Ishtarr
Posts: 1130
Joined: 4/30/2008 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote:
ORIGINAL: Ishtarr quote:
ORIGINAL: tazzygirl If the driver had been obeying the laws, he would not have hit the kid. That was the "push". As I said, she was wrong in her decision. But I dont believe her decision caused the child's death alone. And for her to get more time than the driver... Its no wonder she got a new trial. That isn't for sure. It could have very possible have been a case of a person driving with the utmost care and obeying the law to the letter, and this kid, who RAN out in traffic, just ran in front of their car, with nothing they could have done to stop. In that case, not only would the mother have the death of her son on her conscious, she would also have ruined the life and sleep of a perfectly innocent driver. The fact that the driver in this case wasn't innocent is a coincident, and has no bearing on the guilt of the mother. Of course she's getting more than the driver... she encouraged her 4 year old son to run out in traffic while carrying a fish. But that isnt the case. We can do "what ifs" all day. It doesnt change the facts. The fact that the driver in this case was also in fault is purely coincidental. It doesn't change the fact that she was more in fault than he was. I'm not saying the driver shouldn't be punished, but I don't think he was as much in fault as she was, and therefore, I completely understand her getting a harder punishment.
< Message edited by Ishtarr -- 11/17/2011 10:54:20 AM >
_____________________________
Du blutest für mein Seelenheil Ein kleiner Schnitt und du wirst geil Egal, erlaubt ist, was gefällt Ich tu' dir weh. Tut mir nicht Leid! Das tut dir gut. Hör wie es schreit!
|