|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3 [Next] | ||||||||||
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16544 Posts |
It is right and wrong?
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
ed rhodes Inner circle Rhode Island 2885 Posts |
I don't think they had either a legal or a moral obligation to pay.
But it was a great positive publicity point to pay and would have been a major negative publicity point if they hadn't paid.
"...and if you're too afraid of goin' astray, you won't go anywhere." - Granny Weatherwax
|
|||||||||
Tony Clifton New user oakhurst, ca. 24 Posts |
From now on people in accidents will say "Officer, I was in the bar and saw a car heading for a kid so I ran out, disregarding my own safty because I knew I was drunk, and ran into the pole while protecting the child who then ran away".
|
|||||||||
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16544 Posts |
I think they had a legal obligation to pay.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
ed rhodes Inner circle Rhode Island 2885 Posts |
Why would they have a legal obligation to pay for intentional damage? No where in any policy I've seen is; "We will pay if you damage your car in an act of heroism."
"...and if you're too afraid of goin' astray, you won't go anywhere." - Granny Weatherwax
|
|||||||||
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16544 Posts |
Because it was not intentional damage. If you dive into a river to save a child but you die in the effort then do you think that is your intent to die? Do you think the insurance company are not legally obliged to pay your life insurance in such an event?
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
LobowolfXXX Inner circle La Famiglia 1196 Posts |
Bad analogy. It clearly WAS his intent to collide with the other driver. It was his intention to dive into the river and help, in your example, and the dying was an unfortunate consequence; here, the collision WAS the help.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley. "...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us." |
|||||||||
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16544 Posts |
No it was not the intent to dive in. The intent was to save the child. His intent was not to dive in the river. Diveing in the river is merely the action he took to carry out the intent. If some one tries to hit you on the head then you may raise your arm to block the blow. Your intention in this case is to stop damage to your head, not damage your arm, even though your arm may get damaged in the action. Likewise is the case before the court.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
dave_matkin Inner circle 4522 Posts |
I know of a man who was killed on a motor way in the UK. He was driving on his own but was with another car. They had a problem and pulled on to tHe hard shoulder with their warning lights on. He came off the motorway doubled back to the previous junction and back to his friends. He pulled in in front of them and got out of his car, fixed a tow rope to his car and was walking to the other car. Tragedy struck and he was badly injured by another car straying over the line and hitting him. Some how he did not hit either of the other cars. The car that hit him needed a new wing and mirror. The man not so easily repaired.
The drivers insurance paid out to fix the car. But neither of the insurance companies paid anything to the man or his family rather. He was doing something that he was not insured for - recovering another vehicle from on the motor way. So sometimes they will take the 'it's in the contract' line and they don't always pay out as it was a nice gesture. |
|||||||||
LobowolfXXX Inner circle La Famiglia 1196 Posts |
Quote:
On 2012-09-09 12:48, tommy wrote: He didn't enter the river accidentally; it was intentional. It may not have been his primary objective, but it was an intentional, voluntary action. He didn't fall in or get pushed in. He chose to enter the water. That's intent. The dying is the part that wasn't intentional.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley. "...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us." |
|||||||||
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16544 Posts |
He deliberately crashed the car with intent to save the child, I would argue in court. If he deliberately crashed the car with criminal intent of some sort then he would be charged with a crime because that would have both the actus reus and mens rea of an offence. Crashing the car was the means, not the intent, as any reasonable jury would agree and they would tell the insurance company to pay him and also pay the costs. Go and ask a good lawyer if you don't believe me.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
ed rhodes Inner circle Rhode Island 2885 Posts |
If he deliberately crashed the car, no matter what his intention, then the insurance company is legally off the hook since their policy would state he was only covered in the case of an accident.
"...and if you're too afraid of goin' astray, you won't go anywhere." - Granny Weatherwax
|
|||||||||
ed rhodes Inner circle Rhode Island 2885 Posts |
I love the first line in the article; "Forget the Batmobile, real heroes drive Hummers." In "Batman - Year One" Lt. Gordon begins to doubt the official story of "beserk vigilante" after he sees Batman plow his Batmobile into a streetcar to stop it from hitting a crowd.
Had the insurance company made a statement?
"...and if you're too afraid of goin' astray, you won't go anywhere." - Granny Weatherwax
|
|||||||||
LobowolfXXX Inner circle La Famiglia 1196 Posts |
Quote:
On 2012-09-10 10:11, tommy wrote: You have the mens rea for a crime, but a good lawyer would argue the "necessity" defense.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley. "...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us." |
|||||||||
Tony Clifton New user oakhurst, ca. 24 Posts |
Can those in the area where this happen keep an eye out and update us on what happens with this case? I hope the driver speeding gets suitable punishment.
|
|||||||||
dave_matkin Inner circle 4522 Posts |
Yes I'd like to know what the perp gets for dangerous driving.
If the hummer driver got as far as a court with a jury he would "get off" no question, and I can see there being a lot of 'public pressure' if the hummer driver was treated badly. |
|||||||||
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16544 Posts |
No he is not only covered in the event of an accident.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
ed rhodes Inner circle Rhode Island 2885 Posts |
Details please? You have an insurance policy that states you will receive payment for deliberately damaging your car so long as you can show good cause?
"...and if you're too afraid of goin' astray, you won't go anywhere." - Granny Weatherwax
|
|||||||||
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16544 Posts |
Well Ed you said “their policy would state he was only covered in the case of an accident.” And I said “No he is not only covered in the event of an accident.”
A criminal can deliberately smash your car, which no accident, and one is covered, if one is fully insured. The criminal is held responsible. When a criminal is chased in a car, or whatever, any damages caused to others in the chase the criminal is always held resposible for. You steal a car, the cops chase you. and you cause X amount of damge, the cox cause X amount and deliberately ram the car you are driving casing X amount more damage then I come to help the cops diliberatly smash the winscreen, causing X amount more damage and so on. Now you are in the dock. Add all the Xs together and that is how much damage you are resposible for. Would you argue in court you were for all the damage and do you think you would win the argument. I don't think so. People then who have had their cars damaged, deliberately or otherwise, by the chasers fill out there insurance claims. What do they put on the claim? Criminal Damage! Who done it? Ed the criminal of course, who else? Do you think my policy does not cover me for criminal damage that criminals like you are resposible for? Seriously Ed do realy think the fellow would lose the case in court if the insurance refused to pay? I honestly think a good lawyer would take the insurance company to the cleaners.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
Pecan_Creek Veteran user The Nation of TEXAS! 323 Posts |
Quote:
On 2012-09-10 14:38, ed rhodes wrote: Details please,you have a copy of his policy? |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Who needs a gun when you have a Hummer (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.02 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |