Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: Parker on June 22, 2014, 07:06:40 PM
-
Ok, parents teenage son leaves 14 yr old sister in car to get some sleep. He locks the car. When his classes are done at 3 pm, he comes back and she is dead. Parents sue BMW for double lock feature. The car is a 1997 BMW.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/no-escape-california-family-sues-bmw-after-teen-dies-locked-n100881 (http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/no-escape-california-family-sues-bmw-after-teen-dies-locked-n100881)
-
Great job by the family's attorney at losing the case before it gets in front of a judge
“There’s nothing you can do electronically in any way to escape that car,” he said. “I found the 1997 handbook, it clearly states that if you lock the car from the outside, the occupants cannot get out. The problem is that this was a 16-year-old car and my clients didn’t have the luxury of having the handbook.”
::)
-
Great job by the family's attorney at losing the case before it gets in front of a judge
::)
Another problem is that we don't know that she tried to get out. Because you can kick the window out.
The problem is that the son thought it was a great idea to leave his sister in the car to get some rest. Why didn't she just go to school? Or stay home?
We all know, that the parents don't want the brother to think that he was the one who really killed his sister with his brilliant thinking, but it was BMW's fault that he locked the doors.
-
Another dipshit family trying to get free money
I bet they would settle out of court for a preowned 2013 bmw 750i
-
Didnt read link, what exactly killed the teenage? Don't tell me dipshit left the car running?
-
Salas added that Martinez's family are farmworkers and will struggle to pay for her funeral.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2420147/Graciela-Martinez-14-dies-inside-hot-car-parked-Madera-California-school.html#ixzz35Qn4YMQg
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
They're farm workers but they bought their kids a BMW to drive to school?
Graciela's parents are also suing the Madera Unified School District, which they allege failed to notice their daughter inside the locked vehicle, and didn't notify them that she didn't attend class that day.
It's not just BMW's fault but the entire school district's, too ::). Maybe they should sue the Border Patrol for failing to catch them when they snuck into the US. If they had been caught and deported their daughter would be alive, right?
-
Heat stroke
Kind of fucked up she couldn't open the door or sound the horn with the keys out the ignition
Parents Pedro and jacinta are also suing BMW for compensation for the reduction in EBT , food stamps and section 8 resulting from the loss of their anchor. ::)
-
What does the school district have to do with this case at all? Totally irrelevant.
-
(http://i.imgur.com/AfxTQNa.jpg)
-
Police said preliminary
investigations did not show she had made any attempts to get out.
-
So someone designed a container that a person cannot open from the inside?
Well what could possibly go wrong with that?
-
So someone designed a container that a person cannot open from the inside?
Well what could possibly go wrong with that?
And think about this. The son locked the door. And he apparently didn't think to check on his sister an hour later or less. Also, when you locked the door and you have the key, it was never thought that you would lock a sleepig human being inside. Therefore the horn wouldn't work and the doors wouldn't unlock from inside. Why? Well, because there shouldn't be anybody inside the car..
-
BMW means Bakes Mexicans Well ;D
Too soon?
-
The lawsuit also names the Madera Unified School District as a defendant. Among other things, it alleges that the school failed to notify Graciela’s parents that she did not show up for class that day, as required by district policy.
This makes a bit more sense than suing BMW, since if the school somehow contacted the family earlier perhaps (depending on when they'd call) they would've thought to check the car. That does not absolve the family from responsibility of the stupid act of locking someone inside the car.
Unless there was a specific DoT rule that required cars at the time to have an "escape" feature if a car was locked from the outside then BMW is not really at fault.
The excuse they didn't have the manual because it was a 16 year old car is BS. Manuals for old cars can be found easily. A quick google search returned this:
http://www.mikerophonerecords.com/bimmer/e36manual.pdf
and in page 31 it states:
Never use the keys or the remote control to lock an occupied vehicle, as it would then be impossible to unlock it from inside.
Still the whole case seems more like an outburst of grief and guilt than substance. I think they're trying to make BMW settle out of court to avoid bad publicity.
-
This makes a bit more sense than suing BMW, since if the school somehow contacted the family earlier perhaps (depending on when they'd call) they would've thought to check the car. That does not absolve the family from responsibility of the stupid act of locking someone inside the car.
Unless there was a specific DoT rule that required cars at the time to have an "escape" feature if a car was locked from the outside then BMW is not really at fault.
The excuse they didn't have the manual because it was a 16 year old car is BS. Manuals for old cars can be found easily. A quick google search returned this:
http://www.mikerophonerecords.com/bimmer/e36manual.pdf
and in page 31 it states:
Never use the keys or the remote control to lock an occupied vehicle, as it would then be impossible to unlock it from inside.
Still the whole case seems more like an outburst of grief and guilt than substance. I think they're trying to make BMW settle out of court to avoid bad publicity.
The school was unaware of what happened until AFTER the kid returned to the car and found his sister unresponsive. There is no way the school could have prevented it. The only people on that campus that knew she was locked in the car were her brother and sister.
-
The school was unaware of what happened until AFTER the kid returned to the car and found his sister unresponsive. There is no way the school could have prevented it. The only people on that campus that knew she was locked in the car were her brother and sister.
If they notify within 2 hours or so of the start of classes maybe it could've been different. But if they notify after the school day ends it would make no difference.
-
A German car bakes a Mexican inside, nothing to see here folks 8)
-
Those wacky Germans, now taking baby steps towards racial purity.
-
If they notify within 2 hours or so of the start of classes maybe it could've been different. But if they notify after the school day ends it would make no difference.
It makes no difference either way.
So now when a kid skips class, it's the fault of the school if the kid gets hurt while skipping class?
What happens if a kid stays home sick, the parents forget to inform the school, and the kid dies? Is the school at fault? That's essentially what happened here--kid skips school because she's sick, no one tells the school...and the kid dies
-
And think about this. The son locked the door. And he apparently didn't think to check on his sister an hour later or less. Also, when you locked the door and you have the key, it was never thought that you would lock a sleepig human being inside. Therefore the horn wouldn't work and the doors wouldn't unlock from inside. Why? Well, because there shouldn't be anybody inside the car..
I would have never thought you could not override the lock from the inside. Or that you won't be able to sound the horn, or open a window. That's really scary (says a claustrophobic).
The latest car Phreak rented for work, an Audi I believe, automatically locked the doors after a few seconds. Also when you're inside. And even though you're still able to open the doors from the inside, it really creeped me out every time I heard the sound of the locks.
-
I am a lawyer by profession it is hard to see where culpability rests with BMW. It is dickheads taking cases like this that lead to safety notices spoiling every surface you can see.
I was disgusted by the claims I dealt with (clients) seeking an getting so much when I started out. We got one guy €750k for slipping and breaking his wrist in Dublin airport. Another woman got €28k because someone rear ended her (at almost no speed, she wasn't injured) just because she felt a bit shocked. It was her third claim...
In this instance the son was responsible (or irresponsible), BMW notified the system in manual (should they have a sign about every feature plastered everywhere around car?). In what way was BMW negligent or irresponsible such that it caused harm?
-
I would have never thought you could not override the lock from the inside. Or that you won't be able to sound the horn, or open a window. That's really scary (says a claustrophobic).
The latest car Phreak rented for work, an Audi I believe, automatically locked the doors after a few seconds. Also when you're inside. And even though you're still able to open the doors from the inside, it really creeped me out every time I heard the sound of the locks.
It's also a 1997 BMW...but, why would there be a need to over-ride the lock from the inside? Unless someone kidnapped you and locked the doors and took the key with them.
-
I ride a convertible Landcruiser so i will never have that kind of problem.
-
So someone designed a container that a person cannot open from the inside?
Well what could possibly go wrong with that?
Lol. Bullseye!
So much for German engineering.
-
(http://media3.giphy.com/media/4c5OAzpLYiMtG/200.gif)
-
I am a lawyer by profession it is hard to see where culpability rests with BMW. It is dickheads taking cases like this that lead to safety notices spoiling every surface you can see.
In this instance the son was responsible (or irresponsible), BMW notified the system in manual (should they have a sign about every feature plastered everywhere around car?). In what way was BMW negligent or irresponsible such that it caused harm?
It's also a 1997 BMW...but, why would there be a need to over-ride the lock from the inside? Unless someone kidnapped you and locked the doors and took the key with them.
Excuse me, but you are both cognitively viscous. That is a serious design flaw in that car. An error on the same level of the exit doors of the Cocoanut Grove opening inwards. On the same level of the Citi Building in New York City.
I once moved into a house where a walk in closet had no doorknob on the inside. I immediately went to a hardware store and replaced the door hardware.
-
It's also a 1997 BMW...but, why would there be a need to over-ride the lock from the inside? Unless someone kidnapped you and locked the doors and took the key with them.
Every car in history could be opened from the inside. The better question would be why BMW decided to change it. It's a reasonable expectation that it was possible to open the car from the inside. So I don't see this case as having no chance in court.
-
So now when a kid skips class, it's the fault of the school if the kid gets hurt while skipping class?
Well, yes.
This was true even when I was in elementary school.
From when the child leaves home to when he returns home and crosses the threshold, he is the responsibility of the school.
-
(http://media2.s-nbcnews.com/j/newscms/2014_19/430346/140508-martinez-jms-1719_9fb2fe68286219fc2fa1fc6e2dc62baf.nbcnews-ux-640-800.jpg)
WYHI? (alive oc, no necro)
-
BMW notified the system in manual
People - especially men! - always read the manual thoroughly... ::)
-
People - especially men! - always read the manual thoroughly... ::)
Instructions are for amateurs and girls. ::)
-
OMG this should be such an easy case, BMW are retards big time, what kind of fucken car can not be open from the inside when locked? what fucken enormous flaw, stupid stupid.. Ya we all know that didn't lead to a death of course but the courts won't see it that way. Good, teaches these idiots a lesson, who the fuck designed this horse shit?
-
OMG this should be such an easy case, BMW are retards big time, what kind of fucken car can not be open from the inside when locked? what fucken enormous flaw, stupid stupid.. Ya we all know that didn't lead to a death of course but the courts won't see it that way. Good, teaches these idiots a lesson, who the fuck designed this horse shit?
Only relevant if she DID try to get out and couldn't.
staying in a car without leaving a window slightly open is retarded....you would go to jail if you did that to your dog. It was a bunch of stupid Mexicans end of story
-
Excuse me, but you are both cognitively viscous. That is a serious design flaw in that car. An error on the same level of the exit doors of the Cocoanut Grove opening inwards. On the same level of the Citi Building in New York City.
I once moved into a house where a walk in closet had no doorknob on the inside. I immediately went to a hardware store and replaced the door hardware.
There's a small section within designing thats specialises in psychology of objects, or more acurate, how people think objects work. Watch how many people go wrong with those push-pull doors. They don't read signs or study the door, they just push when the see a flat surface, or pull when they see a handle. And ifit's suddenly a sliding door, they justslam into it face first.
In case of panic, you expect the doors of a building to open outwards. With a car, you always want to be able to get out of the car.
-
Only relevant if she DID try to get out and couldn't.
staying in a car without leaving a window slightly open is retarded....you would go to jail if you did that to your dog. It was a bunch of stupid Mexicans end of story
no argument there. Of course me and you both know she didn't try to open the door from the inside but as long as there is a 1% possibility that she did BMW loses, end of story ;)
-
no argument there. Of course me and you both know she didn't try to open the door from the inside but as long as there is a 1% possibility that she did BMW loses, end of story ;)
Yep, not the first time a big firm pays out for someone else's stupidity...bit like that old woman who bought a hot coffee from McD's drive through and proceeded to place the cup in between her thighs and open the lid to put sugar in and poured it all over her thighs and burned badly. She got a huge pay packet for spilling hot coffee on herself lol.
-
Every car in history could be opened from the inside. The better question would be why BMW decided to change it. It's a reasonable expectation that it was possible to open the car from the inside. So I don't see this case as having no chance in court.
Yes, you can open the car from the inside when the key is in the ignition. But, have you tried to unlock a door from the inside when the key is not ignition?
Actually, i don't think that there is a case.Because as far as they know, she made no attempts to get out. It was the brother's fault. It is also rare for older kids like her to die in locked cars. And it says it in the manual. Also, the BMW model is from 1997, I don't know if today's models have the same feature.
-
There's a small section within designing thats specialises in psychology of objects, or more acurate, how people think objects work. Watch how many people go wrong with those push-pull doors. They don't read signs or study the door, they just push when the see a flat surface, or pull when they see a handle. And ifit's suddenly a sliding door, they justslam into it face first.
In case of panic, you expect the doors of a building to open outwards. With a car, you always want to be able to get out of the car.
You can, just kick out the window.
-
Yes, you can open the car from the inside when the key is in the ignition. But, have you tried to unlock a door from the inside when the key is not ignition?
Yes I have. Again: this works on 99% of all models ever produced. And for those it does not: it is idiotic that it does not work. Driver gets out to do whatever (pay for gas, pick up donut, ...), other occupants cannot leave. Or the driver has to leave the keys in the ignition in a car full of kids for example. That is total bullshit and you know it. Just because you fap to German cars doesn't make this feature a total fail.
Actually, i don't think that there is a case.Because as far as they know, she made no attempts to get out. It was the brother's fault. It is also rare for older kids like her to die in locked cars. And it says it in the manual. Also, the BMW model is from 1997, I don't know if today's models have the same feature.
She made no visible attempts to get out. I doubt that there is a registry of what buttons have been pressed while the key was not in the ignition.
And before you say that she should have kicked in the window: have you actually ever tried doing that? I have. It's fucking hard, and improbable that a small teen girl could do it. Those safety hammers exist for a reason.
-
Those safety hammers exist for a reason.
On that particular model they are likely located in the boot.
-
Yes I have. Again: this works on 99% of all models ever produced. And for those it does not: it is idiotic that it does not work. Driver gets out to do whatever (pay for gas, pick up donut, ...), other occupants cannot leave. Or the driver has to leave the keys in the ignition in a car full of kids for example. That is total bullshit and you know it. Just because you fap to German cars doesn't make this feature a total fail.
She made no visible attempts to get out. I doubt that there is a registry of what buttons have been pressed while the key was not in the ignition.
And before you say that she should have kicked in the window: have you actually ever tried doing that? I have. It's fucking hard, and improbable that a small teen girl could do it. Those safety hammers exist for a reason.
It's not that hard to kick out a window, especially a windshield. People do it all the time. See the show Cops, or ask any cop have they seen or had someone kick out a windshield.
When they say that she made no visible attempts, maybe she was laying in the same spot? A 3 series BMW is not a cage to a 14 yr old.
It's not me fapping to German cars (which might have been made in the US), I say this because it was the brother's fault. Not BMW. The brother left his SLEEPING 14 yr old sister in the car, locked the doors, and took the key, and didn't think to check on her until his classes were over. His sister was supposed to be in class anyway.
Now, if you are leaving a young child in the car, usually the person who does that is older, and is the responsible if something happens to that child. Not the manufacturer, regardless of make.
And this "feature" probably didn't exist for just that model BMW, but also the 5 and 7, and Z3.
This is also a reflection of cultures---you come from the UK/Europe, correct? Where there is an expectation of people higher up looking out for you. In the US, you can not always have someone looking over your shoulder.
Also, maybe German engineers didn't think someone would lock a sleeping teenager in the car and roll with the keys and not check on the person. Or that someone who is not a little child would allow some to lock them in a car and then they go to sleep.
-
Its never anyones own fault.
-
Its never anyones own fault.
Right, in this case, it's everyone BUT the dumbass who left his sister in a fucking locked car with the windows up in the heat.
Although it's dumb ass fuck to not be able to get out of a car thats locked, it's even dumber to leave a kid in a car in the sweltering heat with the windows up. The kid could have died in her sleep from heat stroke, that shit is serious business... when I was in the military Heat Exhaustion/Heat Stroke was one of their primary concerns, they actually have cards telling them how long they can torture us in certain heat levels, and how much water we need to inject every so often for different levels of heat/exertion... if she was passed the fuck out and dehydrated, it wouldn't surprise me if she died in her sleep. Which is NOT BMW's fault at all.
I feel like a lot of people really don't understand how US courts work, they get involved in the emotion of the situation and say "Well they HAVE to find them guilty, thats just WRONG!"
Unfortunatley, thats not at all how our court system works. They have to probe, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that that exact feature caused her death, and moreover, that there was no warnings, cautions, or notices ANYWHERE in the material the car came with. If there was, sorry customer, your dumbass fault for not reading the manual and understanding exactly how that piece of machinery operates.
Regardless of right or wrong, thats how it is.
Thats why when you buy stuff, there is a 40 page disclaimer of how not to use it, so if you electrocute yourself by trying to blow dry your hair in the bathtub, it's not the companies fault.
-
Heat stroke
Kind of fucked up she couldn't open the door or sound the horn with the keys out the ignition
Parents Pedro and jacinta are also suing BMW for compensation for the reduction in EBT , food stamps and section 8 resulting from the loss of their anchor. ::)
Lmao
-
This is also a reflection of cultures---you come from the UK/Europe, correct? Where there is an expectation of people higher up looking out for you. In the US, you can not always have someone looking over your shoulder.
Funny, we Europeans (or just the Dutch) think it's the Americans who always need someone to look out for them, with everything they do. Really, when I was in engineering the classes about product safety were hilarious; all those safety warnings where we thought "Well, duh! Obviously you would not do that!" One that I can remember was about a plastic fireman's helmet for young kids. It came with a warning that it was not a real helmet and would not protect a child from getting burned... Or a child size superman's cape with the warning that it won't actually make you fly...
-
Funny, we Europeans (or just the Dutch) think it's the Americans who always need someone to look out for them, with everything they do. Really, when I was in engineering the classes about product safety were hilarious; all those safety warnings where we thought "Well, duh! Obviously you would not do that!" One that I can remember was about a plastic fireman's helmet for young kids. It came with a warning that it was not a real helmet and would not protect a child from getting burned... Or a child size superman's cape with the warning that it won't actually make you fly...
Thats not for our safety, thats yo keep idiots from being able to sue the manufacturer.
People here look for holes in order to get a payday. Everyone has to cover their ass.
Btw I think everyone has given up on you being a female.
-
Thats why when you buy stuff, there is a 40 page disclaimer of how not to use it, so if you electrocute yourself by trying to blow dry your hair in the bathtub, it's not the companies fault.
Here in Europe, they ususally don't provide such a lengthy disclaimer. They assume you're not that stupid; they assume you understand that knives can be very sharp and that water and electricity don't mix well. And if you are that stupid, then it's your own fault; don't try to sue the company that made the product.
Still, as a designer it's your job to make a product safe to use. You not only look at what the product is supposed to be used for, but also what other uses consumers are going to use it for. Think of 10 ways to use a kitchen knive apart from cutting food... they probably range from opening letters, to stripping wires, to opening cans and jars, and turning screws.
-
Funny, we Europeans (or just the Dutch) think it's the Americans who always need someone to look out for them, with everything they do. Really, when I was in engineering the classes about product safety were hilarious; all those safety warnings where we thought "Well, duh! Obviously you would not do that!" One that I can remember was about a plastic fireman's helmet for young kids. It came with a warning that it was not a real helmet and would not protect a child from getting burned... Or a child size superman's cape with the warning that it won't actually make you fly...
Again, cultural. Like Shock said, people here look for a loophole to get a payday. And there is a growing culture of "protect me from myself" which is similar to European attitudes due to socialism.
Take a look at the Toyota accelerator debacle. NASA couldn't find anything wrong, it was "misapplication of the pedal" as Toyota calls it, or "dumb American drivers putting their foot on the wrong pedal.", but they didn't want to say that, because they would lose a lot of brand loyalty. So, I believe they did pay out...and also for the floormats that would hinder the pedals.
-
Btw I think everyone has given up on you being a female.
I've given up on anyone here (besides Phreak and me) ever lifting. Makes us even, I suppose.
-
Here in Europe, they ususally don't provide such a lengthy disclaimer. They assume you're not that stupid; they assume you understand that knives can be very sharp and that water and electricity don't mix well. And if you are that stupid, then it's your own fault; don't try to sue the company that made the product.
Still, as a designer it's your job to make a product safe to use. You not only look at what the product is supposed to be used for, but also what other uses consumers are going to use it for. Think of 10 ways to use a kitchen knive apart from cutting food... they probably range from opening letters, to stripping wires, to opening cans and jars, and turning screws.
You're missing the point - it's NOT for the safety of the consumer, it's protection for the manufacturer... because people here WILL intentionally hurt themselves and then sue the company if they don't have a disclaimer on every, single, possible way the product could cause someone harm.
-
I've given up on anyone here (besides Phreak and me) ever lifting. Makes us even, I suppose.
Well, you can thank Junior for that, considering everyone seems to think that you are him.
-
Well, you can thank Junior for that, considering everyone seems to think that you are him.
Yep, she has that daft twat to blame , she shouldnt have fucked about playing his games with him.
-
You can, just kick out the window.
ya because she is really thinking that when her big brother will fuck her up for smashing his window. ::)
-
ya because she is really thinking that when her big brother will fuck her up for smashing his window. ::)
Think about that later, due to him locking the door...Besides, it's already his fault and he knows it. His folks sueing BMW is not going to change that fact. He knows deep down inside that he is responsible.
-
Think about that later, due to him locking the door...Besides, it's already his fault and he knows it. His folks sueing BMW is not going to change that fact. He knows deep down inside that he is responsible.
yes I agree 100% its his fault and has nothing to do with BMW, she probably passed out and didn't wake up (at least the death was not painful),.. hell she still would have died if the doors were unlocked.
However the law has to always go with the benefit of the doubt in his favor and that is he will claim if the doors were not locked she could have got out and as long as there is a 1% chance that she tried opening the door, BMW loses
-
yes I agree 100% its his fault and has nothing to do with BMW, she probably passed out and didn't wake up (at least the death was not painful),.. hell she still would have died if the doors were unlocked.
However the law has to always go with the benefit of the doubt in his favor and that is he will claim if the doors were not locked she could have got out and as long as there is a 1% chance that she tried opening the door, BMW loses
It might be that way in canada but its not here man, they have to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, That she died because of the feature.
-
having owned a 1997 BMW 328is, this is bullshit. I could still hit the door unlock button and open the door. Also, the alarm would go off if the car was moving around as it was in security mode.
-
Lots of Johnny Cochrans in this thread
-
having owned a 1997 BMW 328is, this is bullshit. I could still hit the door unlock button and open the door. Also, the alarm would go off if the car was moving around as it was in security mode.
im going to laugj if they read the manual wronf and she could gwt put...
-
It might be that way in canada but its not here man, they have to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, That she died because of the feature.
I don't know man, It is not hard to say she tried to get out and the door wouldn't open, pretty open and shut case is if you ask me. i am no lawyer but whoever can not win this is pretty stupid. The design fucked up big time, what type of car does not open from the inside when locked, that alone will make them lose, that is them being the only ones with this outrageously retarded feature.
But of course I am with you that she would have died regardless and the car is not to blame but the courts will decide in his favor, I will bet anyone 500 dollars cash right now, and you guys know I am good as I already have dished out cash here at getbig for losing a bet
-
i am no lawyer but whoever can not win this is pretty stupid
Their lawyer has already admitted that BMW tells owners in the manual for the car NOT to do what they did. He also admitted that the family did not have or read the owners manual.
From page 32 of the E36 Owner's Manual (which can be downloaded for free):
Never use the keys or the remote control to lock an occupied vehicle, as it would then be impossible to unlock it from inside.
-
To me, it seems like an insanely stupid idea to have a car that won't allow people to exit.
What is the huge benefit of this feature?
-
One would think that she had a can of beans with which to break a window, or at least a stale burrito that she could eat until her brother returned from his gardening class.
-
(http://media3.giphy.com/media/4c5OAzpLYiMtG/200.gif)
I see Dr. Chimps is still trying to get a free lunch. ;D
-
Their lawyer has already admitted that BMW tells owners in the manual for the car NOT to do what they did. He also admitted that the family did not have or read the owners manual.
From page 32 of the E36 Owner's Manual (which can be downloaded for free):
BMW tells owners in the manual but what does that have to do with the passenger that died, she didn't read the manual, she is not the owner, easy win in court, so easy.
-
BMW tells owners in the manual but what does that have to do with the passenger that died, she didn't read the manual, she is not the owner, easy win in court, so easy.
not really dude, they covered their liability. You dont just get out of responsibility in the US bexause you didnt read the manual.
you take 100 pills that the instructions say 'dont take', guess what, theyve covered their end, its the consumwrs dumbass fault for not doing their homework.
-
RTFM
(http://i.imgur.com/S2xv6X8.jpg)
-
RTFM
(http://i.imgur.com/S2xv6X8.jpg)
Yeah. .. bmw covered their ass. Its on the owners.
-
BMW tells owners in the manual but what does that have to do with the passenger that died, she didn't read the manual, she is not the owner, easy win in court, so easy.
That is why it is on the brother. He is the driver/owner/ user of the vehicle. And I believe he went to classes around 7:30am and didn't come out until 3:00pm. He could have checked on her. It was his negligence. Not BMW.
-
BMW tells owners in the manual but what does that have to do with the passenger that died, she didn't read the manual, she is not the owner, easy win in court, so easy.
That's why I never read safety labels. That way, when I hurt myself or someone else, I get rich because the manufacturer is at fault. Easy win, so easy.
-
That's why I never read safety labels. That way, when I hurt myself or someone else, I get rich because the manufacturer is at fault. Easy win, so easy.
if you are so confident in your sarcastic post then put some money up, i will all day long, easy win, easy win,... 500 bucks? now? ;)
-
That is why it is on the brother. He is the driver/owner/ user of the vehicle. And I believe he went to classes around 7:30am and didn't come out until 3:00pm. He could have checked on her. It was his negligence. Not BMW.
i know that, you know that, the brother knows that, but the design has a flaw and it could be blamed, a freshmen law student can get the win easily. Besides you know car manufacturer almost never win against law suit, in fact they usually settle outside of court which is still a loss.
-
i know that, you know that, the brother knows that, but the design has a flaw and it could be blamed, a freshmen law student can get the win easily. Besides you know car manufacturer almost never win against law suit, in fact they usually settle outside of court which is still a loss.
You keep saying it is a design flaw but is not. BMW specifically notes this feature of the car in the manual. Design flaws are not explained out by manufacturers in the owners manual. The car was designed to work the way it did, for whatever reason.
In addition, before the owner's manual is released to the public a team of lawyers vet every page to ensure there is no liability on BMW's part. This will not be an "easy win for a freshman law student". BMW showed due diligence in notifying the public about the features of the car.
It is akin to those people that sue cigarette manufacturers when they get cancer from using cigarettes, despite the fact that the Surgeon General's Warning has been on every pack of cigarettes sold since 1966 (in the US).
Still, BMW will probably settle this out of court.
-
You keep saying it is a design flaw but is not. BMW specifically notes this feature of the car in the manual. Design flaws are not explained out by manufacturers in the owners manual. The car was designed to work the way it did, for whatever reason.
In addition, before the owner's manual is released to the public a team of lawyers vet every page to ensure there is no liability on BMW's part. This will not be an "easy win for a freshman law student". BMW showed due diligence in notifying the public about the features of the car.
It is akin to those people that sue cigarette manufacturers when they get cancer from using cigarettes, despite the fact that the Surgeon General's Warning has been on every pack of cigarettes sold since 1966 (in the US).
Still, BMW will probably settle this out of court.
every big shot company has a million lawyers to make sure there is no liability and guess what? they lose all the time, especially in the automobile industry.
Design flaw or not, who cares what you want to call it, they never did it again after that hence the reason I called it a flaw but who cares that is irrelevant, ok I agree with you it was not a ''design flaw'' ... but the point is ''if she wanted to get out'' she couldn't and that is all that matters, i will bet anything that BMW will not win this, at the very lease they will offer him something out of court.
-
if you are so confident in your sarcastic post then put some money up, i will all day long, easy win, easy win,... 500 bucks? now? ;)
Keep it in your pants hotshot.
-
Keep it in your pants hotshot.
Just trying to be a getbigger :D
-
$20 says the parents are liberals.
-
$20 says the parents are liberals.
Most likely , those dip shits!
-
every big shot company has a million lawyers to make sure there is no liability and guess what? they lose all the time, especially in the automobile industry.
Design flaw or not, who cares what you want to call it, they never did it again after that hence the reason I called it a flaw but who cares that is irrelevant, ok I agree with you it was not a ''design flaw'' ... but the point is ''if she wanted to get out'' she couldn't and that is all that matters, i will bet anything that BMW will not win this, at the very lease they will offer him something out of court.
But, the if she wanted to get out, but couldn't hedges on "did she try?"
If one makes an effort to do something and cannot it is different than one not making an effort at all. Because you make the assumption that if she did make an effort.
Effort is banging on doors and windows, kicking at doors and windows. And being found with a "death grip" on a handle.
Then again, as I said, if one really wants to get out. You kick out the windows.
-
liberals always wanting somebody else to pay for their mistakes.
double locking doors?
I can park my car in any parking lot anywhere in CA and if my child is locked in the car in 100 deg heat, it'll take me all of about 30 seconds to find something to break a fucking window.
obviously the parents aren't fit to survive, let alone raise a child.
-
liberals always wanting somebody else to pay for their mistakes.
double locking doors?
I can park my car in any parking lot anywhere in CA and if my child is locked in the car in 100 deg heat, it'll take me all of about 30 seconds to find something to break a fucking window.
obviously the parents aren't fit to survive, let alone raise a child.
They left the bitch in there for 7 hours....and then act shocked when she dead
-
Think about that later, due to him locking the door...Besides, it's already his fault and he knows it. His folks sueing BMW is not going to change that fact. He knows deep down inside that he is responsible.
What a load of horseshit. It isn't an unreasonable expectation to believe a locked car can be opened from the inside. No reasonable person would assume otherwise. BMW is 100% responsible for any injury or death their products cause due to irresponsible design. Same deal a few years ago when Toyota produced cars with accelerators that became jammed, killing several people. These deaths occurred because the product didn't perform the way any reasonable person would anticipate.
-
What a load of horseshit. It isn't an unreasonable expectation to believe a locked car can be opened from the inside. No reasonable person would assume otherwise. BMW is 100% responsible for any injury or death their products cause due to irresponsible design. Same deal a few years ago when Toyota produced cars with accelerators that became jammed, killing several people. These deaths occurred because the product didn't perform the way any reasonable person would anticipate.
Of course it can opened from the inside, if you have the key in the ignition.
They also have it in their manual. And chances are, this same feature was in the 5 series, 7 series, and their Z3 coupe. They already warned the driver not to lock a person in the vehicle and take the key, as the person cannot get out of the vehicle.
I really wouldn't call it a design flaw. If someone can open the doors inside via the electric lock, then what is the security point of locking the door in the first place? Also, then a person maybe able to operate the car without the key.
Also, there was no problem with the acelerators per se, people put mats over production mats and the acelerator would get stuck. NASA found nothing wrong with the acelerator. The problem was the operators. The operators (drivers) were pressing the wrong pedal and thinking that they were pressing the brake. Just like Audi's "unintended aceleration" problem years ago. It was found to be "operator error".
Toyota paid out because it was easier to do than say American drivers don't know which pedal to push.
-
What a load of horseshit. It isn't an unreasonable expectation to believe a locked car can be opened from the inside. No reasonable person would assume otherwise. BMW is 100% responsible for any injury or death their products cause due to irresponsible design. Same deal a few years ago when Toyota produced cars with accelerators that became jammed, killing several people. These deaths occurred because the product didn't perform the way any reasonable person would anticipate.
Anyone with a lick of sense wouldnt leave someone in a car for hours. The car wasn't defective, the driver was negligent. Cars aren't day care centers and arent designed for how the father used it.
-
Of course it can opened from the inside, if you have the key in the ignition.
They also have it in their manual. And chances are, this same feature was in the 5 series, 7 series, and their Z3 coupe. They already warned the driver not to lock a person in the vehicle and take the key, as the person cannot get out of the vehicle.
I really wouldn't call it a design flaw. If someone can open the doors inside via the electric lock, then what is the security point of locking the door in the first place? Also, then a person maybe able to operate the car without the key.
Also, there was no problem with the acelerators per se, people put mats over production mats and the acelerator would get stuck. NASA found nothing wrong with the acelerator. The problem was the operators. The operators (drivers) were pressing the wrong pedal and thinking that they were pressing the brake. Just like Audi's "unintended aceleration" problem years ago. It was found to be "operator error".
Toyota paid out because it was easier to do than say American drivers don't know which pedal to push.
The irony of all this is that it is expected that a reasonable person should have foresaw the potential for death by locking a car with an occupant inside, yet you are arguing that such a standard shouldn't be applied to a corporation or it's designers and engineers. BMW should have absolutely foresaw the potential for death and serious injury by implementing such a design.
-
The irony of all this is that it is expected that a reasonable person should have foresaw the potential for death by locking a car with an occupant inside, yet you are arguing that such a standard shouldn't be applied to a corporation or it's designers and engineers. BMW should have absolutely foresaw the potential for death and serious injury by implementing such a design.
Clearly they did, by markong in the manual to nevwr lock an occipant in the car without the keys.
I know you always base all your decisions on emotion, but anu logical person knows thwyre responsible for the machinery theu operate, to know its quirks in and out. Machinery doesnt function the way you think it should, or I, or anyone else.. it functions the way the design engineers decided it will.
Thats my biggest irritant at work... so many people like you call griping about why the machinery doesnt operate in a way that makes logical sense to them.... and every single one has a different idea of that constitutes logical sense.
We have disclaimers in the manual about safety and want not to do, including opening the doors and being inside while operating the machine. People have gotten injured doing that, but since we put a disclaimer on the manual, and since they didn't read it, it was their fault, not ours. If there is no safety regulation regarding it, guess what, they dont have to design it according to a standard or 'reasonable expectation', as you put it. The toyota deal was completely different.
anyway, BMW didnt kill the girl, and unless it can be proven that she struggled and couldnt get out due to the door, they have next to zero liability since it was clearly explained in the manual.
FyI, windows are designed to be kicked out from the inside as safety precautions. She could have gotten out if she really tried. I think she died in her sleep. The family isnjust trying to cast blame to find someone to point the finger at and be mad at
-
Clearly they did, by markong in the manual to nevwr lock an occipant in the car without the keys.
I know you always base all your decisions on emotion, but anu logical person knows thwyre responsible for the machinery theu operate, to know its quirks in and out. Machinery doesnt function the way you think it should, or I, or anyone else.. it functions the way the design engineers decided it will.
Thats my biggest irritant at work... so many people like you call griping about why the machinery doesnt operate in a way that makes logical sense to them.... and every single one has a different idea of that constitutes logical sense.
We have disclaimers in the manual about safety and want not to do, including opening the doors and being inside while operating the machine. People have gotten injured doing that, but since we put a disclaimer on the manual, and since they didn't read it, it was their fault, not ours. If there is no safety regulation regarding it, guess what, they dont have to design it according to a standard or 'reasonable expectation', as you put it. The toyota deal was completely different.
anyway, BMW didnt kill the girl, and unless it can be proven that she struggled and couldnt get out due to the door, they have next to zero liability since it was clearly explained in the manual.
FyI, windows are designed to be kicked out from the inside as safety precautions. She could have gotten out if she really tried. I think she died in her sleep. The family is just trying to cast blame to find someone to point the finger at and be mad at
It doesn't matter that the manufacturer made a small reference remarking the operator shouldn't lock the door with an occupant inside. I could inform you that if you take one step closer to me I will strike you down with a baseball bat, doesn't mean I am not liable for any damage caused to you, I don't get the luxury of using "Well, I informed you defense".
And of course manufacturers have to design a car to a standard, like restrictions on noise and pollution emissions for example. ANd it is just being obtuse to suggest they don't have to design to a standard. Imagine a manufacturer designed a car with the accelerator in the middle, the brake on the left and the clutch on the right. It is reasonable to expect certain universal design implementations when it comes to cars, engineering depends on universality, like the Unified Thread Standard. There is a good reason why BMW seem to be the only manufacturer to make a capsule that imprisons an occupant against their will, other manufacturers obviously realise the potential harm such a design could cause. Obviously BMW realised this at some point also and dropped the ridiculous design.
-
It doesn't matter that the manufacturer made a small reference remarking the operator shouldn't lock the door with an occupant inside. I could inform you that if you take one step closer to me I will strike you down with a baseball bat, doesn't mean I am not liable for any damage caused to you, I don't get the luxury of using "Well, I informed you defense".
And of course manufacturers have to design a car to a standard, like restrictions on noise and pollution emissions for example. ANd it is just being obtuse to suggest they don't have to design to a standard. Imagine a manufacturer designed a car with the accelerator in the middle, the brake on the left and the clutch on the right. It is reasonable to expect certain universal design implementations when it comes to cars, engineering depends on universality, like the Unified Thread Standard. There is a good reason why BMW seem to be the only manufacturer to make a capsule that imprisons an occupant against their will, other manufacturers obviously realise the potential harm such a design could cause. Obviously BMW realised this at some point also and dropped the ridiculous design.
Clearly you didnt understand what I wrote. If there is no safety standard in place (I.e. a rule that says you have to be able to unlock the vehicle from the inside), then theyre not responsible for making it that way.
Look im not going to.keep arguing with you, you clearly have no idea how the system works, youre arguing on emotion and 'how things should be', like you always do.
Proper use of the machinery was spelled put in the manual. The manufacturer is not responsible for harm or injury caused bu misuses of their product, as defined in their instructions. Thats how it works. Thats how they keep from being responsible every time someone does something utterly stupid when told not to.
Dont like it? Tough. Thats the way it is here.
-
Clearly you didnt understand what I wrote. If there is no safety standard in place (I.e. a rule that says you have to be able to unlock the vehicle from the inside), then theyre not responsible for making it that way.
Look im not going to.keep arguing with you, you clearly have no idea how the system works, youre arguing on emotion and 'how things should be', like you always do.
Proper use of the machinery was spelled put in the manual. The manufacturer is not responsible for harm or injury caused bu misuses of their product, as defined in their instructions. Thats how it works. Thats how they keep from being responsible every time someone does something utterly stupid when told not to.
Dont like it? Tough. Thats the way it is here.
It's not the way it is there, and BMW will lose this case. Proper use was not spelled out in the manual, it mentions nothing of the potential for serious injury or death by locking the vehicle while there is an occupant inside. There manual was wholly inadequate, and for such a dangerous feature not clearly highlighted in such a way to suggest the seriousness of performing such an action. BMW will lose. I know you get emotional when you perceive what you believe to be other people's emotion, but just so you know, Juries ALWAYS operate on emotion. That's just how it is there.
-
It's not the way it is there, and BMW will lose this case. Proper use was not spelled out in the manual, it mentions nothing of the potential for serious injury or death by locking the vehicle while there is an occupant inside. There manual was wholly inadequate, and for such a dangerous feature not clearly highlighted in such a way to suggest the seriousness of performing such an action. BMW will lose. I know you get emotional when you perceive what you believe to be other people's emotion, but just so you know, Juries ALWAYS operate on emotion. That's just how it is there.
The owner was using the vehicle beyond it's intended use.
-
Found this article interesting.
Man Sues BMW for Long-Lasting Erection
A California man blames his motorcycle seat for a painful erection he said lasted nearly two years.
Henry Wolf, 52, is now suing BMW of North America, the motorcycle’s manufacturer, and Corbin-Pacific, the maker of the seat, for lost wages, medical expenses and emotional distress.
According to his attorney, Vernon Bradley, Wolf took a four-hour ride – two hours each way – on his 1993 motorcycle on May 1, 2010. After the trip, he developed priapism, a prolonged, unwanted, persistent and painful erection of the penis that for Wolf has lasted 24 hours a day since the ride.
“It’s very embarrassing, and all kind of problems developed,” Bradley told ABC News. “He had to reconfigure his clothing, and going to the bathroom was a problem.”
And recently things have gotten worse, Bradley said. Wolf is now unable to have an erection.
Wolf consulted a number of physicians, who told him the condition was the result of both the configuration of the seat and the long motorcycle ride.
Dr. Ramgopal Satyanarayana, associate professor of urology at the University of Miami’s Miller School of Medicine, said that while he isn’t involved in Wolf’s case, he has never heard of a case of priapism caused by a motorcycle seat.
Priapism, he said, can be a side effect of certain medications, such as Viagra, Cialis and antipsychotics. It can also develop as a complication of sickle cell anemia, a disease that causes red blood cells to take on an abnormal shape. In rare cases, Satyanarayana said, priapism could be the result of trauma.
If not treated early, Satyanarayana said, priapism could lead to permanent erectile dysfunction.
“For treatment, we tell them to take pseudoephedrine, and if that doesn’t bring it down, we actually inject medications that can arrest the amount of blood coming in. If that doesn’t work, we have to operatively reduce it.”
Wolf’s doctors tried the more conservative treatments, his attorney said, and told him the only other option was surgery.
“If that surgery is not successful, he will never be able to get an erection with a pump or anything else,” Bradley said.
Bradley plans to serve the lawsuits this week, and the companies have 30 days to respond. He is seeking an unspecified amount of damages.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2012/05/01/man-blames-bmw-for-long-lasting-erection/ (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2012/05/01/man-blames-bmw-for-long-lasting-erection/)
-
I bet Vince Basile could get into the car with no keys, if there was a 14 year old girl sleeping inside.
-
It's not the way it is there, and BMW will lose this case. Proper use was not spelled out in the manual, it mentions nothing of the potential for serious injury or death by locking the vehicle while there is an occupant inside. There manual was wholly inadequate, and for such a dangerous feature not clearly highlighted in such a way to suggest the seriousness of performing such an action. BMW will lose. I know you get emotional when you perceive what you believe to be other people's emotion, but just so you know, Juries ALWAYS operate on emotion. That's just how it is there.
Right.... tell that to George zimmerman. I seem to remember you saying the same thing then.
And fyi, when the manual says 'dont do this or you cant get out', that kind of explains it all, doesnt it? Thats not even getting into the fact that they have to prove she died because she couldnt get out. Just because something has the POSSIBILITY of causing death does not mean it ACTUALLY CAUSED THE DEATH. They have to prove she didnt die in her sleep, that she couldnt escaoe, and then convince the jury that they had no responsibility to read the manual and use the equipment as instructed.
Wait, heres your counter argument 'but someone died! !! It should work like this cause thats what I think should happen!!! People died theyre at fault!!!"
Good luck with that. Kid left his sister in a locked vehicle in the sweltering heat, and the manual very clearly states that you cannot lock someone inside and still have them be able to get out.
Sorry buddy, thats not BMWs fault.
-
To be fair, she was safer in the BMW then outside it where Vince is
-
Found this article interesting.
Man Sues BMW for Long-Lasting Erection
A California man blames his motorcycle seat for a painful erection he said lasted nearly two years.
Henry Wolf, 52, is now suing BMW of North America, the motorcycle’s manufacturer, and Corbin-Pacific, the maker of the seat, for lost wages, medical expenses and emotional distress.
According to his attorney, Vernon Bradley, Wolf took a four-hour ride – two hours each way – on his 1993 motorcycle on May 1, 2010. After the trip, he developed priapism, a prolonged, unwanted, persistent and painful erection of the penis that for Wolf has lasted 24 hours a day since the ride.
“It’s very embarrassing, and all kind of problems developed,” Bradley told ABC News. “He had to reconfigure his clothing, and going to the bathroom was a problem.”
And recently things have gotten worse, Bradley said. Wolf is now unable to have an erection.
Wolf consulted a number of physicians, who told him the condition was the result of both the configuration of the seat and the long motorcycle ride.
Dr. Ramgopal Satyanarayana, associate professor of urology at the University of Miami’s Miller School of Medicine, said that while he isn’t involved in Wolf’s case, he has never heard of a case of priapism caused by a motorcycle seat.
Priapism, he said, can be a side effect of certain medications, such as Viagra, Cialis and antipsychotics. It can also develop as a complication of sickle cell anemia, a disease that causes red blood cells to take on an abnormal shape. In rare cases, Satyanarayana said, priapism could be the result of trauma.
If not treated early, Satyanarayana said, priapism could lead to permanent erectile dysfunction.
“For treatment, we tell them to take pseudoephedrine, and if that doesn’t bring it down, we actually inject medications that can arrest the amount of blood coming in. If that doesn’t work, we have to operatively reduce it.”
Wolf’s doctors tried the more conservative treatments, his attorney said, and told him the only other option was surgery.
“If that surgery is not successful, he will never be able to get an erection with a pump or anything else,” Bradley said.
Bradley plans to serve the lawsuits this week, and the companies have 30 days to respond. He is seeking an unspecified amount of damages.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2012/05/01/man-blames-bmw-for-long-lasting-erection/ (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2012/05/01/man-blames-bmw-for-long-lasting-erection/)
Irrelevant
A.Im quite sure there is no section of the manual covering the motorcycle seat causing Priapism
B.Until he actually wins something, it's a mute point. you can sue anyone for anything, doesn't mean you're going to win.
-
The owner was using the vehicle beyond it's intended use.
No he wasn't, that is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. Everyday people leave an occupant in a car while they exit the vehicle and later return. Such an action is an everyday occurrence and well within a car's intended use. The way the driver used the car is in legal terms what would be defined as "reasonably foreseeable". BMW admit to this fact when they published a small warning in their operators manual, they admit they know about the danger such an action could cause, it is this admission that will bring them undone. Such a poor design implementation is cause for a recall. The lawsuit also mention how BMW had numerous complaints as well as knowledge of deaths caused by there design and still failed to act or recall the vehicle. BMW will lose.
-
No he wasn't, that is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. Everyday people leave an occupant in a car while they exit the vehicle and later return. Such an action is an everyday occurrence and well within a car's intended use. The way the driver used the car is in legal terms what would be defined as "reasonably foreseeable". BMW admit to this fact when they published a small warning in their operators manual, they admit they know about the danger such an action could cause, it is this admission that will bring them undone. Such a poor design implementation is cause for a recall. The lawsuit also mention how BMW had numerous complaints as well as knowledge of deaths caused by there design and still failed to act or recall the vehicle. BMW will lose.
So, wait... the car is from 97... there is "numerous complaints AS WELL AS knowledge of deaths", yet they haven't been sued or recalled the car?
Hmm... sounds like they might have their asses covered if they're not concerned and haven't been taken to court over it yet.
Generally, when the manual says "DONT DO THIS", and then you DO THAT, its YOUR fault, not theirs.
Also, as said previously, they have to prove that actually tried to escape and couldn't. That has to be the cause of death, not just that she died and the door wouldn't open, correlation =/= causation.
-
RTFM
(http://i.imgur.com/S2xv6X8.jpg)
Hmm. Maybe it'd have been wise for BMW to point out in the same section of the manual that the horn would also be inoperable if someone were locked inside with no key.
(Seriously, who designed this mobile kiddie jail-cell?)
BTW, BMW stopped using the double locking "feature" in its cars in 1997. Wonder why?
-
Irrelevant
A.Im quite sure there is no section of the manual covering the motorcycle seat causing Priapism
B.Until he actually wins something, it's a mute point. you can sue anyone for anything, doesn't mean you're going to win.
Of course! He lost, frivolous lawsuit, too hard to prove, I was posting it for a laugh. I imagine a few getbiggers will be purchasing BMW motorcycles soon.
-
No he wasn't, that is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. Everyday people leave an occupant in a car while they exit the vehicle and later return. Such an action is an everyday occurrence and well within a car's intended use. The way the driver used the car is in legal terms what would be defined as "reasonably foreseeable". BMW admit to this fact when they published a small warning in their operators manual, they admit they know about the danger such an action could cause, it is this admission that will bring them undone. Such a poor design implementation is cause for a recall. The lawsuit also mention how BMW had numerous complaints as well as knowledge of deaths caused by there design and still failed to act or recall the vehicle. BMW will lose.
Using the car to house a child for multiple hours is an acceptable form of use?
-
So, wait... the car is from 97... there is "numerous complaints AS WELL AS knowledge of deaths", yet they haven't been sued or recalled the car?
Hmm... sounds like they might have their asses covered if they're not concerned and haven't been taken to court over it yet.
Generally, when the manual says "DONT DO THIS", and then you DO THAT, its YOUR fault, not theirs.
Also, as said previously, they have to prove that actually tried to escape and couldn't. That has to be the cause of death, not just that she died and the door wouldn't open, correlation =/= causation.
Of course they are concerned about it, but the way big corporations work is too weigh up the cost of a recall and other associated expenses against the potential lawsuits such a unfortunate design could generate. I guess the bean counters figured a few lawsuits was the cheaper option. Life means nothing in a capitalist society when compared to the mighty dollar.
-
But, the if she wanted to get out, but couldn't hedges on "did she try?"
If one makes an effort to do something and cannot it is different than one not making an effort at all. Because you make the assumption that if she did make an effort.
Effort is banging on doors and windows, kicking at doors and windows. And being found with a "death grip" on a handle.
Then again, as I said, if one really wants to get out. You kick out the windows.
if you have to resort to the extent that a window has to be kicked then BMW would still lose the law suit, you are arguing points that I agree with but are irrelevant to the case in a court a law.
No judge is going to say ''well BMW is not at fault cause she could have kicked the window open'' lmao.
-
Why would you have a car that locked people in unless it was a police car?
-
What a load of horseshit. It isn't an unreasonable expectation to believe a locked car can be opened from the inside. No reasonable person would assume otherwise. BMW is 100% responsible for any injury or death their products cause due to irresponsible design. Same deal a few years ago when Toyota produced cars with accelerators that became jammed, killing several people. These deaths occurred because the product didn't perform the way any reasonable person would anticipate.
exactly my point and this is the first time I have agreed with EKUL on anything.
We know he is trying to get money and she may have died anyway but the fact is that no sane person in their right mind would anticipate that the door would not open from the inside when locked, fucken easy money for this guy, the fact you guys are saying he has a chance to lose is fucken beyond me. HE WINS EASILY, I WILL BET MY HOUSE
-
Why would you have a car that locked people in unless it was a police car?
EXACTLY
-
exactly my point and this is the first time I have agreed with EKUL on anything.
We know he is trying to get money and she may have died anyway but the fact is that no sane person in their right mind would anticipate that the door would not open from the inside when locked, fucken easy money for this guy, the fact you guys are saying he has a chance to lose is fucken beyond me. HE WINS EASILY, I WILL BET MY HOUSE
None of that matters if she didnt try to get out..m not only that, but they very clearly stated "do not do this, youll get locked in" in their manual.
Thats how liability works... if someone puts in the blowdryer manual 'dont operate in water or you could get electrocuted', and you operate it in water and die, its not their fault because they warned you about the possible outcome.
-
exactly my point and this is the first time I have agreed with EKUL on anything.
We know he is trying to get money and she may have died anyway but the fact is that no sane person in their right mind would anticipate that the door would not open from the inside when locked, fucken easy money for this guy, the fact you guys are saying he has a chance to lose is fucken beyond me. HE WINS EASILY, I WILL BET MY HOUSE
Here are 10 examples why they are likely to win.
http://money.howstuffworks.com/8-outrageous-lawsuits.htm#page=1
-
exactly my point and this is the first time I have agreed with EKUL on anything.
We know he is trying to get money and she may have died anyway but the fact is that no sane person in their right mind would anticipate that the door would not open from the inside when locked, fucken easy money for this guy, the fact you guys are saying he has a chance to lose is fucken beyond me. HE WINS EASILY, I WILL BET MY HOUSE
No sane person would leave someone in a car for hours either
-
None of that matters if she didnt try to get out..m not only that, but they very clearly stated "do not do this, youll get locked in" in their manual.
Thats how liability works... if someone puts in the blowdryer manual 'dont operate in water or you could get electrocuted', and you operate it in water and die, its not their fault because they warned you about the possible outcome.
car companies lose all the time. If they worked like that the wouldn't lose all the time
-
No sane person would leave someone in a car for hours either
well obviously the guy is a retard
-
well obviously the guy is a retard
He needs to be charged with negligent homicide.
-
He needs to be charged with negligent homicide.
His defence would be he locked the car to make sure no one molested his sister.
-
His defence would be he locked the car to make sure no one molested his sister.
They could use that manual against him; that he locked her in the car when it very clearly stated the outcome, and by not checking on her, he was responsible for her death.
Which, really, is what happened anyway.
Suing the car company is just diverting blame from the son, they don't even know if she TRIED to get out. They found a loophole and they're going for it even though BMW clearly stated what was up.
-
His defence would be he locked the car to make sure no one molested his sister.
Yup
-
They could use that manual against him; that he locked her in the car when it very clearly stated the outcome, and by not checking on her, he was responsible for her death.
Which, really, is what happened anyway.
Suing the car company is just diverting blame from the son, they don't even know if she TRIED to get out. They found a loophole and they're going for it even though BMW clearly stated what was up.
agree with you but he will still win
-
agree with you but he will still win
I don't think it'll ever see the courtroom; BMW will pay them some cash, they'll be able to point the finger, BMW can sweep it under the rug, etc.
But if you guys actually took a step back and looked at the evidence through the eyes of the law, they have no case. Zero. They can't prove she tried to get out, they can't prove the feature killed her, even if it did, it was clearly stated in the manual how the feature operated and that they shouldn't do what they did. BMW was covered all over the place.
-
I don't think it'll ever see the courtroom; BMW will pay them some cash, they'll be able to point the finger, BMW can sweep it under the rug, etc.
But if you guys actually took a step back and looked at the evidence through the eyes of the law, they have no case. Zero. They can't prove she tried to get out, they can't prove the feature killed her, even if it did, it was clearly stated in the manual how the feature operated and that they shouldn't do what they did. BMW was covered all over the place.
It is not hard to prove she tried to get out. She is dead, what do dead people do before they die, they try to survive.
-
It is not hard to prove she tried to get out. She is dead, what do dead people do before they die, they try to survive.
Thats not evidence, thats assumption. What if she was asleep? Were there signs of stuggle? Scratches on the windows? claw marks on the doors? Cmon man, you're arguing purely on emotion and assumption and zero facts.
-
Thats not evidence, thats assumption. What if she was asleep? Were there signs of stuggle? Cmon man, you're arguing purely on emotion and assumption and zero facts.
actually no I am not at all, keep it real, stick to the subject not this emotional shit, I am being straight here bro.
I believe she may have tried to get out and a lot of people would believe this. I mean if my car is a sauna, I will try to get out, it is more common sense that she tried to get out that if she didn't and gave up and fell asleep, people believe victims over car companies any day.
This is a mute point anyway since they will settle out of court but if they went to court I would bet enormous amounts on him winning without even a struggle
-
actually no I am not at all, keep it real, stick to the subject not this emotional shit, I am being straight here bro.
I believe she may have tried to get out and a lot of people would believe this. I mean if my car is a sauna, I will try to get out, it is more common sense that she tried to get out that if she didn't and gave up and fell asleep, people believe victims over car companies any day.
This is a mute point anyway since they will settle out of court but if they went to court I would bet enormous amounts on him winning without even a struggle
Yes, but "your belief" and "common sense" are not admissable forms of evidence in a court of law. You HAVE to be able to submit REAL evidence (not intangibles like "beliefs" and "common sense") that she died BECAUSE of the locked door, you have to prove that she actually woke up and struggled to get out.... then you have to convince the jury that they had no responsibility to understand how the vehicle operates and aren't responsible for reading the manual and knowing how the systems work.
-
Yes, but "your belief" and "common sense" are not admissable forms of evidence in a court of law. You HAVE to be able to submit REAL evidence (not intangibles like "beliefs" and "common sense") that she died BECAUSE of the locked door, you have to prove that she actually woke up and struggled to get out.... then you have to convince the jury that they had no responsibility to understand how the vehicle operates and aren't responsible for reading the manual and knowing how the systems work.
I know that but in this case people will favor the victim, they will believe his end so ''beliefs'' do play a big role. This a no man territory. She tried to get or she didn't, some will believe she did and some won't, people are soft they will believe the victim
-
Of course they are concerned about it, but the way big corporations work is too weigh up the cost of a recall and other associated expenses against the potential lawsuits such a unfortunate design could generate. I guess the bean counters figured a few lawsuits was the cheaper option. Life means nothing in a capitalist society when compared to the mighty dollar.
Yeah, that's how it happens. Cost of predicted risk against competing costs, with the winner being the lowest number. (And best of luck getting any individual to acknowledge prior realization of the threat. A person should look at the drop-in fuel tank on the old Mustang, for instance.)
-
Some great posts in this thread, btw, E-Kul.
-
I know that but in this case people will favor the victim, they will believe his end so ''beliefs'' do play a big role. This a no man territory. She tried to get or she didn't, some will believe she did and some won't, people are soft they will believe the victim
I always side with whichever side has more of a case under purely legal terms, I dont go with the intagibles such as jury emotions.... same with the Zimmerman trial.... everybody KNEW he was going to hang because a kid was dead, except that there was no concrete evidence as the law defines it. Ive found throughout the years that whichever side has a stronger case with real supportive evidence usually wins, regardless of how the majority of people feel... because a good lawyer will manipulate the jury into going with the evidence, not on their 'gut'.
-
i still can't understand why they make a car so people in front seat cannot escape when locked. baffling.
Any number of accidents/emergencies could happen, and someone could die in vehicle because it's locked.
What is the advantage of this in a car?
-
Why would you have a car that locked people in unless it was a police car?
Why lock someone in a car...
-
Zimmerman prosecutor didn't attempt to show that an unlawful death took place, so they didn't want a conviction.
-
...and the fact they didn't go for a single black person should have probably clued us in right away that they didn't want a conviction.
-
Zimmerman prosecutor didn't attempt to show that an unlawful death took place, so they didn't want a conviction.
Yes, im sure thats it. ::)
-
Yes, im sure thats it. ::)
Maybe it was incompetence beyond belief. And I do mean beyond belief.
-
Maybe it was incompetence beyond belief. And I do mean beyond belief.
Or maybe they didn't have enough evidence to prove murder beyond a reasonable doubt. Maybe they didnt have the case that you thought they had.
-
Or maybe they didn't have enough evidence to prove murder beyond a reasonable doubt. Maybe they didnt have the case that you thought they had.
They had a case that they didn't touch. They chose a "how dare he" approach, which didn't (and by all means shouldn't have) cut it.
-
...and it wasn't incompetence. It was purposeful.
If they'd wanted to increase the probability of a conviction, they would have gone after blacks to listen. That would have been step one.
-
They had a case that they didn't touch. They chose a "how dare he" approach, which didn't (and by all means shouldn't have) cut it.
Im sure the prosecutors are kicking themselves for not taking getbigs resident armchair lawyers advice.
Bro, they didn't have the evidence they thought they did. They didnt have a case for murder. Maybe something like negligent homicide could have stuck, MAYBE but they wanted murder.
And I remember you telling us over and over why murder would stick because the way they worded it, you were so positive.
Turn s out you didn't know what you were talking about
-
Im sure the prosecutors are kicking themselves for not taking getbigs resident armchair lawyers advice.
Bro, they didn't have the evidence they thought they did. They didnt have a case for murder. Maybe something like negligent homicide could have stuck, MAYBE but they wanted murder.
And I remember you telling us over and over why murder would stick because the way they worded it, you were so positive.
Turn s out you didn't know what you were talking about
By way of an unlawful death, you mean?
-
By way of an unlawful death, you mean?
I dont remember, I just remember you absolutley promising us why they were going to get it, and then it turned out that you had no clue wtf you were talking about and it wasnt even relevant
-
...and by the way, would love to see you find a single place where I made any prediction about the case. Only after it was given to the jury, did I predict (and correctly) what would happen.
Very few people on this board were reserved about what the outcome would be.
-
Quote me, then, Shockwave.
-
I dont remember, I just remember you absolutley promising us why they were going to get it, and then it turned out that you had no clue wtf you were talking about and it wasnt even relevant
Quoted for future use.
Back it up or STFU.
-
Quoted for future use.
Back it up or STFU.
Im not going back through your posts, I remember you had all kinds of crazy convoluted theories as to how exacrly they were going to get it and not a damn one was relevant to the experts. Not that is over, youre trying to tell us how thwu could have won.
You were wrong. You didnt know wtf you were talking about, and you still dont.
-
Im not going back through your posts, I remember you had all kinds of crazy convoluted theories as to how exacrly they were going to get it and not a damn one was relevant to the experts. Not that is over, youre trying to tell us how thwu could have won.
You were wrong. You didnt know wtf you were talking about, and you still dont.
But you can't be bothered to back up what you're saying.
-
But you can't be bothered to back up what you're saying.
No, frankly I cant. Im not going to waste my time searching posts over a year ago to point out how you didnt know wjat you were talking about then, just like you didnt know what youre talking about now. Winning an efight with a guy that thinks a prosecutor intentionally lost a case (and whos evidence is because they didnt pick black guys ffs) is not worth my time. Sorry.
-
i still can't understand why they make a car so people in front seat cannot escape when locked. baffling.
Any number of accidents/emergencies could happen, and someone could die in vehicle because it's locked.
What is the advantage of this in a car?
I am still cringing at this as well, the more I think about it the more it makes me scream ''fucken idiots''
-
Here's the prediction:
Will be interesting to hear the last comments, but it seems the prosecution has failed. I really don't understand what they've been trying to do. Very strange.
So don't tell me I was "promising they had it".
-
No, frankly I cant. Im not going to waste my time searching posts over a year ago to point out how you didnt know wjat you were talking about then, just like you didnt know what youre talking about now. Winning an efight with a guy that thinks a prosecutor intentionally lost a case (and whos evidence is because they didnt pick black guys ffs) is not worth my time. Sorry.
No, that they didn't pick any blacks was simply a clue. The fact they DIDN'T LIFT A FINGER to show that an unlawful death took place is what should tell you they didn't want a conviction.
-
And if you want to bump a Zimmerman thread, we can fight this out over there. I'm more than ready to do that again, no problem.
-
You're the sort of person that can't stand it if someone disagrees with you, Shockwave. You take it too close to heart.
-
You're the sort of person that can't stand it if someone disagrees with you, Shockwave. You take it too close to heart.
Dude...no offense, but your post explosion here says you're the one who takes it too close to heart.
I think it's time to have a glass of milk or something
-
Dude...no offense, but your post explosion here says you're the one who takes it too close to heart.
I think it's time to have a glass of milk or something
I'll have your mom get that for me, yes.
(Hi, Shockwave :D)