The grieving parents of a 7-year-old child who died hours after being hit by a car were charged with involuntary manslaughter after allowing him and his brother, 10, to walk home unaccompanied by an adult from a nearby grocery store.
The grieving parents of a 7-year-old child who died hours after being hit by a car were charged with involuntary manslaughter after allowing him and his brother, 10, to walk home unaccompanied by an adult from a nearby grocery store.
TBF, the child ran onto the road (a typical US road that encourages drivers to drive fast and be oblivious of pedestrians, I guess), and - according to the police - the driver was neither speeding nor under the influence and is “cooperative”.
But to charge the parents with involuntary manslaughter for letting their children walk 2 blocks is madness, and makes me question the police department’s objectivity, to put it mildly.
My guess is at the very least the driver’s reaction and/or eyesight was impaired due to old age.
You see children next to the road, you slow down. You are the adult operating the deadly machine. You have a duty to be extra careful around kids.
Where I live, if a kid jumps in front of your car, even if there is no crossing and you had no visibility, you still have the majority of the fault. The truth is you are the one driving a killing machine, and if you are going at a speed where you can’t ensure, with your currect visibility and road conditions, that an accident won’t happen, it’s you who is at fault.
Of course that’s different on highways and speedways, where the one crossing would be found at fault. But for all residential areas, drivers need to be careful about pedestrians crossing the road, and especially kids who are unpredictable.
So much this!
Also the prosecutor’s office, who charges people with crimes.
You gotta be a child to believe the police.
Ofc cops lie about everything.
On top of what everyone else has said, my stance in general is that anyone who harms another with their car should have their license revoked for at least 5 years if they were at all at fault, which this man certainly was being the driver hitting a pedestrian. On top of that, he’s at the age where he should probably stop driving anyway. While I don’t exactly believe this warrants jail time, especially if the driver has been as cooperative as they are saying, I do think he needs to be charged with something just to get him off the road for the foreseeable future. Outside of that though I do agree with you.
The driver is always at fault. They’re choosing to use a deadly machine in public. It’s their responsibility not to kill people.
That clause was intended specifically for vehicle on vehicle incidents, I agree that if a vehicle hits a pedestrian they are always at fault.