If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(WTOP)   World's seventh richest woman gets in car accident in Virginia, damaging her Porsche SUV. She killed some plebe, too, but let's try to stay focused on what's important, okay?   (wtop.com) divider line 95
    More: Sad, Porsche SUV, Northern Virginia, the heaviest people, Mars Inc.  
•       •       •

12003 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 Oct 2013 at 10:22 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



95 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-10-09 09:55:53 AM  
The victim lived to 86 without wearing her seatbelt.  Impressive.  I'm sure her family won't sue the sh*t out of Mars for gross negligence.
 
2013-10-09 10:04:59 AM  
Dunno, I'd say if you want to forego wearing a seatbelt you should agree not to use public funds for your medical bills nor be sued for any reason in the event of an accident.
 
2013-10-09 10:08:28 AM  
It will be so awesome if they prove she was playing Candy Crush on her phone when she drove across the line.
 
2013-10-09 10:19:42 AM  
If you think she'll serve even one minute of jail time I've got a bridge to sell you...and it's made of chocolate.
 
2013-10-09 10:23:47 AM  

Walker: If you think she'll serve even one minute of jail time I've got a bridge to sell you...and it's made of chocolate.


It doesn't sound ...from that description at least... that she's done anything that would require jail time. If she was drunk or speeding or reckless, yes, but it sounds like it was an accident.

It probably wouldn't have been a tragic accident if the idiot had worn her seatbelt.
 
2013-10-09 10:23:51 AM  

enry: Dunno, I'd say if you want to forego wearing a seatbelt you should agree not to use public funds for your medical bills nor be sued for any reason in the event of an accident.


Yeah, it's the lack of a seatbelt's fault that the other driver was negligent. Good call.
 
2013-10-09 10:24:46 AM  

Carn: It will be so awesome if they prove she was playing Candy Crush on her phone when she drove across the line.


She's in her 70s, if she even owns a phone on which Candy Crush can be installed I'd be impressed.
 
2013-10-09 10:24:51 AM  
Not wearing a seatbelt.  No sympathy.
 
2013-10-09 10:24:59 AM  
Was she sexting?

No pictures, please.
 
2013-10-09 10:25:06 AM  

kronicfeld: Yeah, it's the lack of a seatbelt's fault that the other driver was negligent. Good call.


You can't control the other driver. You can, however, prevent yourself from rattling around like a ping pong ball if the other driver hits you.
 
2013-10-09 10:25:54 AM  

kronicfeld: enry: Dunno, I'd say if you want to forego wearing a seatbelt you should agree not to use public funds for your medical bills nor be sued for any reason in the event of an accident.

Yeah, it's the lack of a seatbelt's fault that the other driver was negligent. Good call.


They were both negligent.  It's like offsetting penalties in football but you don't get to replay the down.
 
2013-10-09 10:26:23 AM  
Badger Badger  Badger  Badger  MARS BAR
 
2013-10-09 10:27:00 AM  
With all of the old people that are in this incident, I think we should just count our blessings that no farmer's market was involved.
 
2013-10-09 10:28:27 AM  

what_now: Walker: If you think she'll serve even one minute of jail time I've got a bridge to sell you...and it's made of chocolate.

It doesn't sound ...from that description at least... that she's done anything that would require jail time. If she was drunk or speeding or reckless, yes, but it sounds like it was an accident.

It probably wouldn't have been a tragic accident if the idiot had worn her seatbelt.


Mars' Porsche crossed the center line into oncoming traffic.  That's going to lead to very bad things 9 times out of 10.
 
2013-10-09 10:28:31 AM  

DoBeDoBeDo: They were both negligent.


One of them caused the collision. The other didn't. This is not BSABSVD1.

1Both Sides Are Bad So Vote Defendant
 
2013-10-09 10:28:44 AM  
oh come on, i dont think barbara bush is THAT rich.
 
2013-10-09 10:29:08 AM  
Don't you mean "8th richest"?
 
2013-10-09 10:29:31 AM  

kronicfeld: Yeah, it's the lack of a seatbelt's fault that the other driver was negligent. Good call.


One person can cause an accident while the other person can cause it to be severe. It's not an either/or proposition. Fault can be and often is apportioned to multiple involved parties in crashes, I don't see why the severity of injuries shouldn't also be taken into consideration if it can be reasonably surmised that the only reason the person was badly injured or killed is because they chose to make no effort to prevent the outcome. Why should one person's negligence be used to complete excuse another's?
 
2013-10-09 10:31:17 AM  
Mars? Driving? Hershey highway trifecta in play?
 
2013-10-09 10:31:19 AM  

skozlaw: kronicfeld: Yeah, it's the lack of a seatbelt's fault that the other driver was negligent. Good call.

One person can cause an accident while the other person can cause it to be severe. It's not an either/or proposition. Fault can be and often is apportioned to multiple involved parties in crashes, I don't see why the severity of injuries shouldn't also be taken into consideration if it can be reasonably surmised that the only reason the person was badly injured or killed is because they chose to make no effort to prevent the outcome. Why should one person's negligence be used to complete excuse another's?


Just so you know, you are arguing with a lawyer.
 
2013-10-09 10:31:32 AM  
You got your Porsche in my minivan.
You got your Minivan in my Porsche.

Mars' PorscheVan Crunch
Two great tastes that go great together.
 
2013-10-09 10:31:35 AM  

kronicfeld: DoBeDoBeDo: They were both negligent.

One of them caused the collision. The other didn't. This is not BSABSVD1.

1Both Sides Are Bad So Vote Defendant


Virginia has seat belt laws, the victims lack of following the law shouldn't mean extra charges on the defendant.
 
2013-10-09 10:31:56 AM  
I think the survivinf family should be awarded every last penny of the victim's lost wages.
 
2013-10-09 10:33:43 AM  
Oh, come now. The accident had nothing to do with wealth, or how fancy the car was. It was because she was a woman.
 
2013-10-09 10:36:10 AM  
You take your victim as you find him. If the victim was not himself or herself a contributing cause to the occurrence of the negligence, then it is irrelevant whether the victim was particularly more or particularly less prone to injury for any reason.
 
2013-10-09 10:36:56 AM  
The Loudoun County Sheriff's Office says Mars, who turns 74 Thursday, was driving a Porsche SUV in Aldie on Friday when it crossed the center line and hit a minivan. The sheriff's office says 86-year-old minivan passenger Irene Ellisor of Huntsville, Texas, was not wearing a seatbelt and died at the scene.  The Loudoun County Coroner remarked, "74 and 86? My job is already half done here."
 
2013-10-09 10:38:04 AM  
But is she single?

/I'll do conjugal visits for $10mil in the will
//who am I kidding. $10, cash up front
 
2013-10-09 10:39:35 AM  
Seatbelts help keep ya from bouncing around (or out) of your car.  Was going to post something about how old people should be retested every couple years to be able to legally drive.  Or how we have some really huge passenger vehicles on the road, and some really small ones...the small vehicles don't stand a chance.

But hard to be outraged if you're not wearing ya damn seatbelt
 
2013-10-09 10:39:38 AM  

kronicfeld: You take your victim as you find him. If the victim was not himself or herself a contributing cause to the occurrence of the negligence, then it is irrelevant whether the victim was particularly more or particularly less prone to injury for any reason.


That's not the point. Why shouldn't that be considered? I'm not saying it is, but upon what justification is it not?
 
2013-10-09 10:40:56 AM  
Mars co-owner? MARS co-owner? Farking government sold off a whole planet? Thanks, Obama!

/If you're 86 and get in a head-on collision at any speed at all, seat belt's probably not going to save you. That Delta V is a mofo.
 
GBB
2013-10-09 10:42:05 AM  
TFA:"filled with sorrow for the loss of life"

Most depressing candy bar ingredient ever.

/Unless it's chocolate covered, then it breaks even.
 
2013-10-09 10:42:33 AM  

kronicfeld: You take your victim as you find him. If the victim was not himself or herself a contributing cause to the occurrence of the negligence, then it is irrelevant whether the victim was particularly more or particularly less prone to injury for any reason.


I disagree. If the lady was wearing a seatbelt, and she walked away from that crash with like..a broken arm.. we wouldn't be hearing about this.
 
2013-10-09 10:43:21 AM  

kronicfeld: Yeah, it's the lack of a seatbelt's fault that the other driver was negligent. Good call.


We should stop telling people to wear their seat-belt, because "blaming the victim".
 
2013-10-09 10:45:12 AM  

skozlaw: kronicfeld: You take your victim as you find him. If the victim was not himself or herself a contributing cause to the occurrence of the negligence, then it is irrelevant whether the victim was particularly more or particularly less prone to injury for any reason.

That's not the point. Why shouldn't that be considered? I'm not saying it is, but upon what justification is it not?


Possibly because it opens up a pretty large gray area as far as assumptions on what "could" have happened?

/Not a lawyer
//Not frozen or a caveman, either
 
2013-10-09 10:45:25 AM  
The patrons of the Aldie Farmers Market felt a great weight lifted from their shoulders, though they knew not why...
 
2013-10-09 10:46:49 AM  
World's seventh richest woman gets in car accident in Virginia, damaging her Porsche SUV. She killed some plebe, too, but let's try to stay focused on what's important, okay?

Right, subby.  Like the fact that there was a fatal car crash and WTF does it matter that a rich person was involved.  You are the supreme champion on what's important.  And rich.
 
2013-10-09 10:47:13 AM  

kronicfeld: enry: Dunno, I'd say if you want to forego wearing a seatbelt you should agree not to use public funds for your medical bills nor be sued for any reason in the event of an accident.

Yeah, it's the lack of a seatbelt's fault that the other driver was negligent. Good call.


I didn't say the other driver couldn't be criminally charged, just that the injuries would have been far less had the seatbelt been used properly.
 
2013-10-09 10:47:32 AM  

LemSkroob: Oh, come now. The accident had nothing to do with wealth, or how fancy the car was. It was because she was a woman.


If only she'd driven a clunker incapable of going above 60.
 
2013-10-09 10:49:12 AM  
Was this her?

houston.culturemap.com
 
2013-10-09 10:49:16 AM  

mbillips: Mars co-owner? MARS co-owner? Farking government sold off a whole planet? Thanks, Obama!

/If you're 86 and get in a head-on collision at any speed at all, seat belt's probably not going to save you. That Delta V is a mofo.


I own Uranus

/NTTAWWT
 
2013-10-09 10:51:13 AM  

enry: I didn't say the other driver couldn't be criminally charged, just that the injuries would have been far less had the seatbelt been used properly.


Since we don't know what her injuries were, we don't know that the seatbelt would have helped. I've seen elderly/infirm/brittle people severely injured in collisions that don't look particularly "catastrophic" on their face.
 
2013-10-09 10:51:20 AM  

stampylives: oh come on, i dont think barbara bush is THAT rich.


Wrong Bush, but I do so love to see this brought back up.

gallery.socionix.com

But in due fairness, it might have been the Joker.
 
2013-10-09 10:53:13 AM  
Whar seats belts? WHAR?

lovablelabelsblog.com
 
2013-10-09 10:53:14 AM  

skozlaw: kronicfeld: Yeah, it's the lack of a seatbelt's fault that the other driver was negligent. Good call.

One person can cause an accident while the other person can cause it to be severe. It's not an either/or proposition. Fault can be and often is apportioned to multiple involved parties in crashes, I don't see why the severity of injuries shouldn't also be taken into consideration if it can be reasonably surmised that the only reason the person was badly injured or killed is because they chose to make no effort to prevent the outcome. Why should one person's negligence be used to complete excuse another's?


Here's the thing that you might be missing.  The accident wouldn't have happened AT ALL if the lady hadn't crossed the center line.  Period. End of story.  It doesn't matter if the victim was or was not wearing a seatbelt.  It's who is AT FAULT for the accident.
 
2013-10-09 10:53:52 AM  
The old crone had it coming.  I'm glad she's dead, and I hope she burns in hell.
 
2013-10-09 10:54:01 AM  

skozlaw: kronicfeld: You take your victim as you find him. If the victim was not himself or herself a contributing cause to the occurrence of the negligence, then it is irrelevant whether the victim was particularly more or particularly less prone to injury for any reason.

That's not the point. Why shouldn't that be considered? I'm not saying it is, but upon what justification is it not?


Depends on the state.Virginia has a pure contributory negligence law, so the case could be thrown out if the Mars were able to show that the 86-year-old did anything negligent that contributed to the accident. I don't think you can claim negligence as a factor in the severity of injuries, though. Mars is 100 percent liable for the accident, and the old lady would have sustained no injuries if Mars had stayed on her side of the road, so I don't think you can argue that not wearing a seatbelt was negligent. If the old lady had been on the phone and that caused her to fail to swerve out of Mars' way, that would be different.

/People who think it's weird the old lady made it to 86 without wearing a seat belt. NOBODY wore seatbelts prior to about 1980, except for a few safety nerds, and most cars didn't even have seatbelts until the mid-1960s. And 99.9-something percent got away with it their entire driving careers.Same goes for bike helmets, but you can add some decimal places.

//Porsche and SUV are not words that should be in close proximity. The Cayenne and Panamera are abominations unto the gods of motoring.
 
2013-10-09 10:55:02 AM  
Everyone makes mistakes when driving and money has nothing to do with the cause of the accident or whether someone dies. But that won't stop someone thinking "oh my god filthy rich person did something wrong, now I have an excuse to sue and get mine". If no rich person was involved we wouldn't be hearing about this incident, also sad.
 
2013-10-09 10:57:40 AM  
Oh, come now. The accident had nothing to do with wealth, or how fancy the car was. It was because she was an old woman.

FTFY
 
2013-10-09 10:59:20 AM  

kronicfeld: enry: Dunno, I'd say if you want to forego wearing a seatbelt you should agree not to use public funds for your medical bills nor be sued for any reason in the event of an accident.

Yeah, it's the lack of a seatbelt's fault that the other driver was negligent. Good call.


some courts have discussed whether an innocent driver's failure to wear a seatbelt should be a factor in the calculations of damages.  generally, all of us have a duty to mitigate the harm done to us, where possible, and some have argued that a failure to wear a seatbelt is a failure to mitigate the risk of harm.

that does not in any way affect liability, but when damages are calculated (after someone is found liable), the total recovery might be less because you have more damages than you would have had, had you have worn a seatbelt...

(i'm not a personal injury lawyer, so i don't remember whether/which courts are for or against the seatbelt argument... either way, it is a factor for the damages calculation, not the calculation of liability.  someone driving over the median into oncoming traffic is no less liable because she plowed into someone who was not wearing a seatbelt - and trying to argue otherwise is silly/trolly)
 
2013-10-09 11:00:45 AM  
Beeblebrox:   Was it her?


You don't know the difference between a Mars bar and an Oh Henry! - time for a candy lineup!

12.media.tumblr.com
 
Displayed 50 of 95 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report