Quote:
Originally Posted by futuresurferchick
but if I am driving and I hit a toddler, am I not partially responsible? As you go on to say... at least 50%
(actually I said "at most 50%" Given the situation as described, that would be my estimate - in most areas, the legal responsibility for such an accident - as described - is 0% and the owner is 100% responsible, unless the driver was driving recklessly, or broke traffic laws).
In a "People's Court" episode (or maybe it was a similar show) several years ago, a driver of a Porsche hit and severely injured a dog that darted into the road - and the driver sued the owners for the damage to his vehicle. They counter-sued for the animal's vet bills. The judge ruled, based on evidence and eyewitness testimony that the man could not have prevented injuring the dog, and therefore owed nothing to the owners of the dog, and the owner's were ordered to pay for the damage to the vehicle. Personally, I think the owner of the Porsche was a bit of a jerk to sue, but legally he had that right (and who knows - he said he only sued, because the owners were harrassing him about paying their dog's vet bills - which they denied).
As to my answer regarding your responsibility should you in driving hit a toddler - your percentage of blame or responsibility could be anything from 0% to 100% depending entirely on the situation. One of my close friends nearly did hit a toddler, instead the woman in the car ahead of him did. He was driving home at night (late at night, sometime between midnight and 2 am), on the interstate (speed limit 55 or 65 mph), and he saw the car ahead of him hit what appeared to be a doll (he said his mind could just not comprehend that there would or could be a child that small, or any human being for that matter darting into the highway like that). The woman stopped her car, and so did my friend (and many others once they realized what happened), but there was nothing anyone coud do. My friend and all of the people who stopped, regardless of which direction they were going when they saw the accident all agreed that none of them had seen the child on the shoulder or in the road until the impact or a split second before, seeing the child on a night that dark just wasn't possible.
Apparently, piecing together things later - the toddler (an 18 month old little boy) was at a wedding reception, and the parents lost track of him, but they figured he was "safe" among all the family at the reception. The little boy had apparently gotten outside and they think (because he loved Taco Bell) saw the taco bell sign in the distance and headed towards it, crossing the interstate to do so (the boy had walked quite a ways, as the accident site was in the middle of the highway, not near the parking lot of the reception hall at all). I believe it was nearly a mile that the little boy had walked.
Who was responsible, and to what degree? Morally? Legally?
My friend had pretty severe post traumatic stress from the incident (being a father himself, and seeing the boy hit and trying to help afterward), and from what he said, so did the woman who hit him. So who was responsible for the child's death? Who was responsible for the post traumatic stress of my friend and the woman who hit the child (she was traveling well within the the speed limit - and there was no way for her to see the child until he was in her path)?
The parents were not charged for neglect, and the woman was not charged for hitting the child, because there was no way she could have forseen the accident or prevented it - therefore she was 0% responsible for it though I'm sure she had many nightmares about it, trying to imagine a way in which she could have prevented it - my friend did and he wasn't even in the car that hit the little boy - I'm sure the parents did much the same thing, and maybe had a little more responsibility for the accident, but were punished rather harshly by the experience (that doesn't mean that anyone owes them compensation for their loss, nor that they're responsible for the harm caused to the people who witnessed the accident, though my friend had a hard time forgiving the parents, not that he said that to them in any way, it was just a difficulty he was having with coping with the aftermath of the accident).
A friend of our family has a husband who is a OTD truck driver, and a man (who was a childhood friend and neighbor of my brother and I) was standing by the roadside - appearing to be waiting to cross the road, and at the last second stepped out in front of the semi. The driver couldn't stop and killed the man. Was he at all to blame (he knows he isn't, but it gives him nightmares still, as well "if only" he had been able to guess the man's intentions, because he had realized it was odd for a man to be standing on the side of this particular road - but the guy was in a sweat suit and the driver just assumed he'd been jogging - his car was found parked some distance away (not visible from the road) with suicide notes to his family and soon-to-be ex wife)?
There are cases in which the driver who injures or kills an animal or even a person with their vehicle IS partially or entirely responsible for the outcome, but just being behind the wheel does not mean that the person gets at least 50% (or for that matter, any) of the blame. If you could not foresee or prevent the accident, you have zero responsibility (except to stop and do what you can for the victim and report the accident, that is a moral and legal responsibility if the accident victim is human - legally the responsibility is somewhat different with an animal, and varies from region to region).