottom line, your dumb *** was in too much of a hurry and didn't take the proper steps to back the vehicle out, plain and simple. Why your 2 year old was out in the driveway unsupervised in the first place is the real issue here. Where was the wife? The idiot husband was too cheap to get the camera option and now he's mad at Nissan for not giving it to him for free?? gimme a break! losers! Pay attention to your &^%$#@! kids!!!!!!
My feelings exactly. Bottom line, your dumb *** was in too much of a hurry and didn't take the proper steps to back the vehicle out, plain and simple. Why your 2 year old was out in the driveway unsupervised in the first place is the real issue here. Where was the wife? The idiot husband was too cheap to get the camera option and now he's mad at Nissan for not giving it to him for free?? gimme a break! losers! Pay attention to your &^%$#@! kids!!!!!!
I hope the judge throws this case out and charge the parents for child negligent!!!
#32
Originally posted by qtb33
Welcome to America....the land of ,"It's someone else's fault!"
He should be neutered, b/c he is obviously not responsible enough to be a parent. Not b/c he ran his child over but b/c he won't admit he messed up.
Welcome to America....the land of ,"It's someone else's fault!"
He should be neutered, b/c he is obviously not responsible enough to be a parent. Not b/c he ran his child over but b/c he won't admit he messed up.
And people wonder why tort reform is needed. If people knew you would get stuck with a huge lawyer bill if you lose, cases like this would never get started. I'm sure some ambulance chasing attorney talked them into it. and is footing the bill
#34
Lexus Fanatic
Maybe John Edwards will take on the case. Now that he's unemployed....or will be next month.....he'll be looking for some work. And he's very experienced at just this kind of frivolous stuff.
#37
Pole Position
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This scumbag is lucky he doesn't live around here. The Commonwealth Attorney's office would be considering filing to the Grand Jury for possible negligent homicide and/or parental abuse and neglect.
#39
Lexus Test Driver
After I read the first post, I was just pissed off. Gimme a freaking break.
If he twisted his lazy as$ head and looked out the rear window, maybe he could have spotted his little girl. Maybe she was right below the bumper and looking out the window won't help??? Well, guess what? A freaking back up camera probably would have missed it too!
I don't know about you guys, when I back up my car out of the driveway, I back up REALLY REALLY REALLY SLOW. I don't even let my foot off the brakes. Don't you think if you hit a 30lbs thing, you would feel it and stop the car right away?
What did he do? Did he feel the bump and decide to keep going until both wheels ran over her? Maybe he wasn't looking back and realized that he ran over his child when he saw her dead body coming out from the front of the car (where his head was facing).
I would LOVE to see them on Judge Judy.....is she still around? I can just hear her ripping into them.
If he twisted his lazy as$ head and looked out the rear window, maybe he could have spotted his little girl. Maybe she was right below the bumper and looking out the window won't help??? Well, guess what? A freaking back up camera probably would have missed it too!
I don't know about you guys, when I back up my car out of the driveway, I back up REALLY REALLY REALLY SLOW. I don't even let my foot off the brakes. Don't you think if you hit a 30lbs thing, you would feel it and stop the car right away?
What did he do? Did he feel the bump and decide to keep going until both wheels ran over her? Maybe he wasn't looking back and realized that he ran over his child when he saw her dead body coming out from the front of the car (where his head was facing).
I would LOVE to see them on Judge Judy.....is she still around? I can just hear her ripping into them.
Last edited by Cadd; 12-05-04 at 07:43 PM.
#41
Lexus Champion
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 2,175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by mmarshall
I agree this is a frivolus lawsuit and should be tossed out........but Nissan also has got some explaining to do why it doesn't install more cameras, particularly if they are available. The fact that there are no grounds to sue doesn't absolve Nissan from having to explain its marketing decisions. Auto companies do a lot of dumb things and often never really have to EXPLAIN them......and THAT has to change.
I agree this is a frivolus lawsuit and should be tossed out........but Nissan also has got some explaining to do why it doesn't install more cameras, particularly if they are available. The fact that there are no grounds to sue doesn't absolve Nissan from having to explain its marketing decisions. Auto companies do a lot of dumb things and often never really have to EXPLAIN them......and THAT has to change.
Nissan doesn't install cameras b/c a camera also requires a display and a camera+ display costs money. I couldn't have afforded a one-thousand dollar "I'm a moron and can't back my car properly" surcharge on my Sentra.
M.
#42
sure, there are some things that car companies do that possibly put people at risk.
But you are comparing cameras as a safety feature that is like seat belts. cameras were intended to give you a view of what is behind you, IN ADDITION TO TURNING THEIR HEAD AND LOOKING BACK.
millions of drivers reverse everyday with out hitting some thing or some one. cameras arent a necessity in driving. just because it is available does not mean a company must include it in all of their products.
GPS nav systems are available AND they help people from getting lost..but are they a necessity? no.
are they helpful sure, but how did people find directions before nav systems? maps.
cameras are a good thing, but in this case perantal supervision would have been better. the parents neglected their child, and now they want some else to blame.
But you are comparing cameras as a safety feature that is like seat belts. cameras were intended to give you a view of what is behind you, IN ADDITION TO TURNING THEIR HEAD AND LOOKING BACK.
millions of drivers reverse everyday with out hitting some thing or some one. cameras arent a necessity in driving. just because it is available does not mean a company must include it in all of their products.
GPS nav systems are available AND they help people from getting lost..but are they a necessity? no.
are they helpful sure, but how did people find directions before nav systems? maps.
cameras are a good thing, but in this case perantal supervision would have been better. the parents neglected their child, and now they want some else to blame.
Originally posted by mmarshall
I agree this is a frivolus lawsuit and should be tossed out........but Nissan also has got some explaining to do why it doesn't install more cameras, particularly if they are available. The fact that there are no grounds to sue doesn't absolve Nissan from having to explain its marketing decisions. Auto companies do a lot of dumb things and often never really have to EXPLAIN them......and THAT has to change.
I agree this is a frivolus lawsuit and should be tossed out........but Nissan also has got some explaining to do why it doesn't install more cameras, particularly if they are available. The fact that there are no grounds to sue doesn't absolve Nissan from having to explain its marketing decisions. Auto companies do a lot of dumb things and often never really have to EXPLAIN them......and THAT has to change.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
LexFather
Car Chat
1
08-26-09 11:55 PM