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.

(Toronto Sun)   Parents of dead teens sue driver who hit them for $1.35 million for emotional distress. Wait, that's way too reasonable to be on Fark. Must be the other way around   (torontosun.com) divider line 29
    More: Asinine, pelvic fracture, two-lane road  
•       •       •

16112 clicks; posted to Main » on 26 Apr 2014 at 7:05 AM (20 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Funniest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2014-04-26 07:19:46 AM
4 votes:
I'd be emotionally distraught as well if some kid's corpse dented my bumper and cracked my windshield
2014-04-26 08:03:47 AM
3 votes:

Squilax: Bslim: What the fark were these minors doing out at 1:30 AM, during a dark and rainy night?

Going to the store to get some snacks, jesus, is that a farking crime where you come from?


In Florida we assume all teenagers getting snacks are dangerous. Were they wearing hoodies? Exponential danger if so.
2014-04-26 08:12:23 AM
2 votes:

Squilax: Erisire: Squilax: Bslim: What the fark were these minors doing out at 1:30 AM, during a dark and rainy night?

Going to the store to get some snacks, jesus, is that a farking crime where you come from?

In Florida we assume all teenagers getting snacks are dangerous. Were they wearing hoodies? Exponential danger if so.

DANGER! HOODIES AT LARGE! DO NOT FEED AFTER MIDNIGHT


You a teenager getting snacks in a hoodie? You're gonna have a bad time.
2014-04-26 08:01:21 AM
2 votes:

Nidiot: We need some perspective here. These kids were cycling. On the road. Nothing good ever came from cyclists. Had they lived they may have gone on to wear those daft lycra outfits.

They had it coming.


And now I know Jeremy Clarkson's Fark handle...neat!
2014-04-26 09:21:55 PM
1 votes:

bunner: sno man: Bonus points for her hubby being a cop.

We really gotta stop kissing these people's asses and the personality disorder riddled cows they breed with.


I suspect being married to a cop is really entitling.
2014-04-26 05:42:23 PM
1 votes:

Squilax: Bslim: What the fark were these minors doing out at 1:30 AM, during a dark and rainy night?

Going to the store to get some snacks, jesus, is that a farking crime where you come from?


read it in Napolean Dynamites voice
2014-04-26 03:16:04 PM
1 votes:
I finally realized it's best I never win the big lottery.  Because with a hundred million dollars at my disposal, I would be hiring thugs to beat the snot out of people like this c00nt.
2014-04-26 11:33:22 AM
1 votes:

vicioushobbit: FWIW, I'm pretty sure you can't get an F on a litmus test.

It'd be a pH.


Stop unmixing my metaphors!  :  )
2014-04-26 11:30:48 AM
1 votes:

bunner: Farty McPooPants: Cop's Wife
Witnesses say she was at bar all evening and left drunk
She was DWI
She was texting
She left the scene of the accident
The police did not perform any sobriety tests because "they didn't think it was necessary"
It was 1:30 am
She pulled the old "show up at the door with a drink in your hand" tactic
Yep, it's all the kid's fault and he should pay 1.2 million even though he is dead.

The stupid, it burns.

No, the fact that this twat isn't in a holding cell without bail instead of snuggling up to some shyster to help her sh*t on the grave of a kid she just removed from this mortal coil and drive his parents into penury absolutely melting steel burns.  I defy anybody to tell me that this wouldn't comprise a criminal case if she wasn't blowing a cop every night.  How many more litmus tests to see just how much sh* we'll eat from "the people in charge" to we need to get an F on?


FWIW, I'm pretty sure you can't get an F on a litmus test.

It'd be a pH.
2014-04-26 11:23:38 AM
1 votes:
There's a dangerous new trend among teens called 'bike riding'. Just recentley a young boy died of a result of bike riding. Tune in at 11 to learn facts that every parrent needs to know about this alarming new trend.
2014-04-26 11:15:09 AM
1 votes:
Three teenaged boys at 1:30 AM have a sudden craving for hot dogs which necessitates bicycle riding during a rainstorm. Conclusion: Marijuana.

Meanwhile a woman is driving home faster than the speed limit while monitored by her husband in a second vehicle. Conclusion: Alcohol.

Nobody deserves money.
2014-04-26 10:54:17 AM
1 votes:

Bomb Head Mohammed: Ok, I'll bite and did RTFA.

The parents let the kid, for whom they are legally responsible, ride a bike without lights in the middle of the night in the middle of a road ("but he's a good kid.")  the kid was struck and killed by a driver going a reasonable speed (90 in an 80 km zone is hardly unreasonable) who was understandably traumatized by what had happened.

take away the emotional argument "bbb.b.bb.bbut the kid's dead!" out of it and she'd certainly have a point.  i mean, look at it this way - what if the kid had just put his bicycle in the middle of the road (with him somewhere nearby) which the suv hit and somehow emotionally scarred the driver such that he/she was truly too afraid to drive at night any more.  would the parents not be responsible?  of course they would.


I'm going with the argument:
It should be legal to hit bicyclists.
2014-04-26 09:56:39 AM
1 votes:

Mike_1962: TomD9938: Squilax: Bslim: What the fark were these minors doing out at 1:30 AM, during a dark and rainy night?

Going to the store to get some snacks, jesus, is that a farking crime where you come from?

In my case, yes.

From the city of St Paul's website:

Unaccompanied minors over 15 and under 18 are restricted from public places from 12:01 am to 4:00 am daily

Really? Wow.


Good to know 7 and 14 year olds are exempted.
2014-04-26 09:54:41 AM
1 votes:

TomD9938: Squilax: Bslim: What the fark were these minors doing out at 1:30 AM, during a dark and rainy night?

Going to the store to get some snacks, jesus, is that a farking crime where you come from?

In my case, yes.

From the city of St Paul's website:

Unaccompanied minors over 15 and under 18 are restricted from public places from 12:01 am to 4:00 am daily


Really? Wow.
2014-04-26 09:27:16 AM
1 votes:
Hey, it takes me 3 years to pay off my car.  The parents only need 9 months to crank out another kid.  I'd sue them as well.
2014-04-26 09:19:49 AM
1 votes:
I sure hope nobody minds if I hit proffer what I feel is a more germane aspect of this case whilst this fascinating armchair review of the possible party at fault in this MVA, but

i.imgur.com
2014-04-26 08:32:41 AM
1 votes:

Squilax: a cute, precocious young girl who is feisty


x1.fjcdn.com
2014-04-26 08:27:31 AM
1 votes:

Erisire: Squilax: Erisire: Squilax: Bslim: What the fark were these minors doing out at 1:30 AM, during a dark and rainy night?

Going to the store to get some snacks, jesus, is that a farking crime where you come from?

In Florida we assume all teenagers getting snacks are dangerous. Were they wearing hoodies? Exponential danger if so.

DANGER! HOODIES AT LARGE! DO NOT FEED AFTER MIDNIGHT

You a teenager getting snacks in a hoodie? You're gonna have a bad time.


I always wear my "Adult White Guy" hoodie when I go out to get snacks.
2014-04-26 08:12:28 AM
1 votes:

guardian_devil: Bomb Head Mohammed: Ok, I'll bite and did RTFA.

The parents let the kid, for whom they are legally responsible, ride a bike without lights in the middle of the night in the middle of a road ("but he's a good kid.")  the kid was struck and killed by a driver going a reasonable speed (90 in an 80 km zone is hardly unreasonable) who was understandably traumatized by what had happened.

take away the emotional argument "bbb.b.bb.bbut the kid's dead!" out of it and she'd certainly have a point.  i mean, look at it this way - what if the kid had just put his bicycle in the middle of the road (with him somewhere nearby) which the suv hit and somehow emotionally scarred the driver such that he/she was truly too afraid to drive at night any more.  would the parents not be responsible?  of course they would.

I don't have kids. Can almost guarantee you don't either based on those comments. I hate children, but you do NOT sue the family of a dead kid. That's "Not being a scumbag 101"


The kid was clearly at fault. Just because the family is mourning doesn't excuse his actions.
2014-04-26 08:10:01 AM
1 votes:
If the kids were wearing spandex, she might have a case.
2014-04-26 08:06:40 AM
1 votes:

Erisire: Squilax: Bslim: What the fark were these minors doing out at 1:30 AM, during a dark and rainy night?

Going to the store to get some snacks, jesus, is that a farking crime where you come from?

In Florida we assume all teenagers getting snacks are dangerous. Were they wearing hoodies? Exponential danger if so.


DANGER! HOODIES AT LARGE! DO NOT FEED AFTER MIDNIGHT
2014-04-26 08:00:17 AM
1 votes:
We need some perspective here. These kids were cycling. On the road. Nothing good ever came from cyclists. Had they lived they may have gone on to wear those daft lycra outfits.

They had it coming.
2014-04-26 07:54:33 AM
1 votes:

jimpapa: it was an accident
not her fault
if anyone was at fault it was the kids.
their folks are suing her which is wrong
so she counter sues, no choice here
end of story
   if any of you that wish her dead had the misfortune to hit some kid riding his bike in the middle of the road in the middle of the night and were getting sued for it, you would do the same thing to protect yourself.


Responding in a way that you might understand:

it wasn't an accident
she was driving over the speed limit
she shouldn't have been driving even the speed limit
her choice should have been to settle and pay the family
end of story
2014-04-26 07:48:14 AM
1 votes:

bunner: If your actions kill an innocent person and you try and get paid by the people from whose bosom you have torn them, you are a gutless, nasty pice of sh*t.  Period.


I might have said this differently, but PTSD is indeed a terrible thing, and perhaps you could construe her possible feelings of guilt as symptoms of PTSD, it can be awfully hard to sleep at night and get through the day when you're forced to remember that you killed a kid or two, even when not drinking. But if you caused the death of someone, and then proceed to sue that person's family for emotional distress, you are an unmitigated piece of shiat and welcome to find the race of other unmitigated pieces of shiat and live among them, because you aren't, then, considered human anymore. Go forth and fark thyself into the sunset.
2014-04-26 07:42:58 AM
1 votes:

Mr. Right: According to the article, the parents' lawyer has filed a routine suit alleging that the driver was drunk.  The initial police report also stated that the driver's husband, a police officer, was following his wife at the time of the accident.  I'm not sure about Canada, but in the U.S., a police officer can easily get a fellow officer to overlook routine exams like a breathalyzer and then "help" that officer write the incident report.

Hopefully, in filing this lawsuit, the driver opens herself up for a complete investigation.  Is it possible, in Canada, that she could end up facing vehicular manslaughter charges if she's determined to have been drinking?  Could her husband face disciplinary charges if he was involved in some kind of coverup?


I'm not entirely sure of how it works in Canadialand, but in the US, this would spark an Internal Affairs investigation that could lead to the guy losing his job and/or being prosecuted for a charge of conspiracy.

I look forward to the follow up on this.
2014-04-26 07:40:42 AM
1 votes:

Bslim: What the fark were these minors doing out at 1:30 AM, during a dark and rainy night?


Going to the store to get some snacks, jesus, is that a farking crime where you come from?
2014-04-26 07:34:08 AM
1 votes:
The impact of the collision cracked the windshield of her SUV, dented the bumper, a headlight was busted, the roof where Brandon hit was dented and scratched and a side mirror dangled by its wires.

It's not so cut and dried against the plaintiff when the gruesome facts are laid out so plainly.
2014-04-26 07:25:20 AM
1 votes:
Ok, I'll bite and did RTFA.

The parents let the kid, for whom they are legally responsible, ride a bike without lights in the middle of the night in the middle of a road ("but he's a good kid.")  the kid was struck and killed by a driver going a reasonable speed (90 in an 80 km zone is hardly unreasonable) who was understandably traumatized by what had happened.

take away the emotional argument "bbb.b.bb.bbut the kid's dead!" out of it and she'd certainly have a point.  i mean, look at it this way - what if the kid had just put his bicycle in the middle of the road (with him somewhere nearby) which the suv hit and somehow emotionally scarred the driver such that he/she was truly too afraid to drive at night any more.  would the parents not be responsible?  of course they would.
2014-04-26 07:24:49 AM
1 votes:
I will willingly serve the jail time of anybody that murders this pathetic piece of human garbage.
 
Displayed 29 of 29 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report