Boy, 4, Dies After Supermarket Fall

Submitted by: wateva_x 7 years ago in
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/5/20090922/tuk-boy-four-dies-in-somerfield-supermar-45dbed5.html

Parents are suing the supermarket for negligence- and they"re not American. Should the supermarket face legal action?
There are 162 comments:
Male 108
My kids are allowed to climb on things at playgrounds, not stores. If the railing was, say, to keep people from falling, the kid was leaning against it and fell - store`s fault. But sorry, hanging and climbing on it - my fault. See how that works?
0
Reply
Female 5,139
This made me really sad :(

I can`t imagine what the parents are going through...but whats the point in sueing, the reason there are so many rules in this country now are because of that exact reason, people sue for anything, it was the mother responsability, she should have been watching her son, it isnt the supermarkets fault -sigh-

meh. who even cares anymore, our country has gone to sh*t already.. benefits, claims, money being thrown at people as apologies for there own mistakes, because we are too soft to say no.

0
Reply
Male 39
Angilion, there`s a fourth degree burn, as well. It typically happens with electrocution and the skin turns into a white powder, and just blows away in the breeze.

... all we are is duuuuuuuuuust in the wiiiiiiiiiind

0
Reply
Male 12,365
"If you are too idiotic to put together that something STEAMING might be a smidgen warm, then I truly hope you play with fire one too many times."

If the coffee had been sold at a reasonable temperature for coffee, you would have a point. It wasn`t, you don`t. The product was dangerous beyond reasonable expectations and was completely unfit for the purpose for which it was sold. McDonalds was clearly aware of this beforehand.

Had the coffee been at a hot drinkable temperature (i.e. fit for purpose), it would have been a different matter.

You should reasonably expect a hot drink to be hot enough to be very painful if spilled on you, maybe even cause superficial burns.

This not-really-a-drink caused third degree (i.e. the highest category) burns over 6% of the person`s body. That is not a degree of hazard that a customer should reasonably expect.

Comparing it to slapping a lion is therefore silly.

0
Reply
Male 12,365
"Saying McDonalds was actually responsible for the famous "Coffee Caper" incident, is to say that they are also responsible for poeple that get fat because they eat too much of their food....Fact is, people in these situations refuse to take responsibility for their OWN ACTIONS..."

The person`s OWN ACTION in this case was to put milk into a cup of coffee. So she`s responsible for having slightly milky coffee rather than black coffee.

She isn`t responsible for MCDONALD`S ACTION of deliberately and knowingly providing a very dangerous product that was completely unfit for the purpose for which it was sold.

So it isn`t at all like people getting fat because they eat too much fatty fast food.

0
Reply
Female 1,264
It is very sad, but if you let your kid swing in a railing, guess who is responsible.
0
Reply
Male 189
They shouldn`t get a pence, which means they`ll get billions. They should have employees that do nothing but follow customers around to keep them from swinging on things.

On the plus side, many of the idiots that think the family deserves money probably shop there and will end up paying higher prices as a result.

0
Reply
Male 129
Saying McDonalds was actually responsible for the famous "Coffee Caper" incident, is to say that they are also responsible for poeple that get fat because they eat too much of their food....Fact is, people in these situations refuse to take responsibility for their OWN ACTIONS...This story is a perfect yet tragic example of the same thing...parents are notorious for this...something happens to their kid when they are not paying attention and then they go sue crazy...its stupid, wrong, and I get tired of seeing it....My heart does go out to the family for their loss...
0
Reply
Female 1,199
I`m sorry but no, I don`t see the Grocery store being liable for this. =/

It`s a really sad story, but it`s wrong to hold the store accountable for what has happened. The parents should have been watching their child more closely, advising him not to swing on the railing.

I still feel sad for their child passing away though. It`s tragic.

0
Reply
Female 535
Moral to thsi story?
Supervise & discipline your own children, people. Or they will die.
0
Reply
Male 3,842
Yeah, what Osiris said. The McDonald`s Coffee lawsuit was NOT a frivilous bullcrap lawsuit, rather, a food service industry should not serve a beverage that causes second degree burns when spilled. They did, and so they were liable for the damages.
0
Reply
Male 3,058
@ AnImbroglio: McDonald`s was serving coffee at a temperature in excess of 180 degrees Fahrenheit. In fact, for some reason that escapes explanation, before they were sued, they even had advertising that bragged about how hot they served their coffee.

McDonald`s claimed that the reason for serving such hot coffee in its drive-through windows was that, because those who purchased the coffee typically wanted to drive a distance with the coffee, the high initial temperature would keep the coffee hot during the trip.

However, the company`s own research showed that some customers intend to consume the coffee immediately while driving.

Other documents obtained from McDonald`s showed that from 1982 to 1992 the company had received more than 700 reports of people burned by McDonald`s coffee to varying degrees of severity, and had settled claims arising from scalding injuries for more than $500,000.

0
Reply
Male 838
"The McDonalds coffee case is very different to how it is commonly made out to be. In reality, she had good grounds for suing McDonalds and the ruling in her favour was reasonable."

Coffee = hot. Sometimes, stupid people have to wait for coffee to cool before drinking. There are things in this world that are self-explanatory. If you don`t understand them, then darwinism takes hold and you get cleansed from the gene pool. If you slap a lion, you will get mauled. Do I really need to explain that to people, even if I run a freaking zoo? I am not responsible for your stupidity. Making me out to be is unreasonable and irresponsible. If you are too idiotic to put together that something STEAMING might be a smidgen warm, then I truly hope you play with fire one too many times. There is no excuse for this type of idiocy.

Sorry, I`ll get off the soap box now.

0
Reply
Male 838
I suppose they shouldn`t have had counters, buggies, tables, chairs, ladders, shelves, or anything else a kid could have possibly fallen from in that store. Let`s put everything in nice neat rows on the ground. Safety first, people.
0
Reply
Female 876
So basically, the parents need someone to blame since clearly they will not blame themselves. They shoulda` been watching the kid and saying "don`t drating swing on that - you`re going to crack your head."

What the drat is wrong with people?

0
Reply
Male 1,164
So the railings.. which if the picture is anything to go by are there for the purpose of stopping the shopping trollys veering off into the road/ carpark and also serving the purpose of keeping things tidy and neat. the parents should not have aloud there 4 year old son to be swinging on railings, by all means it was a dreadful thing to happen, and its terrible that a 4 year old payed with his life.... but the parents are responsible, NOT Somerfield, but im guessing now in every single supermarket there is now going to be a no swinging on the railings sign... aswell as the no alcohol to any person(s) under 18, and the imfamous do not insert pineapple up rectum
0
Reply
Female 1,677
You hit people when you`re too stupid to discipline verbally. Honestly. Kids may seem stupid and out of control, but if you treat them like people, rather than annoying yapping dogs, you can deal with them without resorting to violence. Violence breeds violence.

If they`re raised properly from the start, they`ll understand when they need to shut the drat up and sit down.

0
Reply
Male 32
I don`t get it. Isn`t this supposed to be a funny site
0
Reply
Female 299
aaaaahh liverpool. liverpool, liverpool.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
"angilion, really?"

Yes, really. I`m one of those weirdoes who thinks that beating people is wrong, especially those who can`t effectively defend themselves.

[sarcasm]Maybe I haven`t played enough Grand Theft Auto.[/sarcasm]

Given that you think that beating children is a good thing, please explain *in a way that is consistent with your position* why it would be wrong to pay a bully to beat the child instead and also why it would be wrong to beat a frail elderly person with dementia.

And yes, I am serious about that. I am using it to demonstrate the lack of internal consistency in your point of view. Unless, of course, you also consider those to be good things or you get some pleasure from beating children.

0
Reply
Male 536
1. Mr Blackmore, 39, said: "Now we`re lost. We`re completely empty. We just can`t believe it."

2. "The distraught parents, who have four daughters..."

I guess girls just don`t quite cut it.

0
Reply
Male 1,629
"Beating people who can`t effectively defend themselves is easy, but why do it yourself when you can pay bullies a small amount to do it for you? That saves you any effort, rewards bullies for their early understanding of the ideas you want to promote and gives them some work experience. Of course, you might like doing it yourself.

Why only children? People who have been made frail by old age are about as easy to beat as young children, so why not beat them too? Especially those whose minds have been affected as well, as they can be very childlike.

angilion, really? there is a huge differance between beating your children and physical discipline tho the WORDS are interchangeable. and some children need a swat on the behind on occasion to teach them right from wrong. not everyone is wired the same way mentally so mommy waving her finger and saying no isn`t a 100% fix. especially if the parents have been lax in teaching their kids right from wrong.

0
Reply
Male 12,365
"IT WAS AN ACCIDENT!!!! YOU DON`T SUE FOR AN ACCIDENT UNLESS UR AS STUPID AS THE McDonald`s COFFEE LADY!"

Are you trying to make yourself look bad? If so, your semiliterate shouting was a good idea.

The woman in question suffered third degree burns over 6% of her body, an agonising thing that required a lot of medical attention and caused permament injury. McDonalds was serving something unfit for the intended purpose (it was far too hot to drink) and already knew that it was dangerous (there had been many other injuries before and McDonalds was well aware of the problem).

Also, the woman was not driving and the car she was a passenger in was not moving.

The McDonalds coffee case is very different to how it is commonly made out to be. In reality, she had good grounds for suing McDonalds and the ruling in her favour was reasonable.

0
Reply
Male 1,646
agreed, the parents are to blame. what is the child doing "yards away" and none the less, was "swinging on a small steel rail" although i sympathize for them, they have no right in suing the store. it is, unfortunately human nature to push the blame to someone else, when it is so obvious it is there fault.
0
Reply
Male 308
I don`t understand how they think legal action is even proper at all, if anything they should be sent to jail for neglecting their child.
0
Reply
Male 4,745
Improper parenting is too blame in this one IMO.

Sad.

0
Reply
Male 17,512
Yards away ? So in other words she let the little bugger walk away out of her sight and he fell.

I think the store should counter-sue the parents for being negligent with their kid and leaving a blood stain on their floor. (sarcasm)

0
Reply
Male 1,835
perhaps they`re immigrants from florida
0
Reply
Male 47
I have no sympaty for the BRAIN DEAD, MORONIC, PATHETIC, BLAME EVERY BUGGER ELSE, IDLE, FETHWIT PARENTS.

When I was 4 My mum insisted that I kept hold of the trolly AT ALL TIMES and not go running off.

I HOPE THEY THROW IT OUT, IDIOTS

0
Reply
Female 854
Sad that parents will put a price on their childs life...
0
Reply
Male 1,270
"His mother, just yards away, allowed their four-year-old son to swing from the improperly placed railing."

I was walking in ASDA`s (a supermarket) carpark one night, when a drunk girl, behind the wheel of her boyfriends car, came screaming towards me and my mates. She didn`t stop, and ploughed right into one of those railings. It saved our lives, I have no doubt of that.

0
Reply
Male 1,270
I just want to stare these people in the eye and ask them to answer this question:

How will the money repay you for your son`s accident/your lack of proper parenting.

That greedy, `not my fault` attitude makes me sick.

0
Reply
Male 525
At the risk of sounding like an insensitive prick it`s a shopping centre not a playground. I wish parents would stop expecting other people to raise they`re kids for them. The other day some random woman actually pointed at me and said to her kid "if you don`t behave the man will shout at you". No I wont love, I`m not his father. Raise your own drating children people.
0
Reply
Male 45
IT WAS AN ACCIDENT!!!! YOU DON`T SUE FOR AN ACCIDENT UNLESS UR AS STUPID AS THE McDonald`s COFFEE LADY!
0
Reply
Male 12,365
"Also, might I add...WHITE PEOPLE, its time to start beating your kids again"

Beating people who can`t effectively defend themselves is easy, but why do it yourself when you can pay bullies a small amount to do it for you? That saves you any effort, rewards bullies for their early understanding of the ideas you want to promote and gives them some work experience. Of course, you might like doing it yourself.

Why only children? People who have been made frail by old age are about as easy to beat as young children, so why not beat them too? Especially those whose minds have been affected as well, as they can be very childlike.

0
Reply
Male 12,365
"His mother, just yards away, allowed their four-year-old son to swing from the improperly placed railing."

What leads you to conclude that the railing was improperly placed?

0
Reply
Male 221
I`m no legal expert, but it seems like this could be one of those situations where the store could counter-suit for "defamation of character" towards the store.

It is Europe though, so their laws will obviously be different from the States though...

0
Reply
Female 3,828
i could understand if the floor was wet or something, but in my opinion it wasnt anyones fault, not even the parents. it was a freak accident. plain and simple. i feel sorry for the family, though.
0
Reply
Male 431
i would say that the supermarket should sue the parents for negligence! this is dumb. i feel really bad about the boy. but suing fixes NOTHING especially when its YOUR OWN DAMN FAULT
0
Reply
Male 553
why let the kid swing on the bars in the first place
0
Reply
Female 99
sounds like the parents fault not the supermarket...
0
Reply
Male 204
His mother, just yards away, allowed their four-year-old son to swing from the improperly placed railing.
0
Reply
Female 170
I don`t mean to sound heartless, but it serves them right for not keeping a proper eye on their beloved child.
0
Reply
Male 216
"we`re too stupid to watch our own kids, so we`re going to sue you!" Those railing are in no way dangerous, when you let your kid swing from them like an idiot, they become dangerous. Imo it`s 100% the parent`s fault he`s dead.
0
Reply
Male 8,302
Actually I didn`t make that ENTIRELY clear, I said that it was God, the Universe or DavyMid that was to blame.

One of those doesn`t exist, another is a brainless random uncaring mindless non-sentient non-entity, so I suppose...

[quote]Most obvious punchline in history coming up here...[/quote]

...it could still be The Universe.

:-P

0
Reply
Male 9,305
Davy what do you mean by "Cotton wool" anecdotes again? I`m not clear on that.
0
Reply
Male 8,302
> davymid
> Come on parents, stop trying to lay blame where there is none, you`re just angry at yourselves, at fate, at God, at whatever.

Um I`m pretty sure if you scroll down to my first comment on this post, Davy, I was pretty clear that it was YOUR fault.

0
Reply
Female 232
When it comes to kids I have eagle eyes, even with my dogs I always know where they are and what they are doing... I can`t IMAGINE taking my eyes off my child in a supermarket of all places. Head injury aside, what about kidnappers or sexual deviants. I know that`s not just in America.
0
Reply
Female 96
stupid drating parents.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
Come on parents, stop trying to lay blame where there is none, you`re just angry at yourselves, at fate, at God, at whatever.

It was an accident, it`s sad but it happens.

p.s. My daughter is three years old. She wouldn`t be swinging on any isolated rail in a store, because I`d say to her that it`s not a good idea. Not because I`m a controlling dick, but because I try to look out for her. I`ve biffed my head a few times as a kid, and I know the physics that leads to a head-collision. It`s called being a Dad.

Also, in before the haters: Save the "Cotton Wool" anecdotes. Any mention of which I shall delete with impunity.

0
Reply
Male 13
Key phrase: "[mother] was yards away."

L2parenting.

0
Reply
Male 10
How about you watch your damn kids!
0
Reply
Male 5,314
that`s a sad story and all, but it`s not the store`s fault
0
Reply
Male 194
Nidonemo
thats why i said, should start doing it again...i was whipped as a kid and i knew not to misbehave
and yes i know its not a skin color thing, there are children of all races acting up, but generaly you see the caucasian kids running a muck more often then not
0
Reply
Female 4,197
I still yell at my kid for swinging on the railings. No, I wouldn`t sue, it was an accident and the parents could`ve been watching their kids more attentivly.
0
Reply
Male 215
Ahh, europeans, you so crazy!!
0
Reply
Male 1,666
"Gotta admit...I didnt act up because I knew I was getting the belt if I did"

Prime, not even just white kids, I`m white and we had that in Russia, and I damn well behaved, or else.

0
Reply
Male 1,666
If they get away with this I`m gonna fall on a pen and sue a pen company
0
Reply
Male 7,933
"Also, might I add...WHITE PEOPLE, its time to start beating your kids again, this kind of stuff always happends to white familes, you never see this with mexican or black families, know why? cuz their kid is right there next to the parent behaving *most of the time* because they know that if they act up, their ass is getting beat when they get home"

Gotta admit...I didnt act up because I knew I was getting the belt if I did

0
Reply
Male 7,933
"Should the parents sue? No. They should have been watching their kid more carefully, or has America sunk so low that we have to have signs on all railings that say "Please watch your child so they don`t hit their head on this.""

It clearly said it did not happen in America

0
Reply
Male 9,305
"Also, might I add...WHITE PEOPLE, its time to start beating your kids again, this kind of stuff always happends to white familes, you never see this with mexican or black families, know why? cuz their kid is right there next to the parent behaving *most of the time* because they know that if they act up, their ass is getting beat when they get home"

1) MY parents spanked me as a kid, I`m caucasian.

2) The issue you are looking for cannot be found under "skin color". We suggest you try your search again, and include the keyword "parenting".

3) I have seen both misbehaved children and behaved children of many different colors, flavors, and creeds. With and without nuts for parents.

0
Reply
Male 742
"or has America sunk so low that we have to have signs on all railings that say "Please watch your child so they don`t hit their head on this."

It wasn`t in America...

0
Reply
Female 6
hmmm, I have a kid who swings on poles, has bumped his head loads of times and i would never dare sue a supermarket for it. Those barriers are there to stop people getting hurt (ironicly) by cars etc... if that was my son, i know it would be my own fault. why would you still be shopping while your 4 year old is outsinde playing chimp? yes perents get them blame, and in this case, its the finger pointing in the right direction!!
0
Reply
Male 207
Was this tragic? Yes.
Should the parents sue? No. They should have been watching their kid more carefully, or has America sunk so low that we have to have signs on all railings that say "Please watch your child so they don`t hit their head on this."
0
Reply
Male 18
flipNhigh-

Just because they were not married does not mean they were not ready to have a kid. Me and my girl plan on never getting married. Niether one of of us believe in marriage but when we are ready for a kid we still plan on having one.

0
Reply
Male 1,918
When I did that I just broke my leg...
0
Reply
Female 1
Kids will be kids, regardless of the parenting. The parent probably thought that it was okay for the kid to muck around on the rail- what harm could it do?

No matter how hard parents try to raise their children, everytime something happens they weren`t good enough. Parents do the best they can with what they have got.

When it comes down to it- it`s the supermarkets fault.

0
Reply
Female 185
Ok, I am wondering what the purpose of those railings actually is, but it is not the supermarkets fault that the kid wasn`t being watched by his parents.

I worked in retail and if any employee even sees a kid unbuckled in a cart we are allowed to intervene and ask the stupid parents to buckle their kids in the cart. But they can`t be expected to watch all the kids for the parents... the parents just have to not be idiots and think about the safety of their children.

0
Reply
Female 1,441
This is really awful. I hate hearing stories like this. I can`t imagine what that family must be going through. But it`s really not the Supermarket`s fault. It`s kind of pathetic that they`re placing the blame there.

And I might have to agree with flipNhigh. Beating your kids isn`t the answer to everything but...well who am I kidding. Of course it is.

0
Reply
Male 194
Also, might I add...WHITE PEOPLE, its time to start beating your kids again, this kind of stuff always happends to white familes, you never see this with mexican or black families, know why? cuz their kid is right there next to the parent behaving *most of the time* because they know that if they act up, their ass is getting beat when they get home
0
Reply
Male 194
The kid was swingging on a rail...thats bad parenting, not supermarket`s fault. And I also noticed that the father was 39 and the parents will werent married...WTF? if you ask me, the mom wasnt ready to have a child yet
0
Reply
Female 1,386
Typical of the people I know that have kids. Everything is somebody elses fault... certainly not theirs for not watching their spawn and letting it roam freely all over the damn place while they contemplate soup can labels. Ooooh no. *sigh* But typical of the world we live in, she`ll probably get something $$.
0
Reply
Female 3
Yea its sad but parents need to stop letting thier kids play on things that are not toys.
0
Reply
Female 1,589
"Now we`re lost. We`re completely empty. We just can`t believe it."...but the money will fix that in a jiffy.

I see kids swinging on the rail at my store all the time, but the parents are always there, and tell them to get down, so I never have to do it.

I hate it when the parents put their child on the conveyor belt though and think it`s cute.

0
Reply
Male 215
"We say that parents should be able to go shopping with their children in a safe environment."

Yeah, try not leaving them sitting on the railing! Just do what we do here, leave the kid at the meat section.

0
Reply
Male 606
Sunday, October 4, 2009 5:21:35 PM
It isn`t just "sh*t happens". Their f*cking CHILD DIED. I`m sure if it were you, you wouldn`t be saying " oh well. poo HAPPENS"

No, I wouldn`t. I`d be angry. Furious. Devastated over the loss of my kid. I`d want to blame somebody, and the store would seem the most logical one to blame. I`d want to see the place shut down if I could, if not burned to the ground.

But here`s the problem: It doesn`t matter how I feel. It doesn`t matter if I hate them more than anybody`s ever hated anything in the history of mankind. If they`re not at fault, they shouldn`t be punished for it.

0
Reply
Male 1,193
This pisses me off. It`s the parents fault. I`m sorry but the fact that they are going to put this store out of business and cause many of the workers to lose their jobs because they can`t control their child and are negligent parents isn`t fair.
0
Reply
Female 2,289
It isn`t just "sh*t happens". Their f*cking CHILD DIED. I`m sure if it were you, you wouldn`t be saying " oh well. poo HAPPENS"
0
Reply
Male 12,365
Another possible scenario, Fox4Brawl:

A young child tries to pull themself up on the checkout to look at the items moving on the belt. They lose their footing and fall over.

Is the supermarket at fault for having a checkout?

0
Reply
Male 12,365
"But I favor on the parent side, because when I weigh letting your 4 year old obviously active kid out of your sight for a minute or two to steel railings hanging around the store, I think the store is providing the bigger problem."

Would you think differently if it was made out of plastic?

I`ve no doubt that it was there for a reason. For example, a supermarket will often have some sort of enclosure for "parking" stacks of shopping trolleys. That`s often made out of steel bars, i.e. railings.

The rail was not a hazard. A child misused it and died as a result of their own action and very bad luck.

The only way to make a supermarket completely safe for young children is to prevent them entering it. The floor is hard. Shelves are hard. Freezers are hard. They all have to be hard.

It`s brutal bad luck, but it isn`t the supermarket`s fault. A supermarket is not responsible for unattended young children misusing something and being very unlucky.

0
Reply
Female 54
Geez! Watch your kid! Nice parents. First people to have a freak accident at a grocery store. How bout a little supervision. Poor Kid.
0
Reply
Male 445
So, they left their child unattended and he had an accident and died.

Is the supermarket to blame for the parents being "yards away" or are they?

0
Reply
Male 500
Damn, my daughters 2 1/2. I really, really hate hearing about kids having accidents. I hope the parents will be ok, maybe this is some misplaced blame to help them with their grief, no parent could really try to cash in on the death of their child could they? If anything happened to mine my life would be finished.
0
Reply
Male 219
It`s clearly Somerfield`s fault for having floors in their stores. Obviously everything these days should either let us float in an anti-gravity field or be made of marshmallow.
0
Reply
Male 3,014
I feel for the parents, I really do. But the problem is, they`re letting their emotions cloud their judgement. When enough time has passed, they`ll see that it was all just a freak accident, and all but unforeseeable by all related parties.

I personally think people should not be allowed to sue until they have distanced themselves emotionally from the incident or unless they have friends who are not emotionally invested in the victim to do it for them.

0
Reply
Female 1,287
He was a `keen footballer?`
And he was 4? Okay.
0
Reply
Male 8,302
Tragic, yes. So sorry for you that it happened. But get over it, accidents happen, the Universe, or God, or DavyMid, is to blame, not the supermarket. Poo happens, we all wish it hadn`t but how is destroying someone else financially going to help bring your child back.

One of these days, I hope to live long enough to see the Supreme Court hand down a "Common Sense Says" verdict which once and for all says that not every piece of poo that goes down is someone`s legal fault.

0
Reply
Male 131
Parents need to keep their kids under control. As a small business owner, I can`t believe how parents these days will let their precious, unique snowflake run all over my store, destroy my property, and get upset if I ask the child to stop or say anything to the parent. I`m sick of these little pampered bastards- teach your kids how to behave in public!
0
Reply
Male 133
Glad to see mothers are even siding against this. For some reason I felt as if more people would be for the parents. I`m happy they`re not.
0
Reply
Male 496
Tell your child to get off the drating railing then!
0
Reply
Male 233
Its not a very descriptive story, as to this whole "rail" thing. But as I see it, its a public place. Its not some work site where there are dangers. Its true that the child should have been kept a better eye on, but at the same time, there shouldn`t be steel railings about in a place children will obviously be. It was negligence on both parts. But I favor on the parent side, because when I weigh letting your 4 year old obviously active kid out of your sight for a minute or two to steel railings hanging around the store, I think the store is providing the bigger problem
0
Reply
Male 3,058
What really sucks is that there are lawyers that will take this case, and the store will probably settle out of court.
0
Reply
Female 49
as a mother of a 4 year old, this is tragic, but the mother should have had her child next to her and not let him play or swing on things. "growing up to be a proper boy" my tush, kids play, but parents are supposed to teach their children where it is appropriate and inappropriate to play. a store is not a play area.
0
Reply
Male 4,680
I would actually feel sorry for the mother if she wasn`t trying to blame her own negligence on the super-market. No sympathy now.
0
Reply
Female 395
what a load of turd. honestly, if this woman is looking for someone to blame then she should look in the mirror. in truth it was an accident, small child hits head on concrete floor. its a fluk that he dies, and very tragic. nobody is really to blame, but if they want to play the blame game the mother needs to look at herself for not holding handsand and being more vigilant in her small child safety. they were from liverpool though....
0
Reply
Male 610
i understand that she`s angry about her loss, but the kid hit his head on the floor. how is the supermarket supposed to protect against that?
0
Reply
Male 2,855
of course they should get their asses sued! that rail should have been swing-safe or if it wasnt a proper "no swinging and banging your head on the floor" sign should be placed.
0
Reply
Female 56
Parents should have been watching their kid. Don`t blame the store for the parents negligence.
0
Reply
Male 1,765
"Should the supermarket face legal action? "

Of course they should, I mean, they`re getting sued. What the hell kinda question is that?

0
Reply
Male 4,290
Sucks for the family, but they have to look after their own kids. Definitely not the supermarket`s fault, the family has no case.
0
Reply
Male 168
Here`s an idea, why don`t you watch your kid.

"oh my god! my kid fell into a giant volcano, i`m going to sue!"

How about, pay the drat attention?

0
Reply
Male 35
Sympathy for the mother. Forever in the back of her mind is going to be the image of her sons simply avoided accident. She is also going to be known forever in her neighbourhood as the mother who let her child kill himself. It has nothing to do with the Supermarket, just an attempt by her to try and assuade the terrible guilt and regret she must be feeling. I wonder how many years the Supermarket has been in `that state` without an incident?
0
Reply
Male 7,812
this has nothing to do with the store, stuff happens. kids do dumb things and sometimes bad things come out of it. if anything at all it would be the mothers neglagence, not the stores.
0
Reply
Female 1,566
"I`m sure that kid would be pissed at all of you for saying those things about his mom and dad."

I`m sure that kid would be alive if his mom and dad watched him like we`re saying they should have.

0
Reply
Male 1,803
I read about this in the news here. I`ve got sympathy for them, but they`ve not got a leg to stand on. A UK court will toss that straight out. Hell, even most American courts would. The supermarket will probably quietly chip them a couple of grand to pay for a decent funeral on proviso that said pay off doesn`t suggest any negligence on their part.

Yeah, I`m British.

0
Reply
Male 599
Short version of story: Negligent parent was negligent at grocery store, 4 year old son dies as a result, negligent parent wants money from grocery store because somehow it was their fault parent was negligent.
0
Reply
Female 204
that article was poorly written.
i don`t think it`s negligence, that`s like suing the ocean if someone drowns
0
Reply
Male 471
"Harry Blackmore was swinging on a small steel rail when he fell in the store in Liverpool.

His devastated mother was shopping just yards away when the tragedy happened."

"The family said they were "so protective" over their son..."

Something doesn`t add up here...

I feel bad for her loss, but it`s not the store`s fault. They`ll probably settle out of court to avoid a messy trial, but really that mom should be ashamed of herself if she gets ANY money. If she sued for a change in protocol, that would be different- like that family who`s child died when he was given a hugely improper dose of medication- they sued the hospital, not for money, but for an overhaul in the medication labeling policy to insure that it never happens again. THAT`S acceptable.

0
Reply
Female 15,763
Well Jesus, everything is dangerous if you look at it like that.
0
Reply
Male 1,837
notice how almost 30% is only on how his life in football was? talk about derailing.
0
Reply
Female 2,289
I`m sure that kid would be pissed at all of you for saying those things about his mom and dad.
0
Reply
Male 2,422
A supermarket is not a goddamn daycare! You are resonsible for looking after your children. Any negligence is on the parents part.
0
Reply
Male 31
what a joke. that bitch should have been watching her kid. when i was his age my mother had me on a child leesh and in the shopping cart. thats what those child seats are for you dumb bimbo! the fact that their trying to get money is even lower.
0
Reply
Male 10,440
This will be thrown out of court unless the `parents` can prove it was genuinely unsafe, which I doubt, since supermarkets take measures ensuring safety.

Stupid people. First they don`t pay attention to their kid, which results in the kid dying. Then they try to blame the store. Screw those former-parents. They didn`t deserve to have a kid to begin with.

0
Reply
Female 1,677
The supermarket should sue the parents for negligence. OH.
0
Reply
Male 4,142
I always find it amusing how headlines are made as keywords rather than sentences.
As for the article itself the irony of the parents are suing the store for neglect when they were not watching their own kid
0
Reply
Female 1,006
Uhm, maybe she should have been watching her drating kid. Just an idea. I hope the store laughs at their suit. Sad that the kid died and all, don`t get me wrong, but it`s not the store`s fault. It`s the parents.
0
Reply
Male 1,765
"Should the supermarket face legal action? "

Of course they should, I mean, they`re getting sued. What the hell kinda question is that?

0
Reply
Female 1,566
Hey, parents, watch your goddamn kids. I hope whatever judge gets this case tell the parents they`re idiots and laughs them out of the courtroom.
0
Reply
Male 456
I don`t see how you can blame anyone for this! He was just swinging on a pole, falls, hit his head a certain way, and by a freak accident, he dies...You can`t blame ANYONE for that.
0
Reply
Male 506
Scum trying to bag some money for their kid`s death.
0
Reply
Male 392
I remember hearing about this, and I think the same now as I did then. She should have been watching her damn kid.

It`s not the stores fault, it`s her fault. Her kid was four years old and she let him go off? Idiot.

0
Reply
Female 1,677
There are other links dude. It`s called VARIETY.
0
Reply
Male 3,619
Why is IAB hosting links to tragic news like this`? I mean.. sure its sad. and sure this link has brought the up the question "who`s fault was it really?". But is this link really, erally entertaining? I mean... i know iab is suppose to find amuzing links, but if i want news, i go to some online newspaper, seriusly.

why not host the next link as "Who are we and why are we here?"?...

0
Reply
Female 864
all I had to do was read the first line ,"he was swinging on a small railing " that would be the parents fault . They have no grounds to sue .
0
Reply
Female 4,447
It`s very tragic, but I can`t feel too much sympathy for the parents when they clearly weren`t keeping a good eye on their kid. At 4 he should have been *in* the cart, and his mother shouldn`t have been "just yards away shopping". You can`t baby/kid proof the world, that`s why you have to take responsibility for your kid.
0
Reply
Male 9,305
Sorry lady for your loss, but it`s your responsibility to know where your kid is and what he`s doing at all times at that age.

Shame on you for blaming everyone else but yourself.

0
Reply
Female 529
He hit his head on the floor. Supermarket should be sued for not covering the floor with pillows.
0
Reply
Female 1,677
Oh haha I seem to have overlooked that part. Alrighty then.

But yeah I agree with like everyone here. It`s not the store`s job to babyproof everything. If the kid had walked into the corner of the building, would they be suing for it having sharp corners? I think not.

0
Reply
Male 162
I would like to see a picture of where the kid was playing cause until I see it this is clearly the parent`s fault. He`s 4. Why isn`t he in the cart?
0
Reply
Male 7,378
accidents happen
0
Reply
Male 316
"His devastated mother was shopping just yards away when the tragedy happened."

That right there should be proof enough that it was the stupid mother`s fault.

0
Reply
Male 1,347
@boadicea: probably because the dad wasn`t there.

and I don`t see how this could be construed as the stores fault. The kid wasn`t using the railing as intended and that`s the mom`s fault for not paying attention

0
Reply
Female 7,994
I know they are destroyed after losing their child, but sueing the store will not help one iota. Accidents happen, the world is not totally safe.
0
Reply
Male 341
It was totally the stores fault! I mean after all they should not have had a pole that obviously a kid would want to play on in that state. They should have put spikes on it or something. And they should have made the floors rubber too for good measure and for more idiot-kid safety.
0
Reply
Female 228
maybe the parents should have kept a bloody eye on him.
0
Reply
Male 4,807
Clean-up in aisle three.....
Seriously now, the kid should have been wearing a helmut I guess, (NOT).
He could have hit his head anywhere the poor little guy.
0
Reply
Male 791
Thats why i do the hourly walk-around at my store! Say yes to clean store, say no to shoppers on the floor!
0
Reply
Female 77
So cos they cant keep an eye on their kids it`s the supermarkets fault? Stupid people... shop workers aren`t there to babysit their kids, that should be there job. You`d see it all the time at my last job, kids playing on rails and stuff, sitting on really unstable shelves cos their parents couldn`t be bothered to watch them, or tell them not to do certain things,but you can bet if something was to happen to the kid it would suddenly be OUR fault.. The rail was not designed to be played on, so how the hell is it the shop`s fault?
0
Reply
Male 820
hold up, so the kid was swinging on railing, and fell..., stores don`t just put up railing anywhere.
dammit, I wish there was a picture of where the railing was, I mean, if it was on a ramp or something, that would be different than if some random employee just put of railing in the middle of the store.
0
Reply
Male 474
"Not sure what the statement "they`re not American" is intended to mean. Are you implying that they shouldn`t be able to sue because they`re not American? If so, did you notice that this took place in the UK?"

No, they are implying about the absurd amounts of frivolous lawsuits we americans unleash upon each other because we have this need to be rich and famous that the two most common get rich quick schemes we americans do daily is play the lottery and sue people for drinking hot coffee...

0
Reply
Male 478
next thing you know there are going to be warning signs on walls in your home....
"Caution. Walls can incur concussions and even death. Be careful when near a wall."
0
Reply
Female 1,677
OH MY GOD SHE JUST MEANT THAT USUALLY AMERICANS START FRIVOLOUS LAWSUITS. AND THIS ISN`T AN AMERICAN SITUATION, FOR ONCE. GET IT?
0
Reply
Male 416
"Parents are suing the supermarket for negligence- and they`re not American. Should the supermarket face legal action?"

Not sure what the statement "they`re not American" is intended to mean. Are you implying that they shouldn`t be able to sue because they`re not American? If so, did you notice that this took place in the UK?

0
Reply
Male 606
Keep an eye on your kids. Its the parents fault, not the stores.
0
Reply
Male 474
"...while the parents were yards away shopping..." Yards? They don`t really say how many yards do they? 5, 10? yards is plural, which means it is at minimum 2 yards. And you really wouldn`t say "yards" if it was 6 feet (2 yards). So likely the parents left their kid in an area they thought would be ok, where he wouldn`t destroy anything (he was 4 after all) to do some shopping. If they admitted they left him unattended, being Britain, they would end up in jail on top of losing their child.
0
Reply
Male 33
I would have to agree in the article they say the railing shouldn`t have been in the state it was in but what other "state" would it be in?Laying on the ground?No because someone could trip over it then right.It is possible for Accidents to happen for no reason more people should realize that.
0
Reply
Male 1,931
Seriously? They`re suing the supermarket because the dumb bimbo wasn`t paying attention to her kid?

In their ideal situation, what would the supermarket have done different? Should the supermarket have someone following each kid and take them off railings for them?

This is a classic example of how parents want everyone but themselves to parent their kids. And when it doesn`t happen, they blame other people.

As tragic as the loss of life of a child is, it was an accident. If ANYONE is to blame, it`s the parents for not attending to their kids.

0
Reply
Female 1,677
Why is just the mom`s fault? He presumably has a father as well, WHO ALSO HAS EYES.

And typically it`s litigious Americans starting these stupid lawsuits, hence the title. God people.

0
Reply
Male 330
Idk, can`t really see how its the store`s fault.
0
Reply
Male 1,929
There`s no chance they`ll win this. The lawyer just wants the cash. I`ll eat my own head if they do.
0
Reply
Male 196
Seriously. Accidents happen, you can`t just sue because your kid died. Who told him to swing from the railing? Sounds like the parents should be sued for child negligence.
0
Reply
Male 162
Stupid kid shouldn`t have been on the rail. People need to take responsibility for thier actions, whatever the consequence. How exactly is money from the supermarket going to make up for th death of thier kid anyway?
0
Reply
Male 442
I don`t get the "They`re not American" statement, but I don`t think the supermarket should pay.

It is ironic that the parents are sueing for negligence considering that if the parent had been paying attention to the child and told him off for it nothing would have happened.

0
Reply
Female 165
What does not being American have anything to do with whether they should be sued or not?

Personally I don`t think the store is at fault, the mother should have been watching her kid.

But had the store really been at fault it doesn`t matter if someone`s not American, they were still at fault.

0
Reply
Female 850
The mom wasn`t watching her kid, it`s her fault. I do feel bad for her and the whole family but just because the kid died there doesn`t mean the store should have to pay because the mom wasn`t watching.
0
Reply
Male 650
Its not really stated as to what the railing had to do with his fall, so I don`t think anyone can fairly say which side is at fault.
0
Reply
Male 749
I live near Liverpool! I don`t think Somerfield actually did anything wrong.
0
Reply
Male 1,590
"The rail shouldn`t have been there"

I guess the concrete floor shouldn`t have been there, either.

0
Reply
Female 895
..The poor child is lucky, sounds like being in the hands of those parents would have made for another ignorant citizen.

It`s YOUR f*cking child! YOU are responsible for what happens.God damn it, now I`m pissed.

0
Reply
Female 1,677
No the supermarket should not face legal action. I don`t hold it against the parents though: their kid died and they want to be able to point their finger at someone/thing and say "it`s your fault he`s gone". But poo happens, and unless the supermarket held a gun to his head and said `flip around that rail`, umm no.
0
Reply
Female 691
Link: Boy, 4, Dies After Supermarket Fall [Rate Link] - Parents are suing the supermarket for negligence- and they`re not American. Should the supermarket face legal action?
0
Reply