Perhaps the worlds not completely mad

Perhaps the worlds not completely mad

Author
Discussion

tenohfive

Original Poster:

6,276 posts

184 months

Saturday 4th April 2009
quotequote all
For all its failings, at least theres the occasional nugget of common sense in our legal system:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/dorset/7981652....

TheEnd

15,370 posts

190 months

Saturday 4th April 2009
quotequote all
"Her barrister, Anthony Coleman, had argued that the ruling had given teenagers "carte blanche" to engage in chasing games"

Wow! this sets a dangerous legal precedent, next thing, they'll be kicking balls, or even running!

NiceCupOfTea

25,298 posts

253 months

Saturday 4th April 2009
quotequote all
Hmmm, we don't really know the details though. Kids need to learn that their actions have consequences, and at the age of 13 the kid was probably bigger than the dinnerlady. We're not talking 6 year olds playing "kiss chase", the kid may have deliberately been being an arse and trying to intimidate the dinnerlady (seen it before). If that was the case than he should be held culpable as he should have seen the possible results of his actions coming.

Of course litigation is hardly the answer, but let's not assume the kid was whiter than white...

kaese

727 posts

189 months

Saturday 4th April 2009
quotequote all
NiceCupOfTea said:
Hmmm, we don't really know the details though. Kids need to learn that their actions have consequences, and at the age of 13 the kid was probably bigger than the dinnerlady. We're not talking 6 year olds playing "kiss chase", the kid may have deliberately been being an arse and trying to intimidate the dinnerlady (seen it before). If that was the case than he should be held culpable as he should have seen the possible results of his actions coming.

Of course litigation is hardly the answer, but let's not assume the kid was whiter than white...
You are Anthony Coleman AICMFP wink

NiceCupOfTea

25,298 posts

253 months

Saturday 4th April 2009
quotequote all
What, a jazz musician? confused

tenohfive

Original Poster:

6,276 posts

184 months

Saturday 4th April 2009
quotequote all
NiceCupOfTea said:
Hmmm, we don't really know the details though. Kids need to learn that their actions have consequences, and at the age of 13 the kid was probably bigger than the dinnerlady. We're not talking 6 year olds playing "kiss chase", the kid may have deliberately been being an arse and trying to intimidate the dinnerlady (seen it before). If that was the case than he should be held culpable as he should have seen the possible results of his actions coming.

Of course litigation is hardly the answer, but let's not assume the kid was whiter than white...
If he'd been reckless then he would have been dealt with by police as an assault. Either she didn't take that route (because she's after a payout) or they looked into it and told her there was nothing in it. That for me would be sufficient to suggest the kid wasn't deliberately being an arse.

Jasandjules

70,060 posts

231 months

Saturday 4th April 2009
quotequote all
Perhaps she shouldn't wander across a playground where there are loads of kids playing tag.....

It's called a PlayGround after all...............

Los Palmas 7

29,908 posts

232 months

Saturday 4th April 2009
quotequote all
BBC said:
and her lawyers said she suffered serious brain damage
But still Compos Mentis enough to go for a claim?

Dracoro

8,716 posts

247 months

Saturday 4th April 2009
quotequote all
NiceCupOfTea said:
What, a jazz musician? confused
I think you should read the article.

Digby

8,252 posts

248 months

Saturday 4th April 2009
quotequote all
"She was left with a broken nose, damaged teeth and her lawyers said she suffered serious brain damage and was unable to work after the incident."

Many of us suffered the same fate, after eating school dinners.


NiceCupOfTea

25,298 posts

253 months

Sunday 5th April 2009
quotequote all
Dracoro said:
NiceCupOfTea said:
What, a jazz musician? confused
I think you should read the article.
I did, ta, just didn't learn the names!

Still don't think there's enough info. It's kinda the dinnerlady's job to be in the playground so saying she shouldn't have been there doesn't really make sense!

Hairspray

6,225 posts

209 months

Sunday 5th April 2009
quotequote all
NiceCupOfTea said:
Dracoro said:
NiceCupOfTea said:
What, a jazz musician? confused
I think you should read the article.
I did, ta, just didn't learn the names!

Still don't think there's enough info. It's kinda the dinnerlady's job to be in the playground so saying she shouldn't have been there doesn't really make sense!
But you're also sort of saying that 13 year olds can't innocently play tag. I played it the other day and I am far older than that...

Utterly Clueless

1,981 posts

195 months

Sunday 5th April 2009
quotequote all
next top story "man allergic to bee stings sues god for creating bee's, after being stung"

NiceCupOfTea

25,298 posts

253 months

Sunday 5th April 2009
quotequote all
Hairspray said:
NiceCupOfTea said:
Dracoro said:
NiceCupOfTea said:
What, a jazz musician? confused
I think you should read the article.
I did, ta, just didn't learn the names!

Still don't think there's enough info. It's kinda the dinnerlady's job to be in the playground so saying she shouldn't have been there doesn't really make sense!
But you're also sort of saying that 13 year olds can't innocently play tag. I played it the other day and I am far older than that...
No, of course I'm not! I *am* saying that by the age of 13 they should be more aware of their surroundings. Reading between the lines I wonder if he was deliberately antagonising the dinnerlady and running close to her to see how much he could push it. If you spend any time in a secondary school you see it all the time, testing the boundaries.

snuffle

1,587 posts

184 months

Sunday 5th April 2009
quotequote all
NiceCupOfTea said:
Hairspray said:
NiceCupOfTea said:
Dracoro said:
NiceCupOfTea said:
What, a jazz musician? confused
I think you should read the article.
I did, ta, just didn't learn the names!

Still don't think there's enough info. It's kinda the dinnerlady's job to be in the playground so saying she shouldn't have been there doesn't really make sense!
But you're also sort of saying that 13 year olds can't innocently play tag. I played it the other day and I am far older than that...
No, of course I'm not! I *am* saying that by the age of 13 they should be more aware of their surroundings. Reading between the lines I wonder if he was deliberately antagonising the dinnerlady and running close to her to see how much he could push it. If you spend any time in a secondary school you see it all the time, testing the boundaries.
or it could have been an accident you know one of those accident type things that happen accidently
( like me posting without using proper grammer like)

Jasandjules

70,060 posts

231 months

Sunday 5th April 2009
quotequote all
NiceCupOfTea said:
No, of course I'm not! I *am* saying that by the age of 13 they should be more aware of their surroundings. Reading between the lines I wonder if he was deliberately antagonising the dinnerlady and running close to her to see how much he could push it. If you spend any time in a secondary school you see it all the time, testing the boundaries.
Or, he could have been playing tag in the playground. Then, whilst playing tag, he runs around. Then whilst dodging someone or other he runs into a person who wanders across the playground. Let's just discuss the meaning of that word. It's an area of ground, where play occurs. Playground.

So, you could suggest that it's her own feckin' fault and she should have been keeping a watchful eye out for kids running around.

When I was a kid I managed to play in playgrounds and keep an eye out for kids running around. Actually, there were quite a few people in my schools who also managed to do that. Incredible, no?

NiceCupOfTea

25,298 posts

253 months

Sunday 5th April 2009
quotequote all
Calm down folks, just offering an alternative point of view. There are usually two sides to a story. Perhaps it was a complete accident, perhaps it was mischief gone wrong. We'll never know.

I do maintain that a 13 year should hold a degree of responsibility for their actions.

Dracoro

8,716 posts

247 months

Sunday 5th April 2009
quotequote all
NiceCupOfTea said:
Calm down folks, just offering an alternative point of view. There are usually two sides to a story. Perhaps it was a complete accident, perhaps it was mischief gone wrong. We'll never know.
Well, we *DO* know.

The county court have seen both points of view and presumably ascertained that it was an accident.

The three judges in the court of appeal have seen both points of view and also presumably ascertained that it was an accident.

How much more evidence do you need that it was an accident?

NiceCupOfTea

25,298 posts

253 months

Monday 6th April 2009
quotequote all
Absolutely, PH is full of Daily Mail links to court case results with people saying "Yes, that seems a fair result, sound judgement there!" biggrin

And courts never make mistakes!

What's the point in posting a story if not to invite debate? Many apologies for having a differing point of view! Sorry not to "fit in" but I have seen so many of these types on incidents that I have a healthy level of cynicism. Not saying that it's a bad judgement, rather that it may be less clearcut than it seems at first glance.

But then opinions are like aholes; everybody's got one.

Pommygranite

14,286 posts

218 months

Monday 6th April 2009
quotequote all
NiceCupOfTea said:
let's not assume the kid was whiter than white...
Of course he was. Its Dorset, none of them funny coloured fellas down there. However there is the occasional ginge... wink